Fred L. Fox

The case involved Linda Hardesty's convictions on eight counts related to possessing with intent to deliver, delivering, and conspiring to deliver LSD within 1000 feet of a school, based on three transactions with a confidential informant in 1993. Hardesty appealed, arguing that the multiple charges violated double jeopardy by punishing her multiple times for the same underlying offenses (three sales and one conspiracy) and that the trial court erred in admitting written transcripts of audio recordings made by police. The court agreed that the possession-with-intent and delivery counts were duplicative but found no double jeopardy violation because the sentences were run concurrently, rejected the claim that the two conspiracy counts were duplicative, and held that any error in admitting the transcripts was not plain error given the cautionary instructions and other evidence. The convictions and sentences were therefore affirmed.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Lilly, the defendants were charged with manufacturing and possessing controlled substances after police searched their home pursuant to a warrant obtained on the basis of a confidential informant's tip that they were growing marijuana. The defendants moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the affidavit supporting the warrant was conclusory and failed to establish probable cause, and that the magistrate improperly considered information outside the affidavit. The circuit court denied the motion, leading the defendants to enter conditional guilty pleas. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the affidavit was insufficient on its face to support probable cause and that the suppression motion should have been granted.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Melvin Holstein, a 63-year-old employee discharged by Norandex, Inc., who alleged his termination was pretextual age discrimination under the West Virginia Human Rights Act after a younger employee was hired to replace him. Holstein sued both the company and his supervisor Michael Counts, claiming Counts aided and abetted the discrimination in violation of W.Va. Code § 5-11-9(7)(A). The circuit court dismissed Counts as a defendant, ruling that employees cannot be held individually liable under the Act, that the complaint lacked allegations of threats or reprisals, and that the employer was not a 'person' subject to aiding-and-abetting liability. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals considered whether the statute permits individual liability for supervisors who participate in discriminatory acts, rejecting the lower court's narrow interpretation of the term 'person' and the scope of the aiding-and-abetting provision.

civil rightslabor & employment

The case concerned a dispute between teacher Harry Hartman and the Mineral County Board of Education over whether the Board's Attendance Incentive Policy, which offered year-end bonuses for teachers with high attendance rates based on unused personal leave, became a binding element of the teachers' continuing employment contracts under West Virginia law. The circuit court had ruled in favor of Hartman that the policy was contractual and could not be unilaterally eliminated after April 1, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed that decision. The court held that the policy remained a unilateral board policy subject to elimination because the authorizing statute, W.Va. Code § 18A-4-10a, showed no legislative intent to incorporate such bonuses into contracts, and the parties never reached mutual agreement to treat the policy as contractual. The board had adopted the policy each year on its own initiative using reserve funds and discontinued it when funding was unavailable, without any evidence that either side viewed it as a contract term. The court therefore reinstated the grievance board's ruling allowing the policy's elimination.

labor & employment

This case involved a property damage lawsuit by Hall’s Park Motel, Inc. against Rover Construction, Inc. and related defendants, alleging that excavation for a sewage lift station in 1981 caused subsidence that damaged the motel’s foundation and structure. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding the action barred by West Virginia’s two-year statute of limitations for property damage claims. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the plaintiff had notice of permanent and irreparable damage by 1985 and that the injury did not qualify as a continuing tort that would delay the start of the limitations period. The court rejected arguments for tolling and noted that issues such as public taking or statutory duties were not preserved below.

propertytorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved Peter DeRocchis and his wife suing his employer Matlack, Inc., terminal manager Leo Boats, and third-party defendant Strick Corporation for respiratory injuries allegedly caused by repeated workplace exposure to tolulene diisocyanate fumes from 1972 onward. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, finding the claims barred by the two-year statute of limitations. On appeal, the court held that the action was timely filed only as to any tortious acts occurring within two years before the April 1990 complaint, but barred for earlier acts, because evidence showed DeRocchis had known since at least 1975 that the exposures caused his condition, making each discrete exposure a separate cause of action rather than a single continuing tort.

torts & liabilitylabor & employment

This case addressed whether a third party could intervene in a divorce proceeding under West Virginia Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2). Charles Bradley sought to intervene in the divorce of Robert and Camilla Boyle to enforce an option agreement giving him the right to purchase any Oralco stock Camilla might receive through equitable distribution; the circuit court denied intervention and instead awarded Camilla equivalent value through EAC II shares that were then purchased by the company. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the denial, holding that Bradley's interest was contingent and remote, that existing parties adequately represented any protectable rights, that divorce privacy interests weighed against intervention, and that Bradley had other legal remedies available. The court also upheld the underlying distribution as substantially complying with its prior mandate for Camilla to receive one-half of the marital stock.

