Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia

 Gavel.gif (863 bytes)     Motion Docket     Gavel.gif (863 bytes)

May 4, 1999
(Updated 5/4/99)

1.  State of West Virginia v. David Rabb - 983156 - The petitioner appeals his convictions in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County of kidnapping, aggravated robbery and malicious wounding.  The petitioner's sentences include a term of life without the possibility of parole.  The case concerns the kidnapping, robbery and assault of a pregnant woman in a parking garage in Charleston.  Refused 5-0.

2.  Joe Bailey, et al. v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co. AND Eddie S. Caldwell, et al. v. Norfolk and Western Railway Co. - 983151 - Norfolk and Western Railway Co. appeals from a jury verdict returned in the Circuit Court of McDowell County finding that the railroad discriminated against 67 employees upon the basis of age, when the railroad promoted the employees from "trainman to conductor" but placed the employees at the bottom of the conductors' seniority roster.  Granted 3-2, Starcher & McGraw.

3. Chrislene J. Hickey v. Glen Martin Hickey - 982797 - Chrislene H. appeals an order which permits her children to visit with their paternal grandparents.   The children disclosed that the paternal grandparents sexually abused them.   Initially, the court ordered that the children have no contact with the grandparents.  The court later revisited the issue and determined that the grandparents can have visits with the children as long as the children's father or his new wife supervises the contact.  Refused 3-2, Workman & Davis

4.  Jan-Care Ambulance Service, Inc. and West Virginia EMS Coalition v. PSC of WV, Interstate Medical Transport, Inc., and Sophia Volunteer Fire & Ambulance Service, Inc. - 990562 - No summary available.
Granted 4-1,  Starcher.

5.  Mountain Gauley Investment Corp. and James F. Harris v. Maplewood Mining Co., Inc., Nicholas Loan &  Mortgage, Inc., Theodore Legg and Tim Underwood - 983286 - The petitioners challenge a summary judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Nicholas County in favor of the holder of the petitioner's promissory note.  The petitioners contend that questions of fact surround the note's validity. Refused 4-1, Workman