Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia
Motion Docket
Tuesday, September 19, 20001. State
of W. Va. v. Luke J. M. - 000605 - The petitioner, Luke M., appeals from his conviction, entered upon a guilty plea in the Circuit Court of Wood County, to the offense of murder of the second degree. The petitioner, age 15 when the offense was committed, was transferred to the Circuit Court's adult jurisdiction. The petitioner's primary challenge concerns his sentence of forty years in the penitentiary.
-
Refused 3-2,
Davis, Starcher. 4. Donald Hanks and Catherine Hanks v. Russell S. Cook, William DePaulo and Ross, DePaulo & Hamlin, PLLC - 000741 - The petitioners, Mr. & Mrs. Hanks, appeal the summary judgment order dismissing their legal malpractice claim against William DePaulo and his law firm, Ross & DePaulo. On appeal, the Hanks argue that the circuit court erred in determining that the statute of limitation had run on their claim against the bank before they contacted Mr. DePaulo. The Hanks also argue that because of the advice of a certain third party as an attorney, the running of the statute of limitation was suspended under the discovery rule. - Refused 3-2, Starcher, Scott. 5. Jonella R. Yates and
Donald Yates, her husband v. University of West Virginia Board of Trustees -
000793 - Plaintiffs appeal from the jury verdict returned in favor of defendant in this medical malpractice action.
- Granted 5- 0. 6. Bonita
Sue Hadox and Robert B. Hadox v. Raenna M. Martin
- 000768 - Plaintiffs appeal from the jury verdict rendered in favor of defendant in this personal injury action arising out of a automobile accident.
- Granted 5- 0. 7. Chester Nutter and Alma Nutter, his
wife v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. - 001021 - This is a deliberate intent action wherein the petitioners, Chester and Alma Nutter, appeal from a summary judgment granted by the Circuit Court of Cabell County in favor of Mr. Nutter's employer, respondent Owens-Illinois, Inc. Mr. Nutter, who allegedly suffered severe and permanent injury from inhaling carbon monoxide at work, contends that the Circuit Court erred in ruling that he failed to show: (1) that the respondent had a subjective realization of the unsafe working condition and (2) that the respondent intentionally exposed Mr. Nutter to that condition.
- Granted 5- 0. |
Thursday, November 08, 2001 01:04 PM