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.
6 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1887–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. LaRockgreen2 sentences2021Va. 294, 302 , 470 S.E.2d 613, 621 (1996), State v. Lilly, 194 W. 2021Therefore, we decline to address the correctness of instruction no. 3 pursuant to Rule 10(c)(7) of the West Virginia Rules of Appellate Procedure, which provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]he argument must contain appropriate and specific citations to the record on appeal, including citations that pinpoint when and how the issues in the assignments of error were presented to the lower tribunal,” and that “[t]he Court may disregard errors that are not adequately supported by specific references to the record on appeal.” “Although we liberally construe briefs in determining issues presented fo | 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 v. Lilly
green
1 sentence2021Va. 294, 302 , 470 S.E.2d 613, 621 (1996), State v. Lilly, 194 W. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State Ex Rel. State Road Commission v. Snider
neutral
1 sentence1969Va. 650, 656-57 , 49 S. E. 2d 853, 857 .” It is obvious, therefore, that the correctness of the instruction in the Darrah case was unchallenged in the record before this Court. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
State v. Sixo
neutral
1 sentence1917This charge, it is contended, gives to the possession of the liquors the quality and force of prima facie proof of unlawful storage and sale, in violation of the holding in State v. Sixo, 77 W. | 1 | 1917–1917 |
George v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
green
1 sentence1917Lynch, PRESIDENT: Upon this writ of error, the second one granted defendants, the opinion in the first of which being reported in 88 S. E. 1036 , we are called upon to determine the correctness of the only instruction given for plaintiff, the refusal to give any of the eight instructions requested by defendants except numbers five and six, and the alleged excessiveness of the damages returned by the jury. | 1 | 1917–1917 |
Kinney v. Balt. & Ohio Emp. Rel. Ass'n
neutral
1 sentence1917In Kinney v. Relief Association, 35 W. | 1 | 1917–1917 |
Danks v. Rodeheaver
green
1 sentence1887The correctness of the rule thus laid down having been called in question, we elaborately reviewed the American decisions in Danks v. Rodeheaver, 26 W. | 1 | 1887–1887 |
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.