Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 178 W. Va. 63 - Wiggins v. Eastern Associated Coal Corp.

178 W. Va. 63 - Wiggins v. Eastern Associated Coal Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
4
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

2 district · 41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 182 W. Va. 597 - Board of Education v. Zando, Martin & Milstead, Inc. (1990), O'ROURKE v. Commonwealth (2001)

2 district · 41 state decisions

2201987199020002010decided

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 30 U.S.C. § 815

Relies on McKart v. United States · Curtis v. Loether · Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Buell · 162 W. Va. 116 - Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont · 169 W. Va. 673 - Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont

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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]pply to the appeals board for a review of such alleged discharge, discrimination, or failure to compensate.... Upon receipt of such application, the appeals board shall cause such investigation to be made as it deems appropriate.... Upon receiving the report of such investigation, the board shall make findings of fact. If it finds that such violation did occur, it shall issue a decision within forty-five days, incorporating an order therein, requiring the person committing such violation to take such affirmative action to abate the violation as the board deems appropriate, including, but not limited to, the rehiring or reinstatement of the miner or representative of miners to his former position with back pay.... If the proceedings under this section relative to discharge are not completed within forty-five days of the date of discharge due to delay caused by the operator, the miner shall be automatically reinstated until the final determination. If such proceedings are not completed within forty-five days of the date of discharge due to delay caused by the board, then the board may, at its option, reinstate the miner until the final determination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The rule that an employer has an absolute right to discharge an at will employee must be tempered by the principle that where the employer’s motivation for the discharge is to contravene some substantial public policy principle, then the employer may be liable to the employee for damages occasioned by this discharge.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is generally recognized that there can be only one recovery of damages for one wrong or injury. Double recovery of damages is not permitted; the law does not permit a double satisfaction for a single injury. A plaintiff may not recover damages twice for the same injury simply because he has two legal theories.””
    2 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.