Case Name – Docket No.

Date

Type of Court Action

Court Vote

C.J. Benjamin Vote

Related to Massey

Value to Massey

(if known)

C.J. Benjamin

Writing?

Summary:

Brief Summary of Matter

Reported Court Decisions with Written Opinions – by date

 U.S. Steel Mining Co. LLC v. Helton – No. 32528

12/02/2005

Full Written Opinion

3-1-1 – Affirmed

                (Against Massey)

Against Massey*

approx $85+ million

+ $5 million/yr.

Concurrence & Dissent

Summary:

This case involving eleven coal companies questioned the application of several of West Virginia’s coal severance taxes on mined coal destined for foreign markets.  The taxes were based on the tonnage of coal mined.  On 09/06/05  The Charleston Gazette estimated the case to be worth up to $500 million plus future annual tax assessments to the companies.  Of the companies, Massey had perhaps the greatest tax exposure in view of the tonnage of coal it has mined  in West Virginia.  The majority opinion of the Court found all five taxes at issue to be constitutional.  Chief Justice Benjamin issued a separate opinion in which he agreed with the majority on virtually all of the amounts in issue.  He argued, however, that the minor aspect of the value added to the coal by its final loading for export was beyond the scope of two of the taxes at issue, but that such was quite small and could be easily remedied by a refund of nominal overpaid taxes.  In a separate concurring opinion, J. Albright stated that the amount C.J. Benjamin referenced was simply the tax on the “relatively minimal cost of the mechanical act of scooping up and dumping the coal into the car.”  He stated that such an amount was “de minimis.” * Except for such de minimis amount, C.J. Benjamin found entirely against the coal companies, including Massey.

  Helton v. Reed – No. 32891

06/13/2006

Full Written Opinion

4-1 – Reversed (Ag. Massey)

Against Massey

$5.5 Million

Concurrence

Summary:

Massey subsidiary, Elk Run Coal Company, as Appellee, sought to maintain a refund ruling of $5.5 million of paid severance taxes.  Massey subsidiary sought same favorable tax treatment as other coal companies who had benefitted from an error by the state Tax Commissioner.  In a 4-1 decision, the Court reversed the circuit court ( Kanawha County) which had found in favor of the Massey subsidiary.  C.J. Benjamin wrote a separate concurrence in which he stated that he believed the majority relied too much on equity instead of an easy application of statutory law against the Massey subsidiary.  J. Maynard issued a dissenting opinion.

12/04/2006

Full Written Opinion

5-0 – Answered Question

Against Massey

Uncertain

None

Summary:

Massey was a defendant below and argued in favor of federal preemption by the federal Mine Safety and Health Act in case involving dust collection and roof bolters.  The plaintiffs alleged that the dust collection systems failed to protect roof bolter operators from silica dust released during the machines’ operations, and that any warning pertaining to silica dust as a result of operating the machines were inadequate.  The circuit court certified a question to the WV Supreme Court of Appeals which answered the question in favor of the employees that such lawsuits could be filed and could remain in WV state courts.  The case was appealed to the United State Supreme Court which refused to hear the case.                                                                                                            

  Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal, et al. – No. 33350                                                    

11/21/2007

04/03/2008

Full Opinion - Withdrawn

Full Written Opinion

3-2 – Reversed – W/D

3-2 – Reversed (for Massey)

For Massey - W/D

For Massey

Withdrawn

$50 Million

Withdrawn

Concurrence

Summary:

Currently on appeal to the United States Supreme Court.  In a 3-2 decision (J. Davis), the Court reversed the trial court ( Boone County) on grounds of Forum Selection (Virginia) and Res Judicata.  C.J. Benjamin and Judge Fred Fox II (sitting for J. Starcher) joined in the majority opinion.  An earlier jury trial in Virginia on the actions raised in the plaintiffs’ complaint resulted in a judgment against Massey of approximately $6 million.  At issue in West Virginia was whether an additional action for more damages could proceed beyond the Virginia trial.  The majority decision held that such a suit could not proceed in West Virginia in view of the Virginia action.  The majority opinion focused on venue in light of a forum-selection clause in the applicable 1997 contract and on the principles of res judicata.  The original 11/21/07 decision of the Court was withdrawn and the matter was reargued in 2008.  C.J. Benjamin issued a lengthy concurring opinion on 07/28/08 on legal issues related to the majority decision as well as to the issue of recusal.  J. Albright issued a dissenting opinion to which Judge Cookman (sitting for J. Maynard ) joined.  Based upon a filing in the case, the U.M.W.A. has a primary interest in any recovery.                                                                                                         

  May v. Board of Review & Mate Creek Security – No. 33703

06/17/2008

Full Written Opinion

5-0 – Reversed (Ag. Massey)

Against Massey

Uncertain

None

Summary:

Deborah May contended that she was compelled to quit her job as a personal maid to Don Blankenship because of mistreatment and changes in her job which had been made by Blankenship.  She was denied unemployment compensation benefits on the grounds that she had left her job voluntarily without good cause.  The circuit court upheld that administrative determination.  The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case with directions to award Ms. May unemployment compensation benefits.

