Issue 90 of the Opinion Summary service is posted, covering the final 24 opinions issued for cases argued in the September 2006 term. The opinions in the following three cases argued this term will be held over until next term, when the opinions will issue in due course. The cases are listed below, along with a link to the day the case was argued, where briefs are available.

• STATE v. MULLENS, No. 33073 (constitutionality of warrantless audio and video recordings obtained by undercover police informant while in defendant's home)
• HAINES v. KIMBLE, No. 32844 (appeal from refusal to remove executor of an estate, argued on rehearing)
• JACKSON v. PUTNMAN COUNTY BD. of ED., et al., No. 33038 (plaintiff appeals summary judgment for defendant where plaintiff asserts that the school board was negligent in failing to provide transportation for her son to an off-campus school event; her son was killed in an accident while riding in a private vehicle on the way back from the event)

IN RE: RANDY H., APRIL G., BRITTANY T. AND MEGAN H., No. 33086 (STARCHER, J.)(November 30, 2006). Guardians ad litem for four children appealed an order of the Circuit Court of Hardy County that dismissed an abuse and neglect case. Reversing, and holding that the circuit court had authority to compel the Department to further investigate additional allegations of abuse and had a duty to make findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding those allegations. Holding, in syllabus point 5: "To facilitate the prompt, fair and thorough resolution of abuse and neglect actions, if, in the course of a child abuse and/or neglect proceeding, a circuit court discerns from the evidence or allegations presented that reasonable cause exists to believe that additional abuse or neglect has occurred or is imminent which is not encompassed by the allegations contained in the Department of Health and Human Resource's petition, then pursuant to Rule 19 of the Rules of Procedure for Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings [1997] the circuit court has the inherent authority to compel the Department to amend its petition to encompass the evidence or allegations."

IN RE: CHRISTINA W., SISSY W., AND LISA W., No. 33133 (DAVIS, C.J.)(November 29, 2006). WVDHHR appealed an order of the Circuit Court of Mercer County denying the Department's motion to remove guardian ad litem. Affirming, and addressing situation where guardian is asked to keep abuse confidential. Holding that the role of a guardian is similar to the role of an attorney in an attorney-client relationship, and therefore, as a general rule, the Rules of Professional Conduct apply. However, also holding that the duty to protect client confidences is not absolute, and where there is a high risk of probable harm, the guardian has a duty to disclose to the circuit court.

MARTHA F. RYAN v. CHARLES E. RYAN, No. 33004 (BENJAMIN, J.)(Davis, C.J., disqualified)(Wilson, Judge, by temporary assignment)(December 1, 2006). Petitioner wife appealed an order of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County refusing her petition for appeal and affirming the family court's final order denying her petition for modification seeking to extend her monthly rehabilitative alimony payments. Affirming the denial of extended alimony, and holding, in syllabus point 3 that: "A contract may not be reformed or rescinded based upon a mutual mistake of fact if the mistake relates to a mistaken belief, judgment, or expectation as to future, rather than past or present, facts, occurrences or events."

KATHERINE B.T. v. SALLY G. JACKSON, FAMILY COURT JUDGE, et al., No. 33005 (STARCHER, J.)(Maynard, J., dissenting)(November 30, 2006). Petitioner appealed an order of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County that denied her petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to prohibit the effect of orders entered by the family court in a domestic violence proceeding brought against petitioner by her minor son. Affirming the lower court's decision, and holding that a minor may file a petition for a domestic violence protective order under W. Va. Code 48-27-305. Further holding that a guardian ad litem must be appointed in such circumstances. Finally, setting forth reporting duties for judicial officers who have reasonable cause to suspect that a child is neglected or abused in syllabus point 8: "When any circuit court judge, family court judge, or magistrate has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is neglected or abused, the circuit court judge, family court judge, or magistrate shall immediately report the suspected neglect or abuse to the state child protective services agency pursuant to W.Va. Code, 49-6A-2 (2006) and, if applicable, Rule 48 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure for Family Court."