Joseph P. Albright

This case involves a dispute over an 1898 oil and gas lease on an 850-acre tract in West Virginia, where the lessor seeks partial rescission due to the lessee's alleged failure to fully develop the property with additional wells. The trial court dismissed the claim for partial rescission, finding it duplicative of previously rejected remedies like forfeiture. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court should first impose a reasonable time period for the lessee to attempt further development, and only if that fails and the lessor proves breach of an implied development covenant or extreme hardship, may partial rescission be granted to allow development by others.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case involves a workers' compensation claim filed by John Lovas against self-insured employer Consolidation Coal Company for a 1999 back injury that was ruled compensable and resulted in a permanent partial disability award. The claim was administratively closed in 2006 under West Virginia regulation 85 CSR § 1-13.1 after more than six months had passed without authorized medical treatment, and both an administrative law judge and the Workers' Compensation Board of Review upheld the closure over the claimant's objection that the regulation conflicted with West Virginia Code § 23-4-16(a)(4). The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the Board of Review and remanded the matter, concluding that the regulation is inconsistent with the statute because it shortens the five-year period during which a claim remains eligible for additional benefits without treatment. The court directed that affected claimants receive notice clarifying that administrative closures do not bar claims still active under the statutory five-year rule and that requests for benefits following such closures will not count against statutory reopening limits.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved a juvenile defendant transferred to adult criminal jurisdiction solely on a first-degree robbery charge arising from a violent incident that left the victim in a persistent vegetative state. After the grand jury indicted him on three additional charges—conspiracy to commit first-degree robbery, malicious assault, and conspiracy to commit malicious assault—the defendant moved to dismiss those counts, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction because they were not addressed at the transfer hearing. The circuit court denied the motion, allowed trial on all counts, and convicted the defendant on every charge. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that when transfer is mandatory under the applicable statute, the state may bring additional charges by indictment as long as they flow from the same factual allegations presented at the transfer hearing.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a sheriff who refused to sign checks approved by the Mingo County Commission for emergency flood cleanup services performed by 263 Towing and Marcum Trucking, citing concerns over invoice legitimacy and ongoing federal investigations into possible fraud. The companies petitioned for writs of mandamus, which the circuit court granted along with awards of attorney fees and prejudgment interest, directing the sheriff to make the payments. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed, holding that the sheriff's duty as county treasurer to sign such checks is not nondiscretionary or ministerial when questions exist about the claims, and that the lower court erred in finding a clear legal duty and in awarding fees and interest without proper findings. The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion's guidance on the limits of mandamus and the conditions for fee and interest awards.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

In Horkulic v. Galloway, the plaintiffs sued their former attorney for legal malpractice in missing the statute of limitations on auto accident claims and asserted a related bad faith claim against the attorney's insurer, TIG Insurance Company, which had provided a professional liability policy. The parties discussed a settlement under which TIG would pay policy limits, the attorney would confess judgment for a larger amount, and the plaintiffs would forgo execution against the attorney personally, but TIG objected to the confessed judgment portion. The circuit court granted the plaintiffs' motion to enforce the settlement after a hearing and awarded attorney fees. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed that a valid and enforceable settlement agreement had been reached, while granting a writ of prohibition on the attorney fees issue and remanding for further proceedings on that question.

proceduretorts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

This case involved a property owner suing a water company and its contractors for damage to his land from a 1999 water line installation project, which he claimed caused ongoing erosion and landslides. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the defendants on statute of limitations grounds, and the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed. The two-year limitations period for property damage claims began to run no later than 2002 when the plaintiff observed major slips and learned the identities of the parties involved. The court held that the continuous tort doctrine did not apply because the defendants had no ongoing duty after completing the project, and the discovery rule was inapplicable since the plaintiff had timely notice of the harm without any concealment by the defendants.