Petitions Seeking Granting of Full Review on Appeal – by date

   McNeely v. Independence Coal Company, Inc. – No. 042156

02/09/2005

Refused Massey Petition

5-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

$1 Million

None

Summary:

Massey subsidiary sought full review of lower court verdict in favor of plaintiffs, the McNeelys.  The couple had alleged a deliberate intent action against Independence Coal.  The amount of the verdict was approximately $1 million.  Chief Justice Benjamin voted with a unanimous Court to refuse the petition of the Massey subsidiary.                                                                                               

   Marfork Coal Co. v. Director, WV Dept. Of Environmental Protection and Janice Nease and Freda Williams – No. 051011

11/03/2005

Granted Massey Petition (on selected issues only )

Issue 1:  3-2 (for Massey)

Issue 2:  3-2 (for Massey)

For Massey

Against Massey

Environmental

None

Summary:

This action arose out of a WVDEP suspension of a Marfork Coal Co. surface mining permit.  The Court remanded a previous appeal in this administrative appeal action on 10/25/2004 (before Chief Justice Benjamin was on the Court), with instructions that the substantive issues be considered.  Marfork raised several assertions of error on this petition.  Chief Justice Benjamin voted with a 3-2 majority to accept the petition on only one issue (Justices Davis and Albright would have refused on that assertion of error).  Chief Justice Benjamin voted against the 3-2 majority on the other issue (Justices Albright and Benjamin would have refused on that assertion of error).  Thus, Chief Justice Benjamin voted for Massey on one issue raised, and against Massey’s subsidiary on another issue raised in this case. The case was later resolved and was dismissed on the joint motion of the parties.                                                         

   American Mining Ins. Co. v. Lightening Contract Services, Inc. and Alex Energy, Inc. v. United Nat’l. Group v. Lexington Ins. Co. – No. 052364

11/29/2005

Refused Ins. Co. Petition

5-0 (for Massey)

For Massey

Insurance Coverage

None

Summary:

Chief Justice Benjamin joined a unanimous Court in refusing to grant the petition of American Mining Insurance Company.  The insurance company sought an appeal of a summary judgment ruling of coverage in favor of Massey Energy subsidiary, Alex Energy.  The case stemmed from a declaratory judgment action where American Mining argued that it was not obligated to defend or indemnify Lighting Contract Services and Alex Energy in an employment-related claim under the Commercial General Liability Policy.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

   Birchfield v. Independence Coal Co., Inc. d/b/a Progress Coal Co., Massey Energy Co., et al. – No. 060451

09/13/2006

Refused Massey Petition

4-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

Uncertain Death Case

None

Summary:

Massey petition sought review of certified question about a deliberate intent cause of action involving the deaths of two miners of Progress Coal Company on 09/17/2003.  The requested certified question concerned whether Massey could be sued based upon a violation of its own safety manual.  The circuit court ruled that it could.  The Supreme Court of Appeals refused the petition and the case was settled on remand.  Justice Davis was disqualified in this matter.

   Ooten v. Massey Coal Services, Inc. – No. 061853

   Ooten v. Massey Coal Services, Inc. – No. 061854

01/24/2007

01/24/2007

Refused Plaintiffs’ Petition

Refused Massey Petition

3-1 (Against Massey)

3-1 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

For Massey (2 issues)

$3.46 Million

$3.46 Million

None

None

Summary:

Plaintiffs below (No. 061853) and Massey (No. 061854) sought to appeal from circuit court verdict and various post-trial motions and for post-trial discovery.  The case alleged that Massey’s mining operations had damaged or destroyed water wells and water supplies, caused subsidence or settlement damage and that the company did not provide an adequate supply of replacement water.  Chief Justice Benjamin was the only justice to vote to grant both plaintiffs’ and Massey’s petitions (though he would only hear two of the issues raised by Massey).  Justice Davis was disqualified in these two matters.     

