Larry Starcher

The case concerned a non-profit community theater organization that was assessed by the State Tax Commissioner for failing to collect and remit consumer sales taxes on ticket admissions from 2001-2003 and for failing to pay use taxes on goods and services from 1999-2003. The taxpayer argued it was exempt from both taxes under state law due to its status as a 501(c)(3) organization focused on charitable and educational activities. The Office of Tax Appeals and the circuit court upheld the assessments, interpreting exemptions narrowly to require physical health and fitness purposes for sales tax relief and governmental contributions for use tax relief. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court's order sustaining the assessments.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

The case concerned Waco Oil and Gas Co.'s application for a permit to operate a sandstone quarry in Pocahontas County, West Virginia. The Department of Environmental Protection denied the permit after finding that the proposed operations would impair recreational use, aesthetic values, and future beneficial uses of the area, and the Surface Mine Board upheld that denial. The circuit court reversed, holding that denial was permitted only if all quarrying activity in the area were banned outright. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reinstated the Board's order, concluding that the Quarry Reclamation Act (W.Va. Code §§ 22-4-7 and 22-4-8) authorizes case-by-case permit denials based on the specific harms from an individual proposal without requiring a blanket prohibition on quarrying.

environmentbusiness & regulatory

In Schmehl v. Helton, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals addressed whether a corporate officer could be held personally liable for consumer sales taxes collected by a bar and restaurant but not remitted to the state. The court upheld the circuit court's decision that Barry D. Schmehl, serving as corporate secretary and bookkeeper for Filly's of America, Inc., was personally liable for $172,816.63 in unremitted taxes plus penalties and interest. The ruling relied on W. Va. Code § 11-15-17, which makes corporate officers jointly and severally liable for the tax defaults of the corporation. The court rejected the officer's statute of limitations defense and due process challenges, finding the statute valid and applicable based on his role in tax-related duties.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

The case involved Clearon Corp., a chemical manufacturer, appealing a circuit court ruling that granted unemployment benefits to two long-term employees, Boggs and Childress, who had accepted the company's voluntary early retirement package offered to reduce workforce costs without layoffs. The Board of Review had denied benefits, finding the employees voluntarily quit, but the trial court reversed that decision. The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed the trial court, holding that the employees were disqualified from benefits because they initiated their separation by accepting the retirement offer, even though the employer proposed the plan and their positions were not at risk of layoff. The court reasoned that under state unemployment law, a claimant who leaves work voluntarily without good cause involving employer fault cannot receive benefits, and this was not a forced reduction in force.

labor & employment

The case involved a dispute over a 1994 settlement agreement in which members of the Sunset Addition Property Owners Association agreed to construct a sewage treatment facility for their homes in a subdivision developed by the Watsons. The circuit court found the Association members in contempt for failing to install the facility, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed that finding. The court reasoned that a party cannot be held in contempt for failing to perform an act that is legally impossible, such as installing a plant without a required permit from the DHHR/OEHS, especially when the inability to comply was not the party's fault. The case was remanded with directions to consolidate related proceedings in Logan County.

environmentpropertyprocedure

In this case, plaintiffs Clinton and Jessie San Francisco sued Wendy's International after Mr. San Francisco became severely ill shortly after eating a hamburger purchased from a Wendy's drive-through that he later described as undercooked and raw inside. The circuit court excluded the testimony of two expert witnesses—a treating physician who used differential diagnosis to link the illness to the hamburger and a food safety expert who opined that pre-formed verotoxin from E. coli in the meat caused the rapid symptoms—finding their opinions unreliable under Daubert and West Virginia evidence rules, then granted summary judgment to Wendy's for lack of evidence. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed, holding that both experts were qualified by their training and experience, their methodologies were sufficiently reliable, and the opinions should have been admitted for trial. The court remanded for further proceedings on the food poisoning claim alleging an unsafe food product.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a dispute over whether a former assistant prosecuting attorney who represented the Jefferson County Board of Zoning Appeals could later represent a developer seeking a conditional use permit before that same board. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of prohibition and held that the attorney and his new law firm were disqualified from representing the developer. The court reasoned that the attorney had gained confidential insights into the board's deliberations and thinking on the specific permit application while serving as its counsel, which created an impermissible conflict under Rule 1.11 of the Rules of Professional Conduct governing former government lawyers. The decision emphasized the need to protect the confidentiality of communications between public bodies and their attorneys to allow candid discussions.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

