West Virginia Supreme Court to Hear
Cases in Raleigh County Courthouse

      Beckley, W.Va. - The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia will hear cases at the Raleigh County Courthouse in Beckley on Tuesday, September 28, at 10 a.m.

      The five justices will hear oral argument in seven cases. The public is invited to attend and also may watch and listen to the proceedings over the Supreme Court Web site at www.state.wv.us/wvsca.

      "The Supreme Court hears cases outside Charleston three times a year to give more West Virginians the opportunity to better understand how the Court operates," Chief Justice Elliott E. Maynard said. "We first heard cases in Beckley in 1999 as part of our LAWS student educational program, and were so impressed with the community’s response to our visit that we wanted to return."

       The Supreme Court's visit this month also will include students. About 50 students from the Legal Studies and Criminal Justice departments of Mountain State University, will observe the cases as a teaching tool.

       "The Supreme Court's visit presents a valuable educational opportunity for these students and for the Beckley community," Raleigh Chief Circuit Judge H. L. Kirkpatrick III said. "We're delighted to once again be hosting the Court. "

The cases scheduled for the Raleigh County docket are:

1. State of West Virginia v. Myra Lea Angell (aka Myra Lea Smith), et al. and State ex rel. Michael T. Clifford v. Myra Lea Angell (aka Myra Lea Smith), et al., No. 31787.

The State, by the Kanawha County Prosecuting Attorney, has filed a combined petition for appeal and petition for a writ of prohibition involving the dismissal of a criminal indictment for workers' compensation fraud and the disqualification of an assistant prosecuting attorney handling the case. Respondent moved to dismiss the indictment, and the Circuit Court of Kanawha County ruled in favor of the defendant by dismissing the indictment against her. The reason given for the dismissal of the indictment was that it was presented to the grand jury by a lawyer whose compensation was paid by the Workers' Compensation Commission, while he was sworn and acting as an Assistant Prosecuting Attorney of Kanawha County. Respondent argues such practice violates the defendant’s right to due process. The State asks the Court to approve the use of agency lawyers as special assistant prosecutors. Justice Davis disqualified. Judge Hutchison by temporary assignment.
(The State is represented by Michael T. Clifford, Richard M. Riffe and Michele R. Duncan Bishop, Kanawha County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. Myra Lea Angell is represented by L. Eugene Dickinson, Deputy Public Defender, Charleston, WV.)

2. Tommy A. Rohrbaugh v. State of West Virginia, No. 31618.

In this case the State appeals from the circuit court's order granting to respondent, who is a convicted felon, the reinstatement of various civil rights, including the right to possess firearms. In doing so, the circuit court declared several West Virginia statutes unconstitutional and found that W.Va. Code §61-7-7, insofar as it prohibits a convicted felon from possessing a firearm, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and violates the proportionality doctrine. The State seeks a reversal of the circuit court's rulings, or, in the alternative, explicit restrictions on the circuit court's ability to restore such rights in the future. An amicus curiae brief in support of the State’s position was filed by the West Virginia Prosecuting Attorney’s Institute. The respondent contends that the order of the circuit court should be affirmed.
(The State is represented by Dennis DiBenedetto, Grant County Prosecuting Attorney’ s Office. Tommy Rohrbaugh is represented by Lary D. Garrett, Garrett and Garrett, Moorefield, WV and John H. Treadway, Jr., Judy and Judy, Moorefield, WV.)

3. State ex rel. City Holding Co. v. Honorable Tod J. Kaufman, Judge, et al., No. 31783.

The Petitioner, City Holding Co., seeks a writ of prohibition to prevent the enforcement of an order of the circuit court refusing to enforce a mandatory arbitration provision in an employment severance agreement. The Petitioner is the employer in the underlying case. In that case an employment dispute arose between City Holding Co. and its former officer Larry Dawson. A settlement agreement was entered into between City Holding Co. and Mr. Dawson, resulting in a Severance Agreement. The Severance Agreement is the subject of this action, specifically whether certain rights under a stock option agreement had been excepted from the Severance Agreement. Petitioner argues that Mr. Dawson’s claims with regard to the stock options are within the ambit of the Severance Agreement and thus are subject to the mandatory arbitration provision. Mr. Dawson responds and contends that the Severance Agreement expressly provides that it does not affect the rights of either party under any and all stock options previously awarded by City Holding Co. to Mr. Dawson.
(City Holding Co. is represented by Ancil G. Ramey and Hannah B. Curry, Steptoe & Johnson, Charleston, WV. Larry L. Dawson is represented by Roger D. Hunter, Neely & Hunter, Charleston, WV.)