  Brown v. Rawl Sales and Processing Co. and Massey Energy Co. – No. 070889

09/11/2007

Refused Massey Petition

5-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

Required Services

None

Summary:

Appeal by Massey from a Mingo County Circuit Court order which had ordered Massey to provide water to certain Mingo County residents.  Water users of Rawl, Lick Creek, Merrimac and Sprigg had alleged that the injection of coal mine slurry into an abandoned underground mine and the operation of an above-ground slurry impoundment had contaminated water wells.  The Supreme Court refused the appeal petition.                                                                                                  

   Jackson v. Power Mountain Coal Co. – No. 072598

04/28/08

Refused Plaintiff Petition

3-2 (for Massey)

Against Massey

New Trial Sought

None

Summary:

Plaintiff sought a full appellate review of circuit court order which denied his motion for a new trial on the issue of damages and his motion to set aside the jury verdict and award a new trial on damages.  Plaintiff asserted that the jury’s verdict of compensation damages was inadequate to fully and fairly compensate him in light of uncontroverted evidence of harm (near amputation-type injury). The Supreme Court of Appeals refused the plaintiffs’ petition.  Chief Justice Benjamin voted in the minority to grant the plaintiff’s petition (against Massey’s interests).                                                                                                                                                               

   Timmermeyer v. Goals Coal Company and Coal River Mountain Watch – No. 34138

05/21/2008

Granted CRMW Petition

4-1 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

Environmental

None

Summary:

Coal River Mountain Watch appeals from the circuit court’s final order affirming the decision of the Surface Mine Board in this administrative appeal.  Respondent, Goals Coal Company, sought to build a coal storage silo within three hundred feet of an elementary school, and the Surface Mine Board concluded that the proposed site was within the permit area of the relevant permit.  Chief Justice Benjamin voted with the 4-1 majority to accept the petition of Coal River Mountain Watch.  The case is scheduled to be argued before the Supreme Court of Appeals on 04/08/2009, though Chief Justice Benjamin has temporarily recused himself from cases involving Massey Energy interests while the Caperton case is pending before the United States Supreme Court of Appeals.

   Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel Corp. & Mountain State Carbon, LLC v. Central West Virginia Energy Co. & Massey Energy Co. - Nos. 080183 & No. 080182

05/22/2008

Refused Massey Petition

5-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

$220 Million

None

Summary:

Two separate petitions seeking full appellate review by Massey and its subsidiary of July 2007 Brooke County Circuit Court jury verdict which awarded $220 million, plus interest, to Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel and one of its subsidiaries.  Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel accused Massey of improperly diverting coal which should have been delivered to it under its contract to markets which were more profitable for Massey.  Massey and its subsidiary were accused of breach of contract and fraud.  The refusal to accept the petition let stand the verdict.  The case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court.  On 06/25/2008, Massey sought a stay of the Court’s mandate pending its appeal to the United States Supreme Court.  That stay was granted on a 3-2 vote, with Chief Justice Benjamin voting in the minority against Massey (would have refused the stay).

11/12/2008

Refused Massey Petition

4-1 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

$2 Million

None

Summary:

Massey subsidiary, Independence Coal Company, sought to appeal its post-trial motions after an adverse jury verdict in an employment case.  The jury found that the company wrongfully discharged plaintiff Burns in retaliation for his making complaints about workplace safety.  Independence argued that inadmissible evidence overshadowed the real issues at trial and prejudiced the jury, that the jury’s finding on this count was unsupported by the evidence, and that the damages awarded were unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence.  The jury awarded a total of $1,999,554 to plaintiff, which included $1 million in punitive damages.  Chief Justice Benjamin joined the 4-1 majority which decided not to grant Independence Coal’s petition.                                                               

Petitions Seeking Extraordinary Relief through Prohibition – by date

   Central West Virginia Energy Company v. Gaughan – No. 052797

01/11/2006

Prohibition Writ Denied

5-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

Procedural

None

Summary:

Massey subsidiary sought a writ of prohibition challenging an order of the circuit court requiring disclosure of non-public prices of metallurgical coal sold or projected to be sold by it and its non-party affiliates to non-parties.  Chief Justice Benjamin joined the 5-0 Court which refused to grant the requested extraordinary relief.                                                                                    

   SER Independence Coal Co. v. Hoke – No. 071498

06/06/2007

Prohibition Writ Denied

4-0 (Against Massey)

Against Massey

Procedural

None

Summary:

Independence Coal, a Massey subsidiary, sought to prohibit the enforcement of a circuit court order which had denied its motion to consolidate three cases for trial.  Chief Justice Benjamin joined the 4-0 Court, which refused to grant the requested extraordinary relief. Justice Davis was disqualified in this matter.

   SER Central West Virginia Energy Co. v. Wilson – No. 34403

10/23/2008

Prohibition Writ Dismissed

5-0

Against Massey

Procedural

None

Summary:

Massey subsidiary, Central West Virginia Energy, sought a writ of prohibition related to an order in circuit court which it claimed “grant[ed] relief which is largely dispositive of every issue in the case.”  The matter was dismissed on 10/23/2008 as moot after the circuit court scheduled a hearing on the matter on 11/05/2008.  Central West Virginia Energy, by motion of 10/22/2008, opposed the dismissal based on mootness.