family lawprocedure

The case involved Lawrence A. Carte's appeal of a circuit court order upholding the West Virginia DMV's revocation of his driver's license for six months following a DUI arrest at a sobriety checkpoint on Route 60. Carte argued that police failed to follow the department's standard operating procedures for checkpoints and that the checkpoints themselves violated the West Virginia Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. The court upheld the revocation after reviewing the checkpoint's compliance with policies on site selection, staffing, notice, and operations, as well as the arresting officer's observations and field sobriety tests. It reasoned that the checkpoint met all procedural requirements under departmental guidelines and state law, and that properly conducted sobriety checkpoints do not constitute unreasonable seizures. The decision focused on the administrative license revocation process under W.Va. Code § 17C-5A-2 rather than the underlying criminal charges.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

This case involves a certified question from the Circuit Court of Kanawha County in consolidated lawsuits where students, parents, and teachers alleged injuries from exposure to the toxic pesticide chlordane at a junior high school. Plaintiffs settled their product liability claims against manufacturer Velsicol in good faith, prompting non-settling defendants like the Kanawha County Board of Education to seek clarification on whether that settlement barred their potential claims for implied indemnification from Velsicol. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals answered the certified question in the negative, ruling that a good faith settlement extinguishes contribution claims but does not extinguish claims for implied indemnity. The court reasoned that indemnification and contribution are distinct concepts, with implied indemnity arising from equitable principles based on the parties' relationship and the primary liability of one party, such as a product manufacturer, rather than being interchangeable with contribution among joint tortfeasors.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved Laurence and Sheila Dupuy suing Dr. Earl D. Aliara for medical malpractice, claiming that his failure to properly diagnose and treat Mr. Dupuy's condition led to endocarditis and heart valve replacements. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the doctor, awarding no damages, and the trial court denied the motion for a new trial. On appeal, the court considered errors regarding jury instructions on physician judgment, denial of challenges to jurors, and a mid-trial recess, but found no reversible error and affirmed the judgment.

torts & liability

This case involved the termination of Deputy Sheriff Mark L. McMillian by Sheriff Danny Jones of Kanawha County, West Virginia, based on alleged misconduct during two extradition trips and while serving as a bailiff. The Civil Service Commission for Deputy Sheriffs reversed the termination, finding no just cause and awarding back pay and attorney's fees, a decision affirmed by the circuit court. On appeal by Sheriff Arden Ashley, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the Commission and circuit court rulings were contrary to the evidence and clearly wrong. The court determined that McMillian's actions during the 1986 Florida extradition trip constituted misconduct of a substantial nature that cast doubt on his honesty and integrity and directly affected the public's rights and interests, satisfying the just cause standard under W.Va. Code § 7-14-17. The decision relied on precedents defining just cause as requiring substantial misconduct rather than trivial matters.

labor & employment

This case involved an indigent defendant charged with first-degree murder who remained in jail unable to post bail; after his family used loans and donations to retain private counsel, he sought state funds for expert assistance deemed essential to his defense. The trial court denied the request, concluding that substitution of privately retained counsel ended any right to public funding for related costs. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of prohibition, ruling that third-party payments for counsel have no bearing on the defendant's personal indigency status and that an indigent defendant remains entitled to public funds for necessary experts under West Virginia Code § 29-21-1 et seq. The court reasoned that family members have no legal duty to finance the defense, so their assistance does not alter eligibility determinations or the statutory right to essential expert support.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a habeas corpus petition filed by Ovie G. Hall challenging his 1946 conviction and life sentence for armed robbery in Logan County, West Virginia. Hall alleged that he was denied a jury trial, the opportunity to present witnesses, and effective assistance of counsel, claiming his guilty plea was coerced after initially indicating he would plead not guilty. The court denied the writ and upheld the conviction, finding based on testimony from the trial judge, prosecutor, and appointed counsel that Hall had voluntarily entered an unqualified plea of guilty after consultation with his lawyer, with no evidence of constitutional violations in the proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved an action in debt by the State Tax Commissioner, on behalf of Wayne County, against a county commissioner and his surety bond company to recover $1,100 in salary increases paid from March 1943 to December 1944. The increases were authorized by a 1943 statute raising the commissioner's pay from $75 to $125 per month during his elected term (1939-1944), which the declaration alleged violated the West Virginia Constitution's prohibition on changing public officers' salaries mid-term. The circuit court sustained demurrers to the declaration and amended declaration, ruling them insufficient, and entered a final order dismissing the claim after the plaintiff declined further amendment. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals considered the sufficiency of the pleadings under liberal construction standards and the tax commissioner's statutory authority to bring the suit for misuse of public funds.

