End qualified immunity in West Virginia

Yes, the bill states, "A lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) **The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed.**"

Yes, the bill states, "A lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) **The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed.**"

Yes, the bill states, "**The plaintiff seeking relief bears the burden of proving a violation of a right under the laws or constitution of this State or the United States by a preponderance of the evidence**."

Yes, there are no caps on compensatory damages, as stated in Chapter 55 of West Virginia's code.

No, the bill does not meet the standard.

Yes, the bill states, "The government is a principal responsible for the actions of its government employees. (2) A government employee is an agent of the government that employs the government employee. (3) **The government is legally responsible for a wrongful act of its government employee if such act occurs under the color of law. (4) This section shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity and acceptance of responsibility for a government employee’s act under the color of law under the common law theory of respondeat superior by the government as required to enforce the provisions of this code, without regard to whether the government employee acted pursuant to a policy or custom of the governmen**t."

Yes, the bill states, "In any proceeding in which a plaintiff’s claim prevails, **the government shall be liable for reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs. (2) Reasonable attorney fees include those incurred on an hourly or contingency basis, or by an attorney providing legal services on a pro bono basis.** (3) The court shall recognize that a plaintiff’s claim prevails if the plaintiff obtains any relief the plaintiff seeks in its complaint, whether the relief is obtained via judgment, settlement, or the government’s voluntary change in behavior."

Yes, the bill stipulates that the government may terminate the employee’s employment if the employee is found to have violated a plaintiff’s rights. However, the legislation does not impose financial consequences for the employee. The bill states, "Notwithstanding any other law, contract or agreement, **the government may terminate a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee if the court finds, under this section, that the government employee violated a plaintiff’s right under the laws or constitution of this state or the United States. (2) The government’s termination of a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee shall not affect the government’s liability under this section.**"

Yes, the bill states, "**All documents, including complaints, judgments, settlements, and consent decrees, are subject to public disclosure under the laws of this state.**" These records are not exempt from public disclosure. ( §29B-1-4.)

Yes, the bill states, "**A lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed."**

Yes, the bill states, "**A lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed."**

Yes, the bill states, "**The plaintiff seeking relief bears the burden of proving a violation of a right under the laws or constitution of this State or the United States by a preponderance of the evidence**."

Yes, there are no caps on compensatory damages, as stated in Chapter 55 of West Virginia's code.

No, the bill does not meet the standard.

Yes, the bill states, "The government is a principal responsible for the actions of its government employees. (2) A government employee is an agent of the government that employs the government employee. (3) The government is legally responsible for a wrongful act of its government employee if such act occurs under the color of law. (4) T**his section shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity and acceptance of responsibility for a government employee’s act under the color of law under the common law theory of respondeat superior by the government as required to enforce the provisions of this code, without regard to whether the government employee acted pursuant to a policy or custom of the government**."

Yes, the bill states, "**In any proceeding in which a plaintiff’s claim prevails, the government shall be liable for reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs. (2) Reasonable attorney fees include those incurred on an hourly or contingency basis, or by an attorney providing legal services on a pro bono basis.** (3) The court shall recognize that a plaintiff’s claim prevails if the plaintiff obtains any relief the plaintiff seeks in its complaint, whether the relief is obtained via judgment, settlement, or the government’s voluntary change in behavior."

Yes, the bill stipulates that the government may terminate the employee’s employment if the employee is found to have violated a plaintiff’s rights. However, the bill does not impose financial consequences for the employee. The bill states, "Notwithstanding any other law, contract or agreement, **the government may terminate a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee if the court finds, under this section, that the government employee violated a plaintiff’s right under the laws or constitution of this state or the United States**. (2) The government’s termination of a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee shall not affect the government’s liability under this section."

Yes, the bill states, "**All documents, including complaints, judgments, settlements, and consent decrees, are subject to public disclosure under the laws of this state.**" These records are not exempt from public disclosure. ( §29B-1-4.)

Yes, the bill states "(1) A** lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed**."

Yes, the bill states "(1) A** lawsuit shall not be impeded by invocation of a government employee’s defense or immunity including that: (2) The rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the laws or constitution of this State or the United States were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the government employee, or that the state of the law was otherwise such that the government employee could not reasonably or otherwise have been expected to know whether the government employee’s conduct was lawful; or (3) The government employee acted in good faith or that the government employee believed, reasonably or otherwise, that the government employee’s conduct was lawful at the time it was committed**."

Yes, the bill states, "**The plaintiff seeking relief bears the burden of proving a violation of a right under the laws or constitution of this State or the United States by a preponderance of the evidence**."

Yes, there are no caps on compensatory damages, as stated in Chapter 55 of West Virginia's code.

No, the bill does not meet the standard.

Yes, the bill states, "The government is a principal responsible for the actions of its government employees. (2) A government employee is an agent of the government that employs the government employee. (3) The government is legally responsible for a wrongful act of its government employee if such act occurs under the color of law. (4) T**his section shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity and acceptance of responsibility for a government employee’s act under the color of law under the common law theory of respondeat superior by the government as required to enforce the provisions of this code, without regard to whether the government employee acted pursuant to a policy or custom of the government**."

Yes, the bill states, "**In any proceeding in which a plaintiff’s claim prevails, the government shall be liable for reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs. (2) Reasonable attorney fees include those incurred on an hourly or contingency basis, or by an attorney providing legal services on a pro bono basis.** (3) The court shall recognize that a plaintiff’s claim prevails if the plaintiff obtains any relief the plaintiff seeks in its complaint, whether the relief is obtained via judgment, settlement, or the government’s voluntary change in behavior."

Yes, the bill stipulates that the government may terminate the employee’s employment if the employee is found to have violated a plaintiff’s rights. However, the bill does not impose financial consequences for the employee. The bill states, "Notwithstanding any other law, contract or agreement, **the government may terminate a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee if the court finds, under this section, that the government employee violated a plaintiff’s right under the laws or constitution of this state or the United States**. (2) The government’s termination of a contract, agreement, or employment with the government employee shall not affect the government’s liability under this section."

Yes, the bill states, "**All documents, including complaints, judgments, settlements, and consent decrees, are subject to public disclosure under the laws of this state.**" These records are not exempt from public disclosure. ( §29B-1-4.)