Edwin F. Flowers

This case involved a dispute over a mechanic's lien filed by contractor Carroll M. Earp against property owners Selwyn and Lila Vanderpool for unpaid work developing a subdivision tract in Wayne County, West Virginia, including road grading, culvert installation, and septic system work under an oral contract. The Vanderpools contested the lien, claiming the work was unauthorized, unworkmanlike, and overpriced, and filed a counterclaim for breach of contract damages. After a jury awarded Earp nearly the full unpaid balance of $17,813.47, the trial court denied a new trial motion and entered judgment for the plaintiff. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed plain error by failing to provide any jury instructions on the defendants' counterclaim and defenses, which were central to the case and affected the fairness of the proceedings.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a rear-end collision on a wet, curved highway where plaintiff Clarence King, a mail carrier, had pulled his vehicle onto the berm to deliver mail; he sued defendant Joseph Bittinger for personal injuries, and his wife Lillian sued for loss of consortium. A jury awarded King only his stipulated medical bills of $547.86 (with no recovery for pain, suffering, or lost wages) and found for the defendant against Lillian King. The trial court denied the Kings' motions to set aside the verdicts and grant a new trial, leading to this appeal. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed, holding that an instruction on contributory negligence was proper because slight evidence supported it (including possible partial obstruction of the highway or limited visibility), but the damages were inadequate as they excluded proven elements like pain and suffering and lost wages, and liability was not so clearly established as to limit a new trial to damages alone; accordingly, the court ordered a new trial on all issues.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a mandamus action brought by the President of the West Virginia Senate, the Speaker of the House of Delegates, and a legislative committee against the Governor to compel him to fill a vacancy in the position of superintendent of the West Virginia Industrial Home for Girls, which had existed for over two years after the prior incumbent's forced resignation under the federal Hatch Act. The court first addressed preliminary issues of standing and mootness, determining that the individual relators had standing as citizens and taxpayers to enforce a public duty and that the case was not moot because the legislature could be reconvened. On the merits, the court held that the Governor's constitutional duty under Article VII, Section 8 to nominate and submit appointees for Senate confirmation, while involving discretion in selection, is not discretionary as to whether or when to act, and that mandamus may compel the exercise of that duty after an unreasonable delay. The court therefore issued a writ requiring the Governor to nominate a candidate and submit the name to the Senate at its next meeting.

procedure

This case concerned the constitutionality of West Virginia's prejudgment attachment-garnishment procedures under Article 7, Chapter 38 of the state code, specifically whether they satisfy federal and state due process requirements. A contractor sued a corporation for unpaid work and obtained an ex parte attachment order from the circuit clerk based on an affidavit alleging the defendant was removing assets from the state to defraud creditors. The circuit court quashed the attachment, holding the statutes unconstitutional for failing to provide preseizure notice and a hearing on the probable validity of the claim. On appeal, the court reviewed U.S. Supreme Court precedents including Sniadach, Fuentes, Mitchell, and North Georgia Finishing, noting that later decisions permit such remedies when statutes include adequate post-seizure review, bond protections, and other safeguards.

procedurepropertycivil rights

This case involved a dispute over a promissory note for $94,073.48 executed by defendant George T. Martin in favor of Claude C. Casto, issued in connection with the transfer of McKay Corporation stock as part of a larger transaction to sell bank stock to Donald Carman. After Carman defaulted on his payments, leading Martin to repurchase the stock at foreclosure, Casto's widow as executrix sued to enforce the note, which had remained in the possession of Martin's attorney. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff based on a jury verdict for the full note amount, which was affirmed on intermediate appeal. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed and directed entry of judgment for the defendant, holding that the note's delivery was subject to a condition precedent that was never satisfied, that an unauthenticated memorandum was improperly admitted into evidence, and that an erroneous jury instruction had been given regarding conditional delivery.

business & regulatory

The case involved the City of Morgantown's petition to annex approximately 644 acres, mostly city-owned airport land, as a minor boundary adjustment under West Virginia Code 8-6-5. The County Commission denied the petition after a hearing, finding the acreage too large to qualify as a minor adjustment and that it would create unreasonable boundaries, but the Circuit Court reversed and ordered the annexation. On appeal by the County Commission to the Supreme Court of Appeals, the court dismissed the writ of error, holding that the County Commission lacked statutory authority or standing as an aggrieved party to appeal its own administrative decision in annexation proceedings, as its role was purely administrative rather than that of a litigant with a personal or official interest.

propertyprocedure