propertytorts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a dispute between white water rafting companies where the plaintiff held a three-year option to purchase land from the defendants and sued for damages after the defendants removed and sold timber from the property during the option period. The plaintiff exercised the option, acquired title to the land, and sought compensation for the timber loss and alleged property damage, but the circuit court granted summary judgment to the defendants. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the holder of an unexercised option contract has neither a legal nor equitable interest in the property or its timber under longstanding state law. The court reasoned that an option is merely a continuing offer to sell without mutuality or ownership rights, and absent specific contractual terms, the optionee's only remedy for pre-exercise changes to the land is to decline to purchase.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved a divorced father's petition to modify his child support obligation after he was incarcerated for a sexual assault conviction, arguing that his inability to work due to imprisonment constituted a material change in circumstances warranting reduction or elimination of payments. The family court denied modification, treating incarceration as equivalent to voluntarily quitting employment. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court held that incarceration does not relieve a parent of the child support obligation, as confirmed by state statute emphasizing enforcement of such duties, but reversed the denial in part by ruling that the support amount must be recalculated based on the parent's actual current income and assets rather than pre-incarceration wages. The court reasoned that imputing unattainable prior earnings would be impractical and contrary to policy goals, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this approach while affirming the ongoing obligation.

family lawcriminal law

The case concerned whether two adult daughters could recover underinsured motorist benefits under their own State Farm policies for emotional distress damages arising from their mother's death in a car accident caused by an intoxicated driver, where the mother was not an insured under those policies and the policies covered only bodily injury sustained by an insured. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the daughters, allowing recovery through the wrongful death statute. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the policy language limited UIM coverage to compensatory damages for bodily injury sustained by an insured and that the wrongful death action pursued by the personal representatives did not permit the daughters to claim individual UIM benefits for their own emotional distress.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a petition for a writ of prohibition filed by Erie Insurance in a third-party bad faith action brought by plaintiff Elizabeth Murfitt after settlement of an underlying negligence claim. The dispute centered on a circuit court discovery order requiring Erie to disclose reserve amounts and calculation dates related to Murfitt's claim, which Erie argued were protected opinion work product. Following an earlier remand in Erie I that required a relevancy determination, the lower court found the information relevant to allegations of intentional undervaluation and not shielded by the work product doctrine, as it involved only raw data rather than mental impressions, and alternatively that need had been shown. The Supreme Court of Appeals denied the writ, upholding the order because the trial court had properly addressed relevancy, the primary purpose of reserves was not litigation anticipation, and disclosure was appropriate under the circumstances.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

This case involved an appeal by the plaintiff, as administratrix of her son's estate, from a defense verdict in a wrongful death medical malpractice action against a hospital, a physician, and ambulance services. The suit alleged negligence in emergency care following a 1997 car accident, including improper placement of an endotracheal tube by paramedics, failure by the doctor and hospital to detect and correct it, and related record-keeping failures, which the plaintiff claimed caused the 22-year-old's death. After a jury trial, the circuit court denied the plaintiff's motion for a new trial. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed, holding that reversible error had occurred at trial, and remanded the case for a new trial.

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

Dr. Zaleski, an orthopedic surgeon, sued West Virginia Physicians’ Mutual Insurance Company after Mutual declined to renew his medical malpractice insurance policy that had transferred from the state-run BRIM program, following a brief appeal hearing before Mutual’s underwriting committee that upheld the non-renewal due to the frequency of lawsuits in his history. The circuit court granted partial summary judgment to Dr. Zaleski on claims including breach of good faith and arbitrary conduct and denied Mutual’s motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part, remanding with directions, holding that Mutual has statutory authority to non-renew policies but due process requires review of such decisions, which the Insurance Commissioner has no duty to conduct under the applicable statutes.

