174 W. Va. 191 - Scites v. Huffman’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 167 W. Va. 155 - State Ex Rel. Barker v. Manchin · 174 W. Va. 139 - Allen v. State of West Virginia Human Rights Commission · 173 W. Va. 387 - State Ex Rel. M.C.H. v. Kinder · 172 W. Va. 457 - Meadows v. Lewis · 160 W. Va. 656 - Workman v. Workmen's Compensation Commissioner
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“W.Va. Code, 23-4-8, when liberally construed to achieve the objectives of the workers' compensation law, requires claimants and employers to promptly exchange all medical reports and submit them directly to the Commissioner without waiting for an evidentiary hearing. Upon receipt, medical reports will become a part of the record in the case, subject to the right of an opposing party to object to their admissibility and to cross-examine the medical experts. Admissibility objections and requests for cross-examination must also be promptly submitted to the Commissioner to avoid needless evidentiary hearings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Upon receipt of an objection, the office of judges shall, mthin fifteen days from receipt thereof, set a time and place for the hearing of evidence and shall notify the commissioner of the filing of the objection.... “The employer, the claimant and the commissioner 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 the objection unless such hearing be postponed by agreement of the parties or by the chief administrative law judge or such authorized representative for good cause.” (Emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he criteria for continuances and supplemental hearings `for good cause shown' are to be strictly construed by the commissioner and his authorized representatives to prevent delay, in granting or denying continuances and supplemental hearings.”
1 later decision 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.