6 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
Adkins v. Adkinsgreen2 sentences2016The Court explained, as follows: In Adkins v. Adkins, 221 W.Va. 602, 609 , 656 S.E.2d 47, 54 (2007), we determined that when an obligor parent is terminated from his job involuntarily and West Virginia Code § 48-1-205 does not apply to allow his pre-termination income to be attributed to him, a child support order still may be entered with regard to that parent provided that the order reflects the parent’s actual income and other resources during the period of unemployment. 2016The Court explained, as follows: In Adkins v. Adkins, 221 W.Va. 602, 609 , 656 S.E.2d 47, 54 (2007), we determined that when an obligor parent is terminated from his job involuntarily and West Virginia Code § 48-1-205 does not apply to allow his pre-termination income to be attributed to him, a child support order still may be entered with regard to that parent provided that the order reflects the parent’s actual income and other resources during the period of unemployment. | 2 | 2 |
Fredeking v. Tylergreen2 sentences2013For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the circuit court’s December 18, 2012 order and 3 See Fredeking v. Tyler, 224 W.Va. 1, 5 , 680 S.E.2d 16, 20 (2009) (it was plaintiff’s burden to prove she was the owner of the property). 3 remand this case for a new hearing on respondent’s motion to dismiss once proper notice of the hearing’s date, time, and location has been given. 2013For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the circuit court’s December 18, 2012 order and 3 See Fredeking v. Tyler, 224 W.Va. 1, 5 , 680 S.E.2d 16, 20 (2009) (it was plaintiff’s burden to prove she was the owner of the property). 3 remand this case for a new hearing on respondent’s motion to dismiss once proper notice of the hearing’s date, time, and location has been given. | 1 | 1 |
Mainella v. Board of Trustees of Policemen's Pension or Relief Fundgreen1 sentence2010Insofar as our decision of Ms. Rissler’s assignments of error concerning due process and disqualification of certain Board members and the Board’s attorney requires the reversal of the circuit court’s order and the remand of this case for a new hearing before the Board, it would be premature for us to consider the propriety of the circuit court’s interpretation of the Ordinance at this point in time. “ ‘Courts are not constituted for the purpose of making advisory decrees or resolving academic disputes____’ Mainella v. Board of Trustees of Policemen’s Pension or Relief Fund of City of Fairmont | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co.green2 sentences1995See Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co., 156 W.Va. 351 , 193 S.E.2d 544 (1972); Chandler v. Gore, 170 W.Va. 709 , 296 S.E.2d 350 (1982) (cases decided under W.Va.R.Civ.P. 52). 10 Because the trial court failed to make specific factual findings that we believe are necessary under today’s holding, we find it is necessary to remand this case for a new hearing. 1995See Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co., 156 W.Va. 351 , 193 S.E.2d 544 (1972); Chandler v. Gore, 170 W.Va. 709 , 296 S.E.2d 350 (1982) (cases decided under W.Va.R.Civ.P. 52). 10 Because the trial court failed to make specific factual findings that we believe are necessary under today’s holding, we find it is necessary to remand this case for a new hearing. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Harshbarger v. Gainer
green
2 sentences2010Insofar as our decision of Ms. Rissler’s assignments of error concerning due process and disqualification of certain Board members and the Board’s attorney requires the reversal of the circuit court’s order and the remand of this case for a new hearing before the Board, it would be premature for us to consider the propriety of the circuit court’s interpretation of the Ordinance at this point in time. “ ‘Courts are not constituted for the purpose of making advisory decrees or resolving academic disputes____’ Mainella v. Board of Trustees of Policemen’s Pension or Relief Fund of City of Fairmont 2010Insofar as our decision of Ms. Rissler’s assignments of error concerning due process and disqualification of certain Board members and the Board’s attorney requires the reversal of the circuit court’s order and the remand of this case for a new hearing before the Board, it would be premature for us to consider the propriety of the circuit court’s interpretation of the Ordinance at this point in time. “ ‘Courts are not constituted for the purpose of making advisory decrees or resolving academic disputes____’ Mainella v. Board of Trustees of Policemen’s Pension or Relief Fund of City of Fairmont | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Adkins v. Cline
green
2 sentences2007In addition, he argued for the first time that, insofar as the criminal charges against him had been dropped, this Court's decision in Adkins v. Cline, 216 W.Va. 504 , 607 S.E.2d 833 (2004), [7] necessitated remanding the case for a new hearing. [8] By order entered October 12, 2005, the circuit court denied Mr. Moten's *644 Rule 60(b) motion. 2007In addition, he argued for the first time that, insofar as the criminal charges against him had been dropped, this Court's decision in Adkins v. Cline, 216 W.Va. 504 , 607 S.E.2d 833 (2004), [7] necessitated remanding the case for a new hearing. [8] By order entered October 12, 2005, the circuit court denied Mr. Moten's *644 Rule 60(b) motion. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Chandler v. Gore
neutral
2 sentences1995See Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co., 156 W.Va. 351 , 193 S.E.2d 544 (1972); Chandler v. Gore, 170 W.Va. 709 , 296 S.E.2d 350 (1982) (cases decided under W.Va.R.Civ.P. 52). 10 Because the trial court failed to make specific factual findings that we believe are necessary under today’s holding, we find it is necessary to remand this case for a new hearing. 1995See Commonwealth Tire Co. v. Tri-State Tire Co., 156 W.Va. 351 , 193 S.E.2d 544 (1972); Chandler v. Gore, 170 W.Va. 709 , 296 S.E.2d 350 (1982) (cases decided under W.Va.R.Civ.P. 52). 10 Because the trial court failed to make specific factual findings that we believe are necessary under today’s holding, we find it is necessary to remand this case for a new hearing. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.