Margaret L. Workman

This case involved Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company seeking a writ of prohibition to bar enforcement of circuit court orders compelling its president, CEO, and chairman Roger Crandall to sit for depositions in two civil actions alleging fraud and tax fraud in the sale and transfer of 412i retirement plan annuities. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia granted the writ. The court reasoned that Crandall had no personal or unique knowledge of the plaintiffs' transactions, that the apex deposition rule protects high-ranking corporate officers from deposition absent a showing of such knowledge after less intrusive discovery methods have been pursued, and that the circuit court's orders therefore constituted clear error.

procedurebusiness & regulatorytorts & liability

The case concerned a petition by the maternal grandmother of a 15-year-old boy to be appointed his permanent guardian after he nominated her, which was opposed by his biological mother who had not been found unfit. The family court denied the petition, and the circuit court affirmed. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial, holding that West Virginia Code § 44-10-4 does not require appointment of a guardian nominated by a minor over 14 when doing so would infringe on a fit biological parent's constitutional right to custody of the child. The court reasoned that the statute must be interpreted consistently with parental rights precedents, such as In re Abbigail Faye B., and that a third-party guardianship cannot override those rights absent unfitness or other statutory grounds.

family lawcivil rights

The case involved Petitioner Gregory Smith, a Mingo County Commissioner, who after successfully defending against a petition to remove him from office under West Virginia Code § 6-6-7, filed for a writ of mandamus to compel the county commission and sheriff to reimburse approximately $53,000 in attorney fees and costs. The circuit court denied the writ, ruling that Smith had not established a clear legal right to relief because he could have requested fees from the three-judge panel that heard the removal petition and that this Court's earlier decision in Powers v. Goodwin was no longer controlling due to statutory changes. This Court reversed, explaining that the relevant portion of Powers remains good law for assessing reimbursement claims by public officials and that the circuit court had misapplied the three required elements for mandamus—clear legal right, legal duty by the respondent, and lack of another adequate remedy—before remanding for further proceedings under that standard.

procedure

This case concerns the termination of benefits for B.H. under West Virginia's Medicaid Mentally Retarded/Developmentally Disabled Waiver Program, a joint federal-state initiative providing home and community-based services instead of institutional care for individuals with developmental disabilities like autism. B.H., who has autism but no mental retardation diagnosis and an IQ of 78, had received benefits since 1999 until the Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR) discontinued them in 2008 for failing to meet eligibility criteria on major life areas. The circuit court reversed the termination and ordered reinstatement, and the West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed that decision. The core reasoning was that the DHHR bore the burden of proving a change in B.H.'s medical condition or improvement since the initial eligibility determination, and it failed to present such evidence, making further analysis of other eligibility factors unnecessary.

healthcareprocedurecivil rights

The case involved a wrongful death lawsuit filed in West Virginia by the estate of a North Carolina resident who died allegedly from a fentanyl pain patch manufactured by the Mylan defendants, two of which were West Virginia corporations. The circuit court dismissed the action on forum non conveniens grounds under W. Va. Code § 56-1-1a, finding North Carolina a more convenient forum. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statute is ambiguous and must be interpreted consistently with prior West Virginia precedent and federal common law to require the existence of an available alternate forum. Because the two-year statute of limitations in North Carolina would bar the claims and West Virginia's discovery rule might toll it, the court concluded that dismissal was improper without first determining whether an alternate forum existed. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

proceduretorts & liability

This case involved two consolidated wrongful death lawsuits filed in West Virginia circuit courts against Mylan, a West Virginia-based pharmaceutical company, alleging that the company's fentanyl patches caused fatalities in Wisconsin. The defendants moved to dismiss both actions on forum non conveniens grounds, arguing Wisconsin was the more appropriate forum, but the circuit courts denied the motions without detailed analysis. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia granted writs of prohibition as moulded, holding that the lower courts erred by failing to make findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the eight statutory factors under West Virginia Code § 56-1-1a when denying the motions. The court reasoned that such findings are necessary for meaningful appellate review under an abuse of discretion standard, whether the motion is granted or denied, and remanded the cases for further proceedings consistent with the statute.

proceduretorts & liability

The case involved a legal malpractice suit brought by Carroll Eugene Humphries against his former criminal defense attorney, Paul S. Detch. Humphries had been convicted of accessory before the fact to first-degree murder and conspiracy, but obtained a new trial on habeas corpus due to ineffective assistance of counsel; he then entered a nolo contendere plea to a reduced charge and was resentenced. The circuit court dismissed the malpractice action under Rule 12(b)(6), and the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that a plaintiff in a legal malpractice claim against a criminal defense lawyer must prove actual innocence of the underlying offense as an element of the claim, and that Humphries's nolo contendere plea and resulting conviction prevented him from satisfying that element or recovering damages for incarceration. The decision also addressed the effect of the plea under Rule of Evidence 410 and rejected arguments that collateral estoppel or prior procedural rulings altered the outcome.

