Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 172 W. Va. 457 - Meadows v. Lewis

172 W. Va. 457 - Meadows v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
2
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably 174 W. Va. 139 - Allen v. State of West Virginia Human Rights Commission (1984), 183 W. Va. 130 - State v. Kerns (1990)

2 federal appellate · 73 state decisions

2701983199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 33 U.S.C. § 928

Relies on 153 W. Va. 538 - State Ex Rel. Kucera v. City of Wheeling · 171 W. Va. 445 - Nelson v. West Virginia Public Employees Insurance Board · 172 W. Va. 312 - State Ex Rel. Simpkins v. Harvey · 171 W. Va. 245 - Cooper v. Gwinn · 170 W. Va. 593 - Smith v. W. Va. State Board of Education

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Before this Court may properly issue a writ of mandamus three elements must coexist: (1) the existence of a clear right in the petitioner to the relief sought; (2) the existence of a legal duty on the part of the respondent to do the thing the petitioner seeks to compel; and (3) the absence of another adequate remedy at law.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “designed to compensate injured workers as speedily and expeditiously as possible in order that injured workers and those who depend upon them for support shall not be left destitute.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[U]pon the making or refusing to make any award, or upon the making of any modification or change with respect to former findings or orders, as provided by section sixteen, article four of this chapter, the commissioner shall give notice, in writing, to the employer, employee, claimant or dependent, as the case may be, of his action, which notice shall state the time allowed for filing an objection to such finding, and such action of the commissioner shall be final unless the employer, employee, claimant or dependent shall, within thirty days after the receipt of such notice, object, in writing, to such finding. Upon receipt of such objection the commissioner shall, within fifteen days from receipt thereof, set a time and place for the hearing of evidence. * * * Both the employer and claimant shall be notified of such hearing at least ten days in advance, and the hearing shall be held within thirty days after the filing of objection to the commissioner's findings as here-inabove provided, unless such hearing be postponed by agreement of the parties or by the commissioner for good cause. The evidence taken at such hearing shall be transcribed and become part of the record of the proceedings, together with the other records thereof in the commissioner’s office. At any time within thirty days after hearing, if the commissioner is of the opinion that the facts have not been adequately developed at such hearing, he may order supplemental hearing upon due notice to the parties. Aft”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.