| 1. |
John Butler No. 26905 Refuse 4-1 [Davis, J.] |
Plaintiff, Susan Stout's Motion for Bond Requirement and Stay in Susan Ann Stout v. Vernon L. Stout, No. 26905. Appellant's petition for appeal was granted (4-1 D) on Dec. 2, 1999. Vernon Stout is appealing from an order finding him in contempt for failure to pay child support. Arrearage is over $103,000.00. He contends that the lower court erred in failing to recognize various child support orders entered in Indiana. The arrearage would be substantially lower pursuant to the Indiana order. Appellee, Susan Stout, requests that bond be posted and a stay issued. She argues that she will be prejudiced with the case on appeal accruing interest at a rate of $10,000.00 per year without the protection of an appeal bond. Enforcement of judgment will be difficult. There is evidence of bad faith on the part of Vernon Stout. Appellant objects. |
| 2. |
Paul J. Spence No. 992509
Grant 4-1 |
WCD's Motion to Dismiss as Moot in Joseph W. Altizer v. W.C.D. & Island Creek Mining, No. 992509. It is stated that the Court recently awarded claimant a PTD in claim no. 81-49597. |
| 3. |
Deborah E. Reed No. 26113
Revise Mandate Order |
Motion to Set Aside Judgment Order and to Dismiss that Portion Relating to Costs in Cobb v. E.T. DuPont, No. 26113. Opinion issued October 8, 1999. Cobb filed bankruptcy October 15, 1999. Mandate Order issued on November 29, 1999. |
| 4. |
David A. Sims No. 000009
Consider With Underlying |
Respondent's Motion to Dismiss in John Beitzel v. Terence K. Wolfe, No. 000009. It is asserted that the Petition for Appeal was not filed within four months of the entry of an order granting summary judgment (June 23, 1999). Petitioner responds that the lower court entered an order on August 23, 1999 refusing his Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. Petition timely filed on December 23, 1999. |
| 5. |
Mathew A. Victor No. 26907 Grant 5-0 |
Motion for Leave to Withdraw As Counsel in SER Rodney L. Deal v. William Haines, Warden, No. 26907. It is stated that Deal and his “jail-house legal representative” do not want Victor to represent Deal. |
| 6. |
S. Douglas Adkins No. 26735
Grant And Refer to Disciplinary |
Appellee's, Samantha Mullins, Motion to Dismiss in Virgil J. Kirk v. Franklin R. Mullins, No. 26735. Appellee states that she was not served notice of the filing of the petition for appeal and was unaware of its' existence. It is argued that Appellant did not request a transcript and the Order granting summary judgment was entered on September 14, 1998. Thus, the Appellant should have filed no later than November 14, 1998 and did not file until February 11, 1999. (On January 11, 1999 an Order was entered with the lower court granting the Appellants an additional 30 days to file a petition). It is asserted that the form of the petition was improper. (Appellant's counsel is Steven L. Miller). |
| 7. |
Steven K. Nord No. 26735
Grant And Refer to Disciplinary |
Appellees', Freelin Mullins and Lee Sartin Trucking Co., Motion to Dismiss in Virgil J. Kirk v. Franklin R. Mullins, No. 26735. Appellees' adopt the argument of Samantha Mullins. |
| 8. |
S.F. Raymond Smith No. 990567
Refuse 4-1 |
Claimant's Motion to Reinstate Petition for Review in Timothy Stanley v. WCD & B&S Const., Co., No. 990567. It is stated that the case was settled for the payment of an additional 5% PPD award to be paid in one lump sum. Petition was dismissed as moot based on settlement by order of 12-27-99. In January, 2000, the WCD stated by letter that it would not pay benefits because it was used to satisfy an order from the BCSE. |
| 9. |
Ronald S. Rossi No. 26864 Grant 5-0 |
Appellee's, General Motors Corporation, Motion to Dismiss Robert Fox v. WCD & General Motors, No. 26864. It is asserted that the matter is moot. |
| 10. |
Mary H. Sanders No. 000090
Grant 3-2 |
Petition for a Writ of Prohibition in SER Ben Kish Meadows v. The Honorable Booker T. Stephens, No. 000090. Petitioner seeks to prohibit enforcement of an order granting plaintiffs' motion for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability and granting the motion for a new trial on issue of damages. |
| 11. |
Amy M. Smith No. 26850 Hold in Abeyance |
Consolidation Coal Co.'s Motion to Dismiss Appeal in Roberts v. Consolidation Coal Co., No. 26850. It is argued that the petition is untimely. Entry of final judgment was 9-16-98. Roberts' post-trial motion was not filed within ten days. Thus, issues were waived. Additionally, the appeal period expired Jan. 16, 1999, nearly 8 months before the petition was filed. The circuit court did not enter a timely and proper order extending the period for filing and Roberts did not demonstrate good cause for an extension. |
| 12. |
William Thompson Pro se Refuse 5-0 |
Petition for a Writ of Mandamus in SER William Thompson v. Herman G. Canady. Thompson is incarcerated at Mount Olive. He was convicted in May, 1995. He had divorced in 1991 and child support was set. It is argued that child support should have stopped due to incarceration and lack of income. (Please note that Kanawha County Clerk's Office was unable to locate an order). |
| 13. |
Tom N. White Nos. 26709 & 26710
Refuse 3-2 |
Claimant's Motion to Supplement and Reply in Richard A. Catlett, Jr. v. WCD & Belt Service, Inc., Nos. 26709 and 26710. Three medical reports were obtained after the Appeal Board's Order. The evidence bolsters that which was already submitted. A considerable amount of time has passed during the course of the litigation through no fault of the claimant. During that time, the claimant has obtained additional medical reports. |
| 14. |
Leonard Knee No. 000110
Grant With Bond |
Walls Sanitation, Inc. Motion for Stay Pending Appeal in Patty Ann Joy, d.b.a. Joy Sanitation et al. and Walls Sanitation, No. 000110. Walls and Shisler hold certificates of convenience and necessity to provide garbage service in Monongalia County. They have been in disputes regarding territories. Both filed complaints with PSC. PSC rewrote certificates and ordered public notice. Rewritten certificates alter rights of Walls in areas that were not in dispute. The PSC is wrong. The rewriting deprives Walls of 600 residential customers. Walls will lose $90,000 in revenue. Lost customers may not be recovered. Without a stay, the appeal will be of no practical value. |
| 15. |
O. Reginald Osenton No. 26908 Grant 5-0 |
Motion to Intervene in Robert Mammo v. Graley Construction, No. 26908. Movants state they have a direct interest as they have a similar action involving the same Appellees pending in Mingo county which has been held in abeyance pending this Court's ruling. Mammo is proceeding pro se. Movant's counsel would provide an appropriate brief. A decision in Mammo will decide movant's fate. Thus, they should be able to participate. |