W. Va. Code » §6-5-4. Residence of officers.
West Virginia Code

W. Va. Code § 6-5-4 (2026)

Residence of officers

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WV-LEGwvlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
ARTICLE 5. TERMS OF OFFICE; MATTERS AFFECTING THE RIGHT TO HOLD OFFICE.

§6-5-4. Residence of officers.

The Governor, Secretary of State, state superintendent of free schools, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General and Commissioner of Agriculture, shall reside at the seat of government during their term of office, and keep there the public records, books and papers pertaining to their respective offices. Every judge of a circuit court shall, during his continuance in office, reside in the circuit for which he was chosen. Every county and district officer, except the prosecuting attorney, shall, during his continuance in office, reside in the county or district for which he was elected. And the removal by any such officer from the state, circuit, county or district for which he was elected or chosen shall vacate his office.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2020–2022 · leading case: Thomas H. v. Karen Pszczolkowski, Superintendent, N. Corr. Facility (W. Va. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Thomas H. v. Karen Pszczolkowski, Superintendent, N. Corr. Facility (W. Va. 2020). · cites it 5× “Article IX, section 2 of the West Virginia Constitution provides that: [t]here shall also be elected in each district of the county, by the voters thereof, one constable, and if the population of any district shall exceed twelve hundred, an additional constable, whose term of…”
State ex rel. Just. v. The Honorable Charles E. King, Jr. (W. Va. 2020). · cites it 2× “Later, in 1934, an amendment added the Agriculture Commissioner to the list of officials required to reside at the seat of government and made a change to require the Attorney General to also reside there. Another amendment in 1958 removed the State Superintendent of Free…”
Hammer v. Straughn (N.D.W. Va. 2022). “Therefore, the Petitioner’s objection to the magistrate’s reliance on West Virginia Code § 6-5-4 is OVERRULED. Lastly, the Petitioner again takes issue with the magistrate’s finding that all four of the Petitioner’s claims are variations of the same argument, that a county…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.