John F. McCuskey

The case involved elderly borrowers who challenged the validity of a compulsory arbitration clause in their consumer loan documents with United Companies Lending Corp., claiming it was one-sided and unenforceable, along with claims that loan broker Michael Searls breached fiduciary duties by failing to provide required disclosures and agreements. The Circuit Court of Lincoln County certified three questions to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals concerning whether a court must first determine the arbitration clause's validity, whether the clause was void as a matter of law due to its waivers favoring the lender, and whether a loan broker owes specific fiduciary duties such as providing written contracts, cancellation rights, cost disclosures, and acting solely for the borrower. The court examined the arbitration agreement's limitations on damages and remedies alongside exceptions preserving the lender's access to judicial forums for collections and foreclosures, as well as state statutes defining credit services organizations and mandating written contracts with cancellation notices. It concluded that loan brokers fall under credit services organization rules requiring such protections and addressed the procedural priority of resolving arbitration validity before other issues.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a dispute between two Berkeley County public service districts and the City of Martinsburg over which entity had the right to provide water and sewer utility service to a 13-acre tract of land containing a new apartment complex. The tract lay within the districts' boundaries but was later annexed into the City. The Public Service Commission ruled in favor of the City and dismissed the districts' complaints seeking to bar the City from providing service. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the result, concluding that W.Va. Code § 16-13A-8 controls and bars the districts from serving the annexed area without the City's consent.

business & regulatory

The case involved A & M Properties, Inc., which sued Norfolk Southern Corporation and its subsidiary after the railroad blocked and removed a grade crossing that A & M and its predecessors had used for over ten years, seeking a declaratory judgment establishing a prescriptive easement across the railroad's active trackway. The circuit court initially dismissed the claim but later certified the question of whether West Virginia law allows a prescriptive easement against property owned in fee simple by a railroad. The Supreme Court of Appeals answered the certified question in the negative, holding that no such easement can be acquired over a railroad's trackway. The court's reasoning relied on the West Virginia Constitution's declaration that railroads are public highways, along with longstanding common-law principles treating railroads similarly to public thoroughfares for purposes of preventing adverse property claims.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case involved an insurance dispute in which Donald McCormick sued Allstate Insurance Company after a 1988 car accident, alleging that Allstate underpaid on his total-loss vehicle claim by improperly deducting amounts for mileage, condition, and reconditioning costs, and seeking both compensatory damages under contract principles and punitive damages for unfair claim settlement practices under W.Va. Code § 33-11-4(9). After prior proceedings, the trial court granted summary judgment to Allstate on the punitive damages portion of the statutory claim. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the appropriate standard for punitive damages in such first-party unfair settlement actions requires proof of actual malice, and that the evidence in the record—centered on the adjuster's use of NADA valuations and deductions—did not meet that standard. The court therefore concluded that summary judgment was proper because no genuine issue of material fact existed on the punitive damages issue.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

The case involved whether the West Virginia Attorney General could investigate Pawn America, a licensed pawnbroker, for potential violations of the Consumer Credit and Protection Act through its "title pawn" loan practices, which involved consumers pledging vehicle titles as collateral for high-interest short-term loans while retaining possession of the vehicles. Pawn America argued that the Act's exemption for licensed pawnbrokers barred the investigation and that the subpoena duces tecum violated its Fifth Amendment rights. The circuit court enforced parts of the subpoena after quashing others, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the exemption applies only to true pawnbroking activities within the scope of the local license and does not prevent investigation of transactions outside that scope. The court further concluded that the required records doctrine precluded Fifth Amendment claims as to the documents ordered produced.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved the Marion County Board of Education's termination of teacher Thomas P. Harry for violating its sexual harassment policy through repeated sexually-oriented remarks to students. A hearing examiner in Harry's grievance proceeding found the misconduct proven but ruled the termination excessive and ordered reinstatement without back pay, a decision affirmed by the circuit court. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed, holding that the board did not act arbitrarily or capriciously. The court reasoned that sexual harassment of students constitutes a substantial concern under W.Va. Code § 18A-2-8, which authorizes termination for immorality, and that school boards have a duty to address such conduct to avoid violating federal law such as Title IX.

labor & employmentcivil rights