business & regulatoryhealthcareprocedure

In this personal injury case, electrician David Kyle sued Dana Transport, Inc. and Ronnie Dodrill after being injured by an explosion from an electrical panel he was repairing at the company's maintenance building; Kyle sought to rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to infer negligence from the occurrence of the accident itself. The Circuit Court of Putnam County granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding that Kyle had not met the prerequisites for res ipsa loquitur. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, holding that the stipulated facts did not establish either that such an explosion ordinarily occurs only in the absence of negligence or that other potential causes, including the plaintiff's own actions and those of third parties, had been sufficiently ruled out. The court applied the three-part test from Foster v. City of Keyser and concluded that summary judgment was proper because Kyle failed to make the required showings on essential elements of his claim.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case concerned whether Robert Sarver could be prosecuted under West Virginia Code § 17B-4-3(b) for operating an all-terrain vehicle on a public highway while his driver's license was revoked for DUI. The trial court dismissed the felony indictment, reasoning that chapter 17F provisions governing ATVs meant such operation did not constitute driving a motor vehicle on a highway for purposes of the revoked-license statute. The Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of prohibition to block enforcement of the dismissal order, holding that the plain language of § 17B-4-3 prohibits any person with a revoked license from driving any motor vehicle—including an ATV—on public highways, and that chapter 17F does not create an exception to this prohibition.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute between the West Virginia University Board of Governors and the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission over the Commission's authority to require all higher education classified employees to be paid at or above the zero step on the salary schedule set by statute. The lower court granted summary judgment to the Commission, upholding its directive, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed that decision. The court held that the WVU Board of Governors possesses statutory authority to establish its own uniform and equitable salary policy for classified staff, which cannot be overridden by the Commission. This conclusion was based on the legislative restructuring of higher education governance that allocated such powers to individual boards of governors rather than the central Commission.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case concerned whether a remainderman has any claim to insurance proceeds from a fire policy obtained and paid for solely by the life tenant after the insured property was destroyed by fire. The court answered in the negative, holding that the remainderman has no interest in the proceeds. The reasoning relied on established contract law principles, under which the insurance contract indemnifies only the party who procured and paid for the policy, following the majority rule rather than treating the life tenant as a quasi-trustee for the remainderman. The court noted that the remainderman could have obtained separate insurance to protect his interest.

property

In State v. Green, the defendant appealed her conviction on two counts of negligent homicide after her van rear-ended a stopped car on Route 50, propelling it into oncoming traffic and causing two deaths. The court reversed the convictions, holding that the evidence was insufficient to prove the defendant drove with reckless disregard for others' safety. The core reasoning examined trial testimony on speed, distraction, and braking distances, along with precedents establishing that ordinary negligence or simple traffic violations do not meet the criminal threshold for negligent homicide.

criminal law

In State v. Finley, the defendant appealed his life-without-mercy sentence for first-degree murder after a bifurcated jury trial, contending that the trial court violated due process by forcing him to wear jail clothing during the penalty phase where the jury decided whether to recommend mercy. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the judgment solely as to the penalty phase and remanded for rehearing on that issue. The court held that, under the due process protections of the West Virginia and U.S. Constitutions and following Estelle v. Williams and Deck v. Missouri, a defendant may not be compelled to appear in prison garb before a jury that still exercises discretion over sentencing, as this undermines the fairness of the proceeding even after a guilt verdict.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

Patty Kalany sued her employer Herman Campbell, operator of Irene's Bar, alleging she was laid off in retaliation for complaining about an unwanted kiss, asserting claims under the West Virginia Human Rights Act as well as common law retaliatory discharge, battery, and other torts. After the trial court ruled the Act inapplicable because Campbell employed fewer than twelve workers and dismissed the statutory claims, the jury awarded Kalany damages on the common law retaliatory discharge claim. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of judgment as a matter of law on that common law claim, finding the evidence supported the verdict, but reversed the award of attorney's fees and costs under the Act on the ground that the statute does not apply to small employers and provides no fee-shifting authority against individuals in these circumstances.

labor & employmentcivil rights

This case involved a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the family of Joseph Bates against Valley Radiology, alleging that the company's failure to timely diagnose a blood clot from an MRI caused his death. After a trial, the jury found liability but awarded only the stipulated medical and funeral expenses with no additional damages. The trial court granted the plaintiffs a new trial limited to the issue of damages, prompting the defendant to seek a writ of prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals to block enforcement of that order. The court denied the writ, concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a new trial solely on damages, based on the inadequate verdict and applicable precedents regarding waiver and jury issues.

torts & liabilityprocedure