632 S.E.2d
Volume 632 — South Eastern Reporter, Second Series
53 opinions
- 632 S.E.2d 168Nc Board of Pharmacy v. Commission (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 168State v. Goode (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 169Reypen v. Teeter (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 169State v. Taylor (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 170Goldston & Harrington v. State & Easley (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 171Good Hope Health System v. N.C. Department of Health and Human Services (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 173Harding v. Lowe's Food Stores, Inc. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 173Honacher v. Everson (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 176Multiple v. Ncdhhs (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 177The News and Observer Publishing Company v. Easley (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 237In Re JTW (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 347Jenkins v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2006)
<p>Syllabus by the Court</p> <p>1. "A circuit court's entry of summary judgment is reviewed de novo." Syllabus Point 1, Painter v. Peavy, 192 W.Va. 189, 451 S.E.2d 755 (1994).</p> <p>2. "Determination of the proper coverage of an insurance contract when the facts are not in dispute is a question of law." Syllabus Point 1, Tennant v. Smallwood, 211 W.Va. 703, 568 S.E.2d 10 (2002).</p> <p>3. "The interpretation of an insurance contract, including the question of whether the contract is ambiguous, is a legal determination *348that, like a lower court's grant of summary judgement, shall be reviewed de novo on appeal." Syllabus Point 2, Riffe v. Home Finders Associates., Inc., 205 W.Va. 216, 517 S.E.2d 313 (1999).</p> <p>4. "`Language in an insurance policy should be given its plain, ordinary meaning.' Syl. Pt. 1, Soliva v. Shand, Morahan & Co., 176 W.Va. 430, 345 S.E.2d 33 (1986)." Syllabus Point 2, Russell v. State Automobile Mutual Insurance Co., 188 W.Va. 81, 422 S.E.2d 803 (1992).</p>
- 632 S.E.2d 489Reid v. Julius Blum, Inc. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 489Payne v. Charlotte Heating & Air Conditioning (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 490Ritter v. Ritter (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 491Robins v. Town of Hillsborough (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 492State v. Barnes (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 492State v. Barnes (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 493State v. Bowen (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 494State v. Camp (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 495State v. Collins (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 496State v. Diaz (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Allstate Ins. Co. v. Stilwell (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599B & L Surveys v. Cline (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Ellis v. International Harvester Co. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Fickel v. Fickel (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599In re A.K. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599In re D.M.B. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Lane v. Beall's Inc. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Linkenhoger v. Renaissance Const. Co., Inc. (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Marlowe v. Marlowe (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Berghello (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Bryant (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Hess (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Joyner (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Kirby (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599State v. Thorne (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Taylor v. Town of River Bend (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 599Thornburg v. Rainbow Transport (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 600State v. Owens (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 716Tyler v. State (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 763State v. Hall (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 764State v. Herbin (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 764State v. Hinton (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 767State v. Howell (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 767State v. James (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 769State v. Myers (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 770State v. Ray (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 771State v. Williamson (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 772State v. Wilson (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 774In re Election Protest of Wade (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 774Walker v. Walker (2006)
- 632 S.E.2d 775State v. Stanley (2006)