Stephen U. v. Wickert — Court requires dismissal without prejudice for failure to give pre-suit notice

Case
Stephen U. v. Matthew Wickert, in his Official Capacity as the State Registrar for Vital Statistics
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia
Judge
Daniel W. Greear (Jim Justice, 2021); Charles O. Lorensen (Jim Justice, 2022)
Date Decided
August 6, 2026
Docket No.
25-ICA-474
Topics
pre-suit notice; subject-matter jurisdiction; vital statistics; dismissal
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Stephen U. sued the State Registrar for Vital Statistics, seeking to have his children’s birth certificates amended to identify him as their biological mother. He relied on West Virginia legislation that took effect in June 2025 defining sex-related terms and addressing the collection of sex-based vital statistics.

The registrar moved to dismiss, arguing that Stephen had not provided the pre-suit notice required for actions against state governmental agencies under West Virginia Code § 55-17-3 and that prior litigation barred the claims under res judicata. The Kanawha County Circuit Court dismissed with prejudice, found the claims barred by res judicata, declared Stephen a vexatious litigant, and imposed a filing injunction.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals held that Stephen’s suit was an “action” against a governmental agency within the meaning of West Virginia Code § 55-17-3. Because he did not provide the statute’s required pre-suit notice, the circuit court correctly concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.

But once the circuit court found it lacked jurisdiction, it had authority only to dismiss the case. It could not decide res judicata, declare Stephen a vexatious litigant, or impose a filing injunction. The appellate court affirmed the jurisdictional ruling, vacated those additional determinations and the dismissal with prejudice, and remanded for dismissal without prejudice solely on the pre-suit-notice ground.

Key Takeaways

  • West Virginia’s pre-suit-notice requirement applies broadly to actions against governmental agencies, including suits seeking declaratory relief.
  • Failure to provide required notice under West Virginia Code § 55-17-3 deprives the circuit court of subject-matter jurisdiction.
  • After finding no subject-matter jurisdiction, a court may not reach merits-based defenses or impose further sanctions in the case.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces a strict jurisdictional limit in West Virginia litigation against state officials and agencies: statutory pre-suit notice must precede the complaint. It also makes clear that a jurisdictional dismissal generally must be without prejudice, preserving the distinction between a procedural jurisdictional defect and a merits adjudication.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top