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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 10 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State Ex Rel. Van Nguyen v. Berger.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State Ex Rel. Van Nguyen v. Berger Anchor | green | “if the legislature intends to alter or supersede the common law, it must do so clearly and without equivocation.” | 5 |
| 2 | Shifflette v. Lilly | green | “the common law is not to be construed as altered or changed by statute, unless legislative intent to do so be plainly manifested.' shifflette v. lilly, 130 w.va. 297 , 43 s.e.2d 289 (1947).” | 5 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.