Thomas E. McHugh

This case involved a negligence lawsuit by Bobby and Amanda Messer against Hampden Coal Company after Bobby Messer suffered severe electrical injuries while working as a contractor on a power line at a coal site; the Messers alleged Hampden failed to disclose that the line was energized. After a jury found for Hampden, the Messers moved for a new trial, arguing that the trial court should have struck a prospective juror with an electrical engineering background and related work experience for cause. The West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the motion, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion because the juror stated he could remain impartial, set aside his personal knowledge, and decide the case based solely on the evidence and jury instructions. The court emphasized that a juror's mere background in a relevant field does not automatically create a probability of bias warranting removal when the juror affirms fairness.

proceduretorts & liability

The case involved a grievance by Michelle Falquero, a classified public employee at the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, who submitted a letter of resignation effective June 15, 2008, but later attempted to rescind it after workplace issues improved and before the agency formally accepted the resignation. The Grievance Board ruled in her favor, finding the resignation void because it was an unaccepted offer that she withdrew, and ordered her reinstatement with back pay. The circuit court affirmed the Board's decision, and the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. The core reasoning was that state regulations governing classified employee separations treat a resignation as an offer requiring acceptance by the appointing authority, which did not occur until after the rescission, and no prior Grievance Board precedent required a different result.

labor & employment

The case concerned whether a convicted sex offender in West Virginia violated the state's Registration Act by not re-registering within three business days after a one-night jail confinement on unrelated charges, despite no change in his previously updated registry information. The trial court dismissed the felony indictment for failure to register, and the State appealed. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, holding that the Act requires re-registration only upon conviction, release from qualifying confinement, or when information changes, and that a brief unrelated detention did not trigger a new duty to register. The court interpreted the statutes as not mandating re-registration after every jail release absent altered details or other statutory triggers.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Pilgrim's Pride Corporation challenging the denial of farm-related personal property tax exemptions for its vertically integrated poultry operations in Hardy County, West Virginia, for tax year 2009. The company sought exemptions under statutes for property used in the 'subsistence of livestock' and for 'farm or farm operation' purposes across its hatchery, feed mill, live haul center, processing plant, and protein conversion facility. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the State Tax Commissioner and county assessor, finding entitlement to the subsistence exemption only for the hatchery. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the company was not entitled to the farm exemption because its primary business was commercial poultry processing rather than farming, and it did not qualify as the 'producer' of the chickens under the subsistence exemption since third-party growers handled the maturation phase. The court reasoned that the statutory requirements for being 'actually engaged in agriculture' were not met due to the lack of direct involvement in grow-out operations, despite the company's ownership of the birds.

taxesbusiness & regulatoryproperty

The case involved a civil lawsuit by David Botkins against the City of Saint Albans and two police officers, alleging excessive force, battery, false arrest, and violations of state and federal constitutional rights stemming from an incident in which officers responded to a late-night confrontation at a Taco Bell drive-thru and allegedly struck and kicked Botkins after he partially complied with an order to get on the ground. The defendants moved for summary judgment on qualified immunity and other grounds, but the trial court denied the motion. On interlocutory appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the denial of summary judgment, holding that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established law. The court reasoned that the focus in qualified immunity analysis is on whether the contours of the constitutional right at issue were sufficiently clear to put a reasonable officer on notice that the specific actions were unlawful under the circumstances presented.

civil rightscriminal lawtorts & liability

The County Commission of Greenbrier County petitioned for a writ of prohibition to block enforcement of a circuit court's mandamus order that required the Commission to increase funding in the sheriff's fiscal year 2011-12 budget, meet and confer with the sheriff on specific line items, and submit a revised budget. The underlying dispute arose after the Commission reduced the sheriff's requested allocations for salaries, uniforms, training, and travel based on comparisons to prior budgets, other counties' spending, and the sheriff's prior underspending of appropriated funds. The Supreme Court of Appeals granted the writ of prohibition, holding that the Commission's budget decisions were not arbitrary or capricious and that mandamus may not be used to compel performance of a discretionary administrative act by a county commission.

