Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia

gavel Argument Docket  
Wednesday, October 25, 2006


* Please note that number 5
on today's docket, 
Davis v. Eagle Coal, # 33054, will be heard first.

1.  Linda J. Haines, beneficiary, etc. v. Pamela K. Kimble, Exex. - 32844 - Petitioner appeals from the circuit court's order affirming the ruling of the Hampshire County Commission, which refused to remove respondent as the executrix of the decedent's estate.

2.  In Re: Skylean H., Earl K. Mersadies K., and Cody K. - 33135 - The Petitioner/GAL seeks an appeal of the circuit court's order that dismissed the abuse and neglect petition and ordered the children to be returned to the care of the mother. The GAL also seeks to overturn the circuit court's denial of a stay pending appeal.

3.  State of W. Va. v. Michael Lee Kendall - 32689 - Petitioner appeals his conviction for burglary and for three counts of brandishing a firearm. 

4.  Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Desiree Lynette Albers - 31279 - The Court will hear argument in this lawyer disciplinary matter.

5.  Jerril Davis, et al. v. Eagle Coal and Dock Company, et al. - 33054 -  Defendant J. H. Fletcher & Company files its petition for appeal pursuant to an order certifying questions to this Court. The Order of Certification has been entered in seven civil actions pending before the circuit court. - This case will be heard first.  Chief Justice Davis disqualified.  Judge Johnson sitting by temporary assignment.

THE CIRCUIT COURT HAS CERTIFIED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1. Whether a determination of liability predicated on a roof bolter dust collection system design that has not been heretofore deemed permissible by MSHA/Secretary of Labor is subject to preemption by virtue of the conflict between such a judicial determination and 30 U.S.C.A. § 844 and/or the occupation of the field of roof bolter dust collection system design by Federal regulatory authorities. 

ANSWER: YES.

2. Whether a determination of liability predicated on a failure to warn relating to a roof bolter's dust collection system via a warning not specifically prescribed by MSHA/Secretary of Labor is subject to preemption by virtue of the conflict between such a judicial determination and 30 U.S.C.A. § 844 and/or occupation of the field of roof bolter dust collection system and dust control warnings by Federal regulatory authorities.

ANSWER: YES

 The briefs and other filings are provided in PDF format. 
 Download free Reader 

 

Home | Opinions | Site Map | Law Library | Rules Staff | Site Search | Terms of Use

Monday, October 23, 2006