Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and for Costs and Fees (ECF No. 14). For the reasons given below, the motion is GRANTED as to remand and DENIED as to costs and fees.
You are here
Opinions
The Southern District of West Virginia offers a database of opinions starting in the year 2001, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search to the right or sort using the drop-downs below.
3:11-cv-00683
Author:
Robert C. Chambers
2:11-cv-00335
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending is plaintiffs’ motion to remand, filed May 31, 2011. Also pending are the motion of defendant Thomas A. Zamow (“nondiverse defendant”) to dismiss, filed September 8, 2011, and the motion of defendants Bank of America, N.A. (“Countrywide”), BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (“BAC”), and The Bank of New York Mellon, N.A. (“Mellon”) (collectively, “diverse defendants”) to dismiss, filed September 14, 2011.
Author:
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
2:10-cv-00993
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending before the court are the Motion by Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. for Summary Judgment [Docket 148], the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket 150], and the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification and Court-Authorized Notice Pursuant to Section 216(b) of the FLSA [Docket 157]. For the reasons discussed below, the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, the plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Conditional Certification is DENIED as moot.
Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
3:11-cv-00149
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Currently pending are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Complaint (ECF No. 46) and Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Protective Order (ECF No. 77). For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Complaint and DENIES as moot Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Protective Order.
Author:
Robert C. Chambers
2:11-cv-00342
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending before the court are the plaintiff Logan & Kanawha Coal Co., LLC’s (“Logan”) Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award [Docket 1] and the defendant Detherage Coal Sales, LLC’s (“Detherage”) Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award [Docket 9]. For the reasons discussed below, the court DENIES the plaintiff’s Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award [Docket 1] and GRANTS the defendant’s Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award [Docket 9].
Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
2:11-cv-00989
Memorandum Opinion and Order
The Jefferson County Commission and two of its commissioners, Patricia Noland and Dale Manuel, both of whom reside in Jefferson County, West Virginia, and each proceeding in his or her individual capacity, filed this suit on November 4, 2011, challenging the congressional apportionment enacted by the State of West Virginia following the 2010 census. In their Complaint, the plaintiffs name as defendants Secretary of State Natalie E. Tennant, Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, State Senate President Jeffrey Kessler, and Speaker Richard Thompson of the West Virginia House of Delegates, each in his or her official capacity. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284, this three-judge district court was duly appointed by the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to consider the plaintiffs' claims. The trial of the matter took place at The Robert C. Byrd United States Courthouse in Charleston on December 28, 2011, and it is now ripe for decision.
Author:
Irene C. Berger
2:11-cv-00636
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending before the court are the plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [Docket 6] and the defendants’ Motion to File Surreply in Response to Plaintiff’s Reply Brief on Motion for Remand [Docket 14]. For the reasons discussed below, the plaintiff’s Motion to Remand is GRANTED and the defendants’ Motion to File Surreply is GRANTED.
Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
2:11-cv-00396
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending before the court is the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration [Docket 15]. For the reasons discussed below, this motion is DENIED.
Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
2:11-cv-00533
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending before the court is the plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [Docket 6]. For the reasons discussed below, this Motion is DENIED.
Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
3:10-cv-01039
Memorandum Opinion
This action seeks a review of the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (hereinafter “Commissioner”) denying Claimant’s applications for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) and supplemental security income (“SSI”) under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433, 1381-1383f. This case is presently before the Court on the parties’ cross motions for judgment on the pleadings as articulated in their briefs. (Docket Nos. 14 and 17). Both parties have consented in writing to a decision by the United States Magistrate Judge. (Docket Nos. 15 and 16).
Author:
Cheryl A. Eifert