4. State ex rel. Richard Brooks v. Honorable Paul Zakaib, Jr., Judge, No. 31782.

The Petitioner, Richard Brooks, seeks a writ of prohibition to prevent enforcement of the circuit court’s order denying petitioner’s motion to unseal records from an action in Grant County. Petitioner seeks to use those records in his medical malpractice action pending in Kanawha County Circuit Court. Respondent, Charleston Area Medical Center, argues the evidence sought to be used is privileged under the peer review statute and was to be used only in the Grant County action.  Respondent, Rakesh Wahi, M.D., responds that the circuit court’s order denying the motion was proper because the documents are privileged.
(Richard Brooks is represented by Stuart Calwell and Mary McQuain, The Calwell Practice, Charleston, WV. Respondent CAMC is represented by Richard D. Jones, Flaherty, Sensabaugh & Bonasso, Charleston, WV. Respondent Rakesh Wahi, M.D. is represented by Chanin Wolfingbarger Krivonyak, Pullin, Fowler & Flanagan, Charleston, WV and James D. McQueen, Jr., McQueen, Harmon & Murphy, L.C., Charleston, WV.)

5. State of West Virginia v. Michael Wayne Fiske, No. 31714.

This criminal appeal arises from defendant’s conviction in the Circuit Court of Morgan County of two felony convictions for forgery and uttering. The circuit court accepted Defendant’s admission that he was the same person identified in the recidivist information, which finding defendant now appeals, and the Defendant was sentenced to two concurrent 2 to 10 year sentences. The sentencing order provides that by operation of law, being found guilty of a second felony offense makes the Defendant ineligible for probation, notwithstanding the fact that the offense in this case involved the Defendant forging and cashing a check in the amount of $33.92 a the Berkeley Springs 7/11 store for the purchase of food for his children. The defendant contends that there was error with regard to certain improperly admitted evidence, a defective indictment, failure to prove an essential element of the crimes as charged, namely the intent to defraud. He also claims reversible error by arguing that the circuit court failed to comply with due process requirements in accepting the recidivist information. The defendant is seeking a new trial. In response, the State argues that the judgment of the circuit court should be affirmed.
(Michael Wayne Fiske is represented by Paul G. Taylor, Martinsburg, WV. The State of West Virginia is represented by Colleen Anne Ford, Assistant Attorney General, Charleston, WV.)

6. William A. Crowley, III, et al. v. Krylon Diversified Brands, et al., No. 31723.

Defendant, Sherwin-Williams Co. appeals from the circuit court's order denying its motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Rules 55(c) and 60(b) of the W.Va. Rules of Civil Procedure. The appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying Sherwin-Williams Co.'s motion for relief from judgment, because service of process was insufficient and Sherwin-Williams Co. did not receive either actual or reasonable notice of the claims and proceedings against it. Sherwin-Williams Co. argues that service of process was insufficient, thereby making the default judgment void. The Appellees, William A. Crowley, III and Sherry Ellis, argue that service of process in this case was proper and the judgment of the circuit court should be affirmed.
(William A. Crowley, III and Sherry Ellis are represented by Samuel F. Hanna, Hanna Law Office, Charleston, WV. Sherwin-Williams is represented by Anita R. Casey, MacCorkle, Lavender & Casey, Charleston, WV.)

7. George E. Carr, Sr. v. Dottie L. Hancock (fka Dottie L. Carr), No. 31752.

This is an appeal by the husband in a divorce action asking this Court to reverse the decision of the Circuit Court in which it upheld the decision of the Kanawha County Family Court.  Appellant argues that on appeal to the circuit court the record was incomplete and the circuit court failed to make requisite findings of fact and conclusions of law in affirming certain matters. Appellant also argues the circuit erred in failing to recognize and enforce an antenuptial agreement, and raises issues of equitable distribution, alimony and the award of attorney fees. Appellee argues the appeal should be dismissed.
(George E. Carr, Sr. is represented by Beverly S. Selby, Law Office of Beverly S. Selby, Charleston, WV. Dottie L. Carr is represented by Arden J. Curry, Pauley, Curry, Sturgeon, & Vanderford, Charleston, WV.)

# # #