West Virginia Supreme Court· 7/22/1998
Kessel v. Leavitt
Citations
- 511 S.E.2d 720
- 204 W. Va. 95
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[W]e discern [no] authority to permit a defendant [standing] to challenge the personal jurisdiction of a codefendant when that eodefendant, by his/her acts or omissions, has waived his/her right to challenge such personal jurisdiction.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Davis, Workman, McHugh, McCuskey
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
83 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Dunn v. RockwellWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2009-11-24· cited 201×
- Wickland v. American Travellers Life InsuranceWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1998-11-04· cited 183×
- Coward v. Wellmont Health SystemSupreme Court of Virginia· 2018-05-03· cited 126×
- State Ex Rel. Medical Assurance of West Virginia, Inc. v. RechtWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2003-07-11· cited 101×
- Ashby v. StateNebraska Supreme Court· 2010-03-05· cited 96×
- Exotics Hawaii-Kona, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Hawaii Supreme Court· 2007-11-21· cited 86×
- Fell v. RamboCourt of Appeals of Tennessee· 2000-05-05· cited 85×
- Brooke B. v. Donald Ray C., IIWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2013-01-24· cited 74×
- Charlotte McCauley v. Home Loan Investment Bank, FSBFourth Circuit· 2013-03-25· cited 72×
- Perrine v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.West Virginia Supreme Court· 2010-03-26· cited 72×
- Lively v. RufusWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2000-06-16· cited 46×
- Roberts v. Consolidation Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court· 2000-07-19· cited 44×
- State Ex Rel. Brandon L. v. MoatsWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2001-07-06· cited 44×
- Highmark West Virginia, Inc. v. JamieWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2007-11-20· cited 41×
- In re Desarae M.West Virginia Supreme Court· 2003-12-02· cited 40×
- Sterling Finance Management, L.P. v. UBS Painewebber, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois· 2002-12-20· cited 36×
- Tracy v. CottrellWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1999-11-12· cited 34×
- Jeffery Moore v. Equitrans, L.P.Fourth Circuit· 2022-02-23· cited 33×
- Foster v. SakhaiWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2001-12-12· cited 32×
- Stone v. WallSupreme Court of Florida· 1999-06-17· cited 28×
Cites
326 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court· 1957-11-18· cited 30,380×
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1945-12-03· cited 18,588×
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court· 1975-06-25· cited 10,875×
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court· 1950-06-05· cited 10,395×
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court· 1974-05-13· cited 6,517×
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court· 1984-04-24· cited 6,200×
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1972-04-03· cited 5,889×
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court· 1973-01-22· cited 5,581×
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court· 1984-05-22· cited 5,292×
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court· 1982-01-12· cited 4,651×
- Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.Supreme Court· 1982-06-25· cited 4,631×
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court· 1965-06-07· cited 4,329×
- Wisconsin v. YoderSupreme Court· 1972-05-15· cited 3,250×
- Shapiro v. ThompsonSupreme Court· 1969-04-21· cited 3,119×
- Goss v. LopezSupreme Court· 1975-01-22· cited 3,014×
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court· 1996-05-28· cited 2,781×
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court· 1992-06-29· cited 2,492×
- Skinner v. Oklahoma Ex Rel. WilliamsonSupreme Court· 1942-06-01· cited 1,929×
- Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court· 1972-03-22· cited 1,851×
- Lehr v. RobertsonSupreme Court· 1983-06-27· cited 1,333×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.