1. Shelby B. Leary, Comm’r v. McDowell County National Bank  - 29001 - The Commissioner of the Division of Labor appeals Judge Zakaib's dismissal of its claim against the McDowell County National Bank in a Wage Payment and Collection Act case. Judge Zakaib found that the Commissioner's investigation into the amount of money owed to eleven coal miners was fatally flawed and dismissed the case prior to trial.

2. Estate of Bobby J. Robinson, et al. v. Randolph County Commission, et al.  - 28851 - Plaintiffs appeal from the circuit court's order dismissing their action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the W. Va. Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs seek a reversal and a remand to the circuit court for proceedings on the merits.

3. West Virginia Insurance Guaranty Association v. Marlyn Potts, et al.  - 28856 - In this declaratory judgment action, the petitioners, Marlyn Potts, et al., appeal from a summary judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Ohio County in favor of respondent West Virginia Insurance Guaranty Association. In an underlying medical malpractice action, the petitioners obtained a judgment against Robert L. Cross, M.D., and Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, Inc., in excess of $1,000,000, which judgment included a direct negligence claim and derivative claims for loss of consortium. Noting that the tortfeasors' insurer was insolvent, the Circuit Court, in the declaratory judgment action, aggregated the petitioners' claims and held that the claims were subject to a statutory cap of $300,000 under the West Virginia Insurance Guaranty Association Act. The petitioners contend that their claims should not have been aggregated and that the claims were separately subject to the $300,000 cap. 

4. Darlene Gillingham, et al. v. Albert Stephenson  - 28852 - The petitioners, Darlene Gillingham and Carl Bumgardner, appeal from an order entered in the Circuit Court of Ohio County denying them a new trial. According to the petitioners, their motor vehicle came to a controlled stop when they noticed that several vehicles ahead of them were involved in an accident. The petitioners' motor vehicle, however, was rear-ended by a vehicle operated by the respondent, Albert Stephenson. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the respondent. Alleging instructional error, the petitioners contend that they were entitled to a judgment as a matter of law or to a new trial.