criminal lawproceduretorts & liability

This case concerned whether the Mason County Commission could rescind its prior resolution approving a proposed U.S. Route 35 parkway project under West Virginia Code § 17-16A-30, after which the Parkways Authority's General Manager refused to perform his statutory duties to advance the project. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of mandamus compelling the General Manager to proceed, ruling that once a county commission issues a valid approval resolution, the statute provides no authority for later rescission. The court's reasoning rested on the plain language of the statute, which requires county commission approval prior to final project approval but contains no provision allowing revocation, and on the absence of any evidence of fraud or procedural invalidity in the original vote.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involves the equitable distribution of marital assets in the divorce of Donna F. Wilson and Leon Hunter Wilson, focusing on the valuation of their jointly owned real estate development management company, Hunter Company of West Virginia. The family court valued the business at over $8.9 million, including enterprise goodwill from existing management agreements, and ordered Mr. Wilson to pay Ms. Wilson approximately $4.9 million. The circuit court reversed this valuation, finding no enterprise goodwill and instead ordering Ms. Wilson to pay Mr. Wilson nearly $900,000. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the circuit court's June 2009 order, affirmed in part and reversed in part its March 2009 order, and remanded to the family court, holding that the company's manager fees from ongoing projects are a distinct asset for division separate from any goodwill analysis.

family lawproperty

This case involved a dispute between developers B.A. and Cheryl McClure and the City of Hurricane, West Virginia, over whether the city's 2004 stormwater management ordinance applied to an ongoing residential subdivision whose plat had been approved in 2001. The developers sought a declaratory judgment after the city refused to issue additional building permits for the remaining lots unless the project complied with requirements such as stormwater retention ponds. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the developers, finding the ordinance inapplicable under a grandfather clause for nonconforming uses. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed, holding that the ordinance's definitions of "development" and "redevelopment" expressly cover land-disturbing activities tied to residential construction that require building permits, even if the subdivision plat predated the ordinance, and that the need for ongoing permits meant no exemption applied.

business & regulatoryenvironmentproperty

The case involved a wrongful death action brought by the administratrix of a West Virginia worker's estate against his employer, alleging a deliberate intent claim under West Virginia Code § 23-4-2 after the worker was electrocuted at a Virginia job site. The employer moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing that Virginia law applied under lex loci delicti and barred such claims, and later submitted an affidavit asserting the worker was not covered under West Virginia's workers' compensation statute. The circuit court granted the motion to dismiss, but the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed, holding that the court improperly converted the motion into one for summary judgment by relying on facts outside the pleadings without providing notice or an opportunity to respond. The Court remanded the case for further proceedings, noting that the issue of whether the deliberate intent claim could proceed required fact development through discovery.

labor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

This case concerned efforts by the West Virginia Office of Miners' Health, Safety and Training to permanently decertify coal miner William Coulson after he operated a locomotive unsafely in an underground mine, colliding with another crew and causing a fatal accident; evidence showed he ignored flagging signals, failed to confirm the location of the crew ahead, and tested positive for oxycodone without a prescription. The Coal Mine Safety Board of Appeals imposed only a 90-day suspension instead, and the circuit court affirmed that penalty while also ruling that the OMHST needed a formal prior application to the Board before temporarily decertifying a miner. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed both circuit court decisions, holding that the OMHST could impose temporary decertification without first submitting an application to the Board and that the Board had not properly addressed the statutory requirements for penalties when evidence of impairment by an intoxicant was presented, remanding for further proceedings on penalties under W. Va. Code § 22A-1-31.

labor & employmentbusiness & regulatoryprocedure

In this case, a same-sex couple consisting of biological mother Jennifer P. and her partner Cary P. petitioned the family court to appoint Cary as legal guardian of Jennifer's two minor sons so that Cary could make medical, educational, and other decisions when Jennifer was unavailable due to her work schedule. The family court transferred the matter to circuit court, which denied the petition after finding no need for a guardian given that the mother was alive, healthy, and capable of caring for the children. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial, holding that the circumstances did not warrant appointment of a guardian and noting that the best interests of the child remain the predominant concern in such matters. The court declined to broadly interpret guardianship statutes in this context without full briefing on related issues.