procedure

The case involved David Wayne Kaufman's appeal from his first-degree murder conviction and life sentence without mercy for the death of his wife, Martha Kaufman, whose body was found in their home with a gunshot wound; the state presented evidence of marital discord, an affair, and fabricated alibis but little physical evidence linking Kaufman to the death. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the trial court erred by admitting the victim's diary and her out-of-court statements to others, which detailed alleged threats and violence by Kaufman in the weeks before her death, as these constituted inadmissible hearsay that did not qualify under any recognized exception. The decision focused on the prejudicial impact of this evidence and the need for proper evidentiary rulings on remand.

criminal law

This case was a lawyer disciplinary proceeding against John A. Grafton, who was charged with multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct arising from his handling of a client's personal injury lawsuit. The charges stemmed from Grafton's repeated failure to meet court deadlines, respond to discovery, file necessary documents, communicate with his client, and cooperate with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, which led to the dismissal of the client's case; additional allegations involved his abandonment of his law practice and prior disciplinary history. After an evidentiary hearing, the Hearing Panel Subcommittee found the violations proven and recommended a one-year license suspension along with other sanctions. The court accepted the findings and conclusions of law but imposed a two-year suspension, along with the other recommended sanctions, to address the misconduct and protect clients and the public.

procedure

The case involved a breach of contract claim filed in 2009 by Shell Equipment and Shell Energy against Monongahela Power Company and related entities, arising from a 2000 coal sales agreement that was terminated in July 2000 after the sellers failed to deliver coal from the specified mine. The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing the suit was barred by the four-year statute of limitations under the UCC for contracts involving the sale of goods. The trial court denied the motion, applying instead the ten-year limitations period for written contracts on the ground that the agreement did not qualify as a UCC sale of goods because the plaintiffs were not the parties who severed the coal. The Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of prohibition, holding that the contract was a sale of goods under West Virginia Code § 46-2-107(1) regardless of which entity performed the severance, so the four-year UCC limitations period applied and the claims were untimely.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case concerned a dispute over the Bureau of Child Support Enforcement's method of allocating payments on child support arrearages, specifically whether payments should first reduce principal or accrued interest. Ms. Hornbeck, the child's custodian, argued that the agency's approach of applying payments to principal first deviated from the standard rule for money judgments, which requires interest to be paid before principal. The family court and circuit court both upheld the agency's method, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed those rulings. The court reasoned that no statute or precedent mandated a different allocation for child support, the agency had authority to establish its procedures as a federally mandated entity, and its long-standing practice of prioritizing principal was consistent with applicable law.

family law

The case involved an appeal by the Clerk of the McDowell County Commission from a circuit court order in a mandamus action that directed the county commission to pay attorney fees and costs incurred by A. Ray Bailey as the prevailing party in an election contest challenging his eligibility for a county commission seat on residency grounds. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the order, concluding that the circuit court lacked authority to require the county commission to reimburse the fees. The court reasoned that attorney fees are generally borne by each litigant absent express statutory or contractual authority, or a showing of bad faith or vexatious conduct by the opposing party, and that neither condition was met here since the county commission was not a party to the contest and no applicable statute authorized payment of public funds in election contests.

electionsprocedure

The case concerned whether the circuit court could classify Stanley Myers as a sexually violent predator under the West Virginia Sex Offender Registration Act after he had completed his prison sentence and been released. Myers had been convicted of multiple sexual assault offenses and had registered as a sex offender upon release in 2006; three years later the State initiated proceedings that resulted in the 2010 determination. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, ruling that the required summary proceeding must take place before or upon release from incarceration. The court reasoned that the Act's structure, including its provisions for the Sex Offender Registry Advisory Board and legislative rules directing initiation at sentencing or upon knowledge of impending release, contemplates a timely determination tied to the original criminal proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves a father's appeal from lower court orders denying his petition to modify a parenting plan to allow overnight visitation with his special needs son, after the parties never married and the mother had primary custody. The family court and circuit court rejected the request, citing the father's failure to meet conditions such as attending a sufficient number of therapy sessions and obtaining a suitable home inspection. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court's affirmance and remanded the case, holding that the prior orders were impermissibly vague regarding the specific requirements for modification, rendering it impossible for the father to meet his burden and thereby violating his due process rights. The court directed further proceedings, including potential appointment of a guardian ad litem and clearer guidelines for future modifications.

