| 1. |
Thomas E. McHugh No. 001317 Refuse 4-1 [ M aynard , C.J.] |
Petition for a Writ of Prohibition in In Re: Tobacco
Litigation, No. 001317. Petitioners, tobacco companies,
distributors, retailers, etc., seek to prohibit Judge Recht
and Judge Kaufman from proceeding under the Case
Management Order/Trial Plan entered January 11, 2000.
It is asserted that the circuit court exceeded its legitimate
powers by adopting a trial plan that is fundamentally unfair
and contrary to law in that it violates due process, creates
confusion for the jury, forces defendants to present their
case in an artificial and prejudicial manner, conflicts with
substantive law, and violates the right to a jury trial. It is
also argued that the lower court committed clear error in
finding that the purported efficiencies outweighed the risk
of confusion and prejudice. The petitioners argue that
there is a distinction between the tobacco cases and the
asbestos litigation.
(Note: The Clerk requested a response. It is due July 5, 2000 and will be circulated as soon as it is available.) |
| 2. |
William M. Miller, P.A. No. 001345 Grant 5-0 |
Petition for a Writ of Prohibition in SER W.Va. Dept. of Health & Human Resources v. Honorable Andrew N. Frye, Jr., No. 001345. Petitioner seeks to prohibit the lower court from proceeding in a habeas corpus matter in which Petitioner is a named defendant. There was a termination of parental rights in Randolph County. The decision was appealed to this Court. The appeal was refused. The child has now been adopted. DHHR does not have custody of the child. The habeas corpus action raises the same issues raised in the petition for appeal. It is argued that there is no jurisdiction in Tucker County and the DHHR is not a proper party. The lower court has refused a motion to dismiss and set the matter for hearing on August 23, 2000. |
| 3. |
Erica Baumgras No. 27058 Refuse 5-0 |
Motion of Appellee, American States Insurance Co, to
Strike Brief and Dismiss Appeal of Dr. Karl E. Yurko in
Animal Urgent Care, Inc. v. American States Insurance
Co., No. 27058. It is asserted that Dr. Yurko did not
file a petition for appeal within four months, did not join
Animal Urgent Care in petitioning for an appeal, did not
file a Motion for Leave to File a Brief as Amicus or a
Motion to Intervene.
Dr. Yurko has responded that he was a party. Accordingly, he argues that even though he filed no separate petition for appeal, he remains a party and has status as an appellee to file a separate brief. |
| 4. |
Charles R. Webb No. 27379 Grant 5-0 |
Motion for Leave to Designate Additional Record in Myron Zirkle, II v. Shelia Zirkle, No. 27379. Appellee, Myron Zirkle, II, seeks to designate a transcript of a hearing that has information relevant to the appeal. |
| 5. |
Heather Wood No. 001304
Grant Returnable Below For [Maynard, C.J., Davis, J.] |
Summary Petition for Bail in State v. Gerald Jako, No.
001304. Jako was arrested in March 1999 and charged
with DUI, 3d, Fleeing while DUI, and Driving While
Revoked for DUI. Bond was set at $55,000. Jako was
unable to make bond. Jako was found guilty after a two
day trial. He was sentenced to 3 to 11 years. He filed a
petition for appeal. On April 19, 2000 the Court entered
an order reversing and remanding in light of Nichol.
Jako filed a motion for pretrial release and requested a
hearing to set bond. The lower court denied the motion.
Jako argues that his conviction and sentence has been
overturned, he is entitled to a new trial and just and
reasonable bail.
The State notes this matter is scheduled for trial on July 19, 2000. The State contends that the lower court is well aware of the evidence against Jako and his prior history such that the decision to admit Jako to bail should be discretionary. This is a unique circumstance. In the Order, the lower court found that everything contained in Jako's motion had been previously considered. |
| 6. |
Richard D. Frum No. 27765 Grant 5-0 |
Motion to Supplement Petition for Writ of Prohibition in SER Marjorie Louise Webb v. Honorable Charles McCarty, No. 27765. It is stated that the Petition was prepared over two weekend days. Petitioner did not have adequate time to conduct legal research and seeks to supplement. |