family law

In State ex rel. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Bedell, the case arose from a personal injury and wrongful death lawsuit following a car accident, where the plaintiff refused to produce medical records without a protective order that barred electronic storage and required State Farm to return or destroy the records after litigation. State Farm sought a writ of prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court to block enforcement of the circuit court's protective order, contending that it would force the insurer to violate a legislative rule from the Insurance Commissioner requiring retention of claim records, potentially endangering its license to operate. The court granted the writ after determining that the protective order directly conflicted with the regulatory retention obligation. The decision focused on reconciling discovery protections under Rule 26(c) with insurance record-keeping mandates.

procedurebusiness & regulatorytorts & liability

This case involves the retrial of the mercy phase in a first-degree murder conviction after a habeas court found that the original jury had been erroneously instructed on parole eligibility (ten years instead of fifteen) if mercy was recommended. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals addressed three certified questions from the trial court regarding the upcoming mercy-phase retrial under W. Va. Code § 62-3-15. The court held that the statute would be unconstitutional if it shifted the burden of proving mercy to the defendant or permitted a non-unanimous jury verdict on mercy; that the same jury that decided guilt is not required to decide mercy; and that the prosecution bears the burden and must present its case first, with evidence limited by relevance and prejudice rules. The reasoning relied on prior precedent upholding the statute's constitutionality when properly applied, the state's burden in capital sentencing, and the discretionary nature of bifurcation in mercy determinations.

criminal lawprocedure

In Carper v. Watson, a plaintiff sued for personal injuries from a car accident, the defendants stipulated to liability and offered $35,000 under West Virginia Rule of Civil Procedure 68, which the plaintiff rejected, and a jury later awarded the plaintiff only about $9,600. The circuit court granted the defendants' motion for costs under Rule 68(c), awarding over $7,000 that included expert witness fees, deposition transcript expenses, and other court costs. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, ruling that recoverable costs under Rule 68(c) are limited to those allowable as court costs under Rule 54(d) unless a statute specifically permits additional expenses.

proceduretorts & liability

The case involved the appeal of Darrell Eugene Smith, who was convicted by a jury in Kanawha County Circuit Court of five counts of sexual abuse by a custodian and two counts of first degree sexual abuse against his two granddaughters, resulting in a sentence of thirty to sixty years in prison. Smith argued that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a pretrial taint hearing on the victims' testimony and by denying a mistrial due to the improper admission of evidence under Rule 404(b). The West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the circuit court did not commit reversible error or abuse its discretion in these rulings.

criminal law

This case arose from a wrongful death lawsuit filed after an explosion at an oil well site in West Virginia, in which the plaintiffs sued Halliburton, Texas Keystone, and Falcon Drilling for negligence. Halliburton settled with the plaintiffs and then pursued cross-claims against Texas Keystone for contractual indemnification and contribution based on a work order containing an arbitration clause, and against Falcon Drilling for implied indemnification and contribution. The circuit court dismissed the claims against Texas Keystone on the ground that they were subject to arbitration and later clarified that the dismissal covered both indemnification and contribution. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the circuit court misapplied the standard for a motion to dismiss, improperly expanded the scope of the arbitration clause, and erred in other respects regarding the contribution claim and related issues, and it remanded for further proceedings. The court also determined that Halliburton's implied indemnification and contribution claims against Falcon Drilling had been extinguished by the parties' settlements.

procedurebusiness & regulatorytorts & liability

This case is a divorce proceeding in which the husband sought to enforce a prenuptial agreement designating his ownership interest in a pizza business as separate property, while the wife challenged the agreement's validity and sought a share of marital assets, alimony, and fees. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court's order upholding the agreement and remanded for further proceedings on property division and related issues. The court held that the agreement was invalid because both parties were not represented by independent counsel during its formation, with one attorney purporting to advise both spouses. It reasoned that the presumption of validity for prenuptial agreements requires independent counsel for each party and shifted the burden of proving validity to the party seeking enforcement when that requirement is not met, overruling prior precedent to that extent.

family lawproperty

This case involved the estates of two men who drowned after their vehicle went off a single-lane bridge on a West Virginia road with known hazards, including sharp curves, no guardrails, and a deep water impoundment below. The plaintiffs sued the West Virginia Department of Transportation, Division of Highways (DOH), alleging negligence in failing to inspect, maintain, and warn about the dangerous conditions. The circuit court granted the DOH's motion to dismiss, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state's liability insurance policy's Endorsement No. 7 excluded coverage for claims arising from the DOH's primary functions like road and bridge maintenance. The court reasoned that the state constitution provides sovereign immunity for such claims, the insurance exclusion is clear and unambiguous, and it does not violate West Virginia law or public policy. The decision was limited to the DOH and noted potential recourse through the Court of Claims.

torts & liabilityprocedure