taxesprocedure

The case involved J.J. Mullins, chief of police in Clay, West Virginia, who was indicted and convicted of voluntary manslaughter after fatally shooting Noah Chapman Jr. during a struggle that began when Mullins attempted to arrest Chapman for public intoxication on a town street in March 1947. After two trials, the jury found Mullins guilty and he was sentenced to one to five years in prison; he appealed, arguing that the verdict was unsupported by the evidence and that the trial court gave erroneous jury instructions limiting his arrest authority. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that the instructions improperly required Chapman to have been in a state of gross intoxication before Mullins could lawfully arrest him without a warrant. The court reasoned that under the applicable statutes, a municipal police officer may arrest without a warrant for the offense of appearing in a public place in an intoxicated condition when committed in the officer's presence, making the jury instructions overly restrictive on the officer's arrest powers and leaving factual questions such as Chapman's level of intoxication for retrial.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved the 1949 armed robbery of a feed store owner in Charleston, West Virginia, for which Albert Young was indicted along with his brother. After a jury trial in which the victim identified Young as the perpetrator and he presented an alibi defense corroborated by several witnesses, he was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison; the trial court overruled his motion to set aside the verdict. On appeal, Young challenged the prosecutor's statements referencing his prior convictions (which he had himself introduced) and other evidentiary rulings as prejudicial. The appellate court affirmed the conviction and lower court rulings, reasoning that the central issue was one of witness credibility between the victim and the defendant, that the prosecutor's comments did not prejudice the defense, and that no reversible errors occurred in the trial proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

This case arose from efforts to redeem two lots in Raleigh County, West Virginia, that had been sold for delinquent taxes to B. W. Lilly. Laura L. Ford, through her attorney-in-fact Paul Craghead, filed a petition to set aside the sale and redeem the property, but she subsequently conveyed her interest in the lots to Lilly; the lower court denied relief. Craghead then appealed the final decree. The court dismissed the appeal as improvidently granted, holding that Craghead had never been a party to the litigation below, which was prosecuted entirely in Ford's name, and that only parties or their legal representatives may appeal.

propertyproceduretaxes

In Fisher v. Bouchelle, the petitioner, facing a civil wrongful death suit and related manslaughter charge from an automobile accident, was served with process in the civil action while attending a preliminary hearing in municipal court in his home county; he sought a writ of prohibition after the trial court rejected his plea in abatement asserting immunity from service. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia denied relief, limiting the common-law immunity from civil process during court attendance to nonresidents only. The court reasoned that the historical rule originated to prevent arrests under different legal conditions and that extending it to residents would create unwarranted discrimination, as locals could be served after a reasonable time following their court appearance without needing service inside the courthouse.

procedure

The case involved Thomas Voiers, who was indicted for grand larceny of a collie dog valued at $100 that had been assessed for taxes but was convicted by a jury of petit larceny in the Circuit Court of Nicholas County. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the conviction and sentence of 90 days in jail, ruling that Code 19-20-1 validly made dogs over eight months old personal property subject to larceny when taxed, overcoming the common-law rule that dogs could not be stolen. The court reasoned that the 1925 statute's title met constitutional single-object requirements, the evidence of the defendant's taking and claiming of the injured dog without seeking its owner was sufficient for the jury to infer intent, and no trial errors warranted reversal.

criminal lawproperty

This case concerned a dispute between owners of two adjacent lots in South Charleston, West Virginia, originally owned by Lizzie Coles, over whether an easement for light and air existed through a 'well' opening in the second floor of the building on Lot 27 that benefited the apartments on Lot 28 via a shared party wall. After Coles's death, the lots were conveyed separately without any mention of the well or reservation of rights in the deeds, and defendant Ballard eventually acquired Lot 27. The court held that no implied easement for light and air was created by the conveyances. Its reasoning focused on the explicit terms of the deeds, which conveyed the properties without reservation, the lack of necessity for such an easement, and application of precedent like the Powell case limiting implied easements in real property.

property