The Judiciary Amendment

The object of this commentary is twofold: first, to present to the public--particularly the legal public-a complete copy of the revision of Article VIII of the West Virginia Constitution dealing with courts and their personnel, as proposed by the Legislative Interim Committee and as finally approved, with amendments, by the Legislature; second, to call attention, as briefly as practicable, to the substantial changes which the redraft makes in the present Constitution

Parties to Actions and Suits under the Revised Code

It is not the purpose of this discussion to deal with all the provisions in the Revised Code relating to parties to actions and suits, but only with those which have been newly adopted in the revision. Most of the technicality which has heretofore hampered procedure involving the law of parties has prevailed in the common law actions, rather than in suits in equity; particularly, in the rules controlling joinder of parties and defining the consequences of misjoinder and nonjoinder of parties. The nature and effect of these rules at the common law and of the statutory modifications prior to the Revised Code, many of which modifications have been carried into the revision without change, have been comprehensively discussed in prior numbers of this publication. Efforts of the revisers were largely directed toward elimination of the evils there criticised, and hence were chiefly concerned with problems relating to joinder of parties in common law actions and the consequences of misjoinder and nonjoinder thereof. Consequently, a reading of the former discussion will serve the double purpose of furnishing a prior common law and statutory background for explanation of the effects of the new provisions and of directing attention to the nature of the evils intended to be corrected. It is perhaps unnecessary to state that no attempt will be made to cover all the provisions in the Revised Code which in some particular may affect parties to actions or suits, but only those which have a more prominent general application

Common Law Pleas and Subsequent Pleadings in West Virginia

Some time ago the writer published an article1 dealing with the common law declaration in West Virginia, the general purpose of which was to collect and analyze the local statutes modifying or dispensing with common law requirements and to determine what further might be done by way of statutory reform. It is now proposed to deal with some of the features of common law pleas and the subsequent pleadings somewhat in the same manner and with the same general purpose in view. Necessarily, an attempt can be made to deal only with selected details of the subject. The pleadings discussed will be considered in chronological order

Conveyances by Husband and Wife under the Revised Code

The formalities of conveyances involving the property rights of husband and wife have been much simplified in the Revised Code. The simplification has resulted largely from fundamental changes made in property rights arising from the marital relationship, the general effect of which is to place the husband and the wife on a parity with reference to the rights of each in the other\u27s property and to divest the husband of his former control over the wife\u27s disposition of her property. In order to have a full realization of the formalities and complications which have been abandoned, and to differentiate therefrom essentials which have survived or which have been newly created, it will be necessary to compare somewhat in detail the older statutory provisions with the new

Functions of a Demurrer under the Revised Code

The Revised Code undertakes to establish the demurrer as the uniform method of objecting to the insufficiency of pleadings. Although the intention was to accomplish a maximum of uniformity and simplicity, not only as to selection of the remedy, but also, presumably, as to its operative effect, there already may be detected some divergence of opinion among members of the bar as to the specific application of the new provisions. As an illustration of conclusions that may be too hastily drawn, perhaps due to a superficial consideration of the apparent general motives by which the Revisers were actuated, may be mentioned the impression which seems to prevail among some to the effect that no objection of any sort can be interposed to a pleading except through the medium of a demurrer. A brief analysis of the statutes and a comparison of the present provisions with the common law and equity practice and prior statutory regulations which have been superseded may help to clarify the situation. It is perhaps superfluous to state that space will not permit any attempt to cover more than a few of the more prominent features of the subject