The case concerned whether a supplier of raw steel to a company that custom-fabricated structural steel components for a public university construction project could recover unpaid amounts from the surety bond posted by the general contractor under W. Va. Code 38-2-39. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals answered a certified question from the federal district court by holding that the fabricator qualified as a subcontractor, making the bond available to the raw steel supplier. The court applied a functional standard that examined whether the middle party had agreed to perform a definite and substantial portion of the work specified in the original contract according to project plans, including off-site fabrication of non-fungible components, rather than relying on contract labels, on-site performance, or other formalistic tests.

business & regulatory

The case involved a declaratory judgment action by a law firm seeking to uphold a 1998 fee agreement with clients, under which the firm received 30% of increased coal royalties obtained through settlement of a 1988 lawsuit challenging the validity of a 1968 coal mining lease on the clients' mineral property in Boone County, West Virginia. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the firm, finding the arrangement fair and reasonable. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, holding that the fee was not grossly disproportionate to the services rendered in the entire litigation and was consistent with the original contingency retainer. The court rejected arguments that the clients lacked full information or that post-settlement payments should be evaluated separately, noting the fee compensated the firm for achieving a more favorable lease and royalty terms overall.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved plaintiffs suing a pharmacy for negligently filling a Colchicine prescription without specifying dosage limits, resulting in toxicity and permanent kidney damage requiring lifelong dialysis. After the prescribing doctor settled, the circuit court certified the question of whether pharmacies qualify as "health care providers" entitled to protections under the 1986 Medical Professional Liability Act (MPLA). The Supreme Court of Appeals answered in the negative, holding that the MPLA's definition of health care provider—which lists specific professions like physicians and hospitals but omits pharmacies—did not encompass pharmacies, based on the statutory text and affidavits from 1986 legislators confirming that pharmacies had lobbied for and received exclusion from the Act.

healthcaretorts & liability

The case is a habeas corpus action in which the appellant challenged his life sentence imposed after convictions for felony drug offenses. The trial court initially sentenced him to 2-30 years under W.Va. Code 60A-4-408 but granted the State's Rule 35(a) motion to correct the sentence to life imprisonment under the recidivist provisions of W.Va. Code 61-11-18, based on the appellant's three prior felony convictions and his admission to them. The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the corrected life sentence and remanded the case, reasoning that the recidivist statute mandated the enhanced penalty and that an illegal sentence could be corrected at any time under Rule 35(a).

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned the priority between General Motors Acceptance Corporation's (GMAC) prior perfected security interest in a financed pickup truck and an improver’s lien asserted by D.C. Wrecker Service for towing and storage fees after the vehicle was damaged in an accident. The trial court awarded the wrecker service $1,500 in compensatory damages under W.Va. Code § 38-11-3 plus $4,500 in punitive damages and denied GMAC recovery for vehicle depreciation, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reversed. It held that GMAC was entitled to judgment on the counterclaim and to damages for depreciation caused by the wrecker service's unreasonable 569-day retention of the vehicle. The court reasoned that GMAC's perfected security interest took precedence, the wrecker service could not lawfully withhold the vehicle to extract excessive fees, and the extended storage resulted from the wrecker service's demands rather than any dilatory conduct by GMAC.

property

In State v. Thompson, the defendant was convicted by a jury of operating a clandestine drug laboratory after officers responding to a 911 call discovered equipment and chemicals at his residence on his mother's property. The circuit court sentenced him to two to ten years in prison. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the trial judge's extensive questioning of witnesses, totaling around 180 questions, created an appearance of partiality that prejudiced the jury and impaired the fairness of the proceeding under the West Virginia Rules of Criminal Procedure.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned the constitutionality of West Virginia Code § 20-2-5(28), which permits counties to hold local elections to decide whether to prohibit Sunday hunting on privately owned land. Plaintiffs including a hunting club and non-resident landowners challenged the statute after Ritchie County voters approved such a ban, claiming it violated state constitutional protections for hunting rights, property use, and due process. The circuit court granted summary judgment upholding the law, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, reasoning that the provision is a valid local-option statute within the legislature's broad authority to regulate hunting, does not create an unconstitutional delegation of power, and satisfies due process and equal protection requirements under the state constitution.