family lawcivil rightsprocedure

The consolidated cases in State v. James involved three defendants convicted of sex offenses who challenged the constitutionality of West Virginia Code § 62-12-26, which mandates extended supervised release after incarceration for certain sex offenders. The appellants argued that the statute facially violates prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishment, due process rights, and double jeopardy under federal and state constitutions, with one also claiming an abuse of discretion in the length of supervision imposed. The court reviewed the statute's provisions, case law, and constitutional principles, concluding that it is not facially unconstitutional on any of the asserted grounds and that its application in these cases involved no constitutional breach or discretionary abuse. Accordingly, the sentencing orders from the circuit courts were affirmed.

criminal law

The case involved the West Virginia DMV Commissioner's appeal of a circuit court order prohibiting a second administrative hearing on the revocation of Craig Hare's driver's license following a DUI arrest, where the investigating officer failed to appear at the initial hearing despite a subpoena. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's writ of prohibition and related fee award, concluding that the Commissioner possessed statutory authority to continue and reschedule the hearing. The court's reasoning centered on the relevant motor vehicle code provisions and DMV rules permitting continuances when a subpoenaed officer does not appear, distinguishing this from licensee non-appearance and finding that the delay did not violate due process.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involves an abuse and neglect proceeding concerning infant Cecil T., who was removed from his parents' care shortly after birth due to the mother's prior terminations, positive drug tests, and the father's admitted drug use amid pending charges. After the father completed an improvement period and briefly regained custody, he was arrested and incarcerated for selling firearms as a felon, leading DHHR to file a second petition and seek termination of his parental rights, which the foster parents and guardian ad litem supported. The circuit court denied termination, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the father's incarceration and participation in illegal activities while the child was present rendered him unable to provide care, and the child's best interests required termination of parental rights along with a permanent placement plan.

family lawcriminal law

The case involved the West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission seeking a writ of prohibition after a circuit court issued a preliminary injunction declaring four South Charleston High School football players eligible for a state championship game despite a one-game suspension for unsportsmanlike conduct during a playoff fight. The lower court had found that game officials violated SSAC rules by identifying the ejected players after the game ended and granted relief on that basis. The Supreme Court of Appeals granted the writ, holding that the circuit court exceeded its authority by interfering with the SSAC's enforcement of its eligibility rules. The core reasoning was that the officials' post-game reports identifying the players were consistent with applicable rules, the SSAC acted within its discretion in imposing the suspensions, and judicial intervention was not warranted in the absence of arbitrary or capricious action.

procedure

This case concerns whether Sherman Dils, who signed a promissory note to Traders Bank to cover a car dealership's defaulted floor plan financing, could raise a defense and counterclaim of fraudulent inducement based on the bank's alleged oral promise to fully reinstate the financing agreement. The bank sought to enforce the note after the dealership failed, and Dils claimed the bank never intended to fulfill the promise, leading to financial harm including the sale of pledged real estate. The certified question was whether Dils had standing to assert the tort claim when the promise benefited a third party (the dealership). The court held that the maker of the note does have standing to assert fraud in the inducement under these facts, reasoning that the claim arises from the deceit of the false promise itself rather than the identity of the promise's beneficiary.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

The case arose when relatives of decedents buried in unmarked graves on wooded land sued a pipeline company and its client after a bulldozer inadvertently crossed the graves during pipeline relocation work. The circuit court certified five questions to the West Virginia Supreme Court concerning whether W.Va. Code § 29-1-8a preempts common-law grave desecration claims, the elements of direct and indirect desecration actions, recoverable damages, and the definition of next of kin. The Supreme Court reformulated and answered the questions, clarifying the scope and requirements of the common-law tort while remanding the matter for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

torts & liabilityproperty

The case involved North Carolina limited partnerships that owned and managed timberland in West Virginia, where their activities were limited to growing, sustaining, and selling harvest rights to standing timber under forest management plans, without any direct logging or harvesting. The State Tax Commissioner assessed business franchise taxes for 2003 and 2004, but the partnerships claimed exemption under the agriculture and farming exception in W. Va. Code § 11-23-3(b)(8). The Office of Tax Appeals and circuit court ruled in favor of the partnerships, finding their activities qualified as producing woodland products through cultivation. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, holding that the statutory exception for agriculture and farming extends to managing timberland without direct timbering activity, as it meets the definition of producing woodland products by means of cultivation and related farm practices.

taxesbusiness & regulatory