Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1991–2010 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by West Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jordan v. Robertsgreen2 sentences2010Ellis v. Kelly, 145 W.Va. 70 , 112 S.E.2d 641 (1960), this Court held that: “Due process of law, within the meaning of the State and Federal constitutional provisions, extends to actions of administrative officers and tribunals, as well as to the judicial branches of the governments.” Equally important is this Court’s holding in Syllabus Point 2 of Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978), which provides that “[ujnder procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right 2010Ellis v. Kelly, 145 W.Va. 70 , 112 S.E.2d 641 (1960), this Court held that: “Due process of law, within the meaning of the State and Federal constitutional provisions, extends to actions of administrative officers and tribunals, as well as to the judicial branches of the governments.” Equally important is this Court’s holding in Syllabus Point 2 of Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978), which provides that “[ujnder procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right | 4 | 7 |
Clay v. City of Huntingtongreen2 sentences2002See, Clay v. City of Huntington, 184 W.Va. 708 , 403 S.E.2d 725 (1991), and Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978). 2002See, Clay v. City of Huntington, 184 W.Va. 708 , 403 S.E.2d 725 (1991), and Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978). | 2 | 2 |
Sisler v. Hawkinsgreen2 sentences2008See, e.g., Syl. pt. 2, Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978) ("Under procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right to litigate an issue central to a statutory violation or deprivation of a property interest"); Syl. pt. 1, Sisler v. Hawkins, 158 W.Va. 1034 , 217 S.E.2d 60 (1975) ("`The due process of law guaranteed by the State and Federal Constitutions, when applied to procedure in the courts of the land, requires both notice and the right to be heard.' Point 2008See, e.g., Syl. pt. 2, Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978) ("Under procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right to litigate an issue central to a statutory violation or deprivation of a property interest"); Syl. pt. 1, Sisler v. Hawkins, 158 W.Va. 1034 , 217 S.E.2d 60 (1975) ("`The due process of law guaranteed by the State and Federal Constitutions, when applied to procedure in the courts of the land, requires both notice and the right to be heard.' Point | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State Ex Rel. Ellis v. Kelly
green
2 sentences2010Ellis v. Kelly, 145 W.Va. 70 , 112 S.E.2d 641 (1960), this Court held that: “Due process of law, within the meaning of the State and Federal constitutional provisions, extends to actions of administrative officers and tribunals, as well as to the judicial branches of the governments.” Equally important is this Court’s holding in Syllabus Point 2 of Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978), which provides that “[ujnder procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right 2010Ellis v. Kelly, 145 W.Va. 70 , 112 S.E.2d 641 (1960), this Court held that: “Due process of law, within the meaning of the State and Federal constitutional provisions, extends to actions of administrative officers and tribunals, as well as to the judicial branches of the governments.” Equally important is this Court’s holding in Syllabus Point 2 of Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978), which provides that “[ujnder procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Simpson v. Stanton
green
2 sentences2008See, e.g., Syl. pt. 2, Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978) ("Under procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right to litigate an issue central to a statutory violation or deprivation of a property interest"); Syl. pt. 1, Sisler v. Hawkins, 158 W.Va. 1034 , 217 S.E.2d 60 (1975) ("`The due process of law guaranteed by the State and Federal Constitutions, when applied to procedure in the courts of the land, requires both notice and the right to be heard.' Point 2008See, e.g., Syl. pt. 2, Jordan v. Roberts, 161 W.Va. 750 , 246 S.E.2d 259 (1978) ("Under procedural due process concepts a hearing must be appropriate to the nature of the case and from this flows the principle that the State cannot preclude the right to litigate an issue central to a statutory violation or deprivation of a property interest"); Syl. pt. 1, Sisler v. Hawkins, 158 W.Va. 1034 , 217 S.E.2d 60 (1975) ("`The due process of law guaranteed by the State and Federal Constitutions, when applied to procedure in the courts of the land, requires both notice and the right to be heard.' Point | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.