criminal lawelectionspropertycivil rights

In Shortt v. Damron, a former wife petitioned to enforce a 1987 divorce order and incorporated property settlement agreement that required her ex-husband to pay for their son's post-high-school education at an accredited school, up to the cost of West Virginia University, provided the child met grade and graduation requirements. The lower courts vacated the college-expense provision under W.Va. Code § 48-11-103(c) [2002] but enforced the obligation through the separate settlement agreement; the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed that application of the statute and affirmed the ex-husband's duty to pay. The court reasoned that the 2002 statute's vacation provisions did not apply because the divorce order was entered in 1987, six years before the relevant statutory authority existed, and the order embodied the father's voluntary contractual commitment rather than a court-imposed duty under the later law.

family law

This case concerned whether meetings of the Medical Staff Executive Committee (MSEC) at Charleston Area Medical Center (CAMC) must be open to the public under the Open Hospital Proceedings Act. The circuit court ruled that only the Board of Trustees qualified as the governing body, granting summary judgment to CAMC. On appeal, the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed, holding that the MSEC's meetings are subject to the Act because the statutory definition of "governing body" encompasses groups that make recommendations on policy or administration, and the MSEC effectively handles significant decision-making that the Board routinely approves without substantial review.

healthcareprocedure

The case involved a wrongful death action filed after Linda Kannaird drowned during a flood evacuation from her workplace, a convenience store operated by Speedway SuperAmerica. Her daughter initially sued as estate administratrix against the city and Speedway on a deliberate intention claim under workers' compensation law, but the court later substituted Kannaird's sister, Savilla, as plaintiff due to family conflicts. Speedway moved to dismiss, arguing that only the specific statutory beneficiaries listed in W.Va. Code 23-4-2(c) could bring such claims and that a settlement with the daughter barred further action. The circuit court granted the dismissal on standing grounds. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed, holding that a personal representative may assert deliberate intention claims in a wrongful death suit on behalf of beneficiaries, consistent with prior precedent, and remanded for further proceedings.

labor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

The case concerned a mother's challenge to a family court's issuance of a domestic violence protective order against her, based on a petition filed by her 15-year-old son, along with temporary custody arrangements granted to the son's adult sister. The mother sought a writ of prohibition from the circuit court, arguing that the family court exceeded its jurisdiction by allowing the minor to proceed without proper representation and by granting relief in the underlying domestic violence matter. The circuit court denied the writ, and the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. The court reasoned that state statutes permit minors to sue by next friend in such proceedings, that the family court properly recognized the sister's role and exercised its authority under domestic violence laws, and that a writ of prohibition is only appropriate where a court lacks jurisdiction or exceeds its legitimate powers, which did not occur here.

family lawprocedure

This case involves an appeal from the dismissal of a child abuse and neglect petition filed by the West Virginia DHHR against parents Dawn K. (now Dawn B.) and Earl K. regarding their four young children. The petition alleged medical neglect of one child, excessive school absences, insufficient food in the home, and domestic violence, leading to the children's temporary removal. The circuit court dismissed the petition after hearings, finding the DHHR had not proven abuse or neglect by clear and convincing evidence. On appeal, new information emerged about possible sexual abuse of the children and a subsequent petition was filed, prompting the Supreme Court to reverse the dismissal orders and remand for consolidation of all allegations to prioritize the children's welfare. The court directed the lower court to fully investigate and consider the new evidence alongside the original claims.

family lawprocedure

In Hatcher v. McBride, the appellant challenged the denial of his habeas corpus petition after his 1996 conviction for first-degree murder and sentence of life without mercy, arguing that his sentencing was unfairly prejudiced by testimony from a circuit judge during the penalty phase of a bifurcated trial. The judge, called by the prosecution, testified about his prior experience with the defendant as a juvenile and was repeatedly referred to by the prosecutor as "Judge," which the appellant claimed violated judicial conduct canons and created undue prejudice under Rule 403 of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence. The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the circuit court's denial of the petition, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the testimony because its probative value was not substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice. The court emphasized that assessments of prejudice under Rule 403 are within the broad discretion of the trial court and found no reversible error from the references to the witness's judicial title.

criminal lawprocedure