Justia West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Petitioner, the Acting Commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles (Commissioner), revoked Respondent’s driver’s license on the grounds of driving under the influence of alcohol and refusal to submit to a secondary chemical breath test. Respondent timely requested an administrative hearing before the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to challenge the order. Because the arresting officer failed to attend the first day of the hearing, the Commissioner sua sponte scheduled the license revocation matter for a further hearing. Respondent filed a petition for a writ of prohibition and an application for stay in the circuit court seeking to prohibit the DMV from conducting a second day of the hearing. The circuit court granted the petition, concluding that the Commissioner disregarded the procedural law for DMV hearings by scheduling a second hearing when the first hearing “[did] not proceed in a manner that benefits the Commissioner.” The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the Commissioner acted within his legitimate powers by adjourning and continuing the hearing to a later day in order to secure the officer’s testimony, and therefore, the circuit court erred in granting this writ of prohibition. View "Dale v. Sizemore" on Justia Law

Plaintiff alleged that while housed at the Southern Regional Jail, she was raped repeatedly by a correctional officer. Plaintiff filed suit against the West Virginia Regional Jail and Correctional Facility Authority (WVRJCFA), alleging vicarious liability and negligence-based claims. The WVRJCFA moved for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. The circuit court denied summary judgment, concluding (1) disputed issues of fact precluded a determination as to whether the WVRJCFA was vicariously liable for the alleged sexual assaults committed by its employee; and (2) Plaintiff’s claims of negligent supervision, training, and retention did not encompass “discretionary decisions in the administration of fundamental government policy.” The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for entry of an order granting the WVRJCFA summary judgment, holding that the WVRJCFA was entitled to immunity on Plaintiff’s claims. View "W. Va. Reg’l Jail & Corr. Facility Auth. v. A.B." on Justia Law

Jaymie Godwin Wilfong, a circuit court judge in Randolph County, admitted to having had a more than two-year-long affair with a local man. The judge deliberately intertwined the affair with her judicial office, and the evidence before the Judicial Hearing Board “established a clearly articulable nexus between the judge’s extrajudicial misconduct and her judicial duties.” The Hearing Board determined that the judge’s conduct constituted eleven separate violations of seven Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct and recommended that she be severely sanctioned. The Supreme Court adopted the Hearing Board’s finding that the judge committed eleven violations of seven Canons and held that the judge must be censured, suspended until the end of her term, and required to pay the costs of investigating and prosecuting these proceedings. View "In re Judge Jaymie Godwin Wilfong" on Justia Law

The West Virginia Racing Commission promulgated two administrative rules, a rule establishing the burden of proof for ejections by a racing association and a rule allowing the Racing Commission to grant a stay of a permit holder’s ejection by a racing association pending review. The Racing Commission adopted the rules without legislative approval, concluding that the rules were merely procedural rather than legislative and thus did not require legislative approval. PNGI Charles Town Gaming, LLC filed a petition seeking a writ of prohibition and declaratory judgment claiming that the rules had not been properly promulgated under the West Virginia Administrative Procedures Act. The circuit court entered summary judgment in favor of the Racing Decision, concluding that the rules were properly adopted without the need for legislative approval and that the Racing Commission possessed inherent authority to issue a stay of a racetrack’s ejection decision. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the circuit court did not err in concluding that the two rules were properly enacted procedural rules that were within the authority of the Racing Commission. View "PNGI Charles Town Gaming, LLC v. W. Va. Racing Comm’n" on Justia Law

Pursuant to a written plea agreement Petitioner entered a no contest plea to one count of sexual abuse in the first degree. The circuit court later rescinded Petitioner’s probationary period “due to [Petitioner’s] non-compliance of conditions of his probation,” and sentenced Petitioner to a term of one to five years incarceration. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the circuit court and ordered Petitioner released from incarceration, holding that the circuit court erred in rescinding Petitioner’s probationary period based upon its determination that Petitioner violated the conditions of his probation, as Petitioner fulfilled all the conditions of the plea agreement at issue in this case. View "State v. Shrader" on Justia Law

Petitioners, individually and in their capacities as representatives of 162 firefighters, filed a petition with the Fireman’s Civil Service Commission for the City of Charleston (the Commission) challenging the City of Charleston’s (City) method of calculating overtime wages. The Commission found that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Petitioners’ claims. Petitioners filed a complaint and petition for writ of mandamus in the circuit court, alleging that the City should not be permitted to unilaterally alter its method of calculating overtime pay and asserting that the Commission should be compelled to assume jurisdiction in the matter. The circuit court dismissed the Commission and granted summary judgment to the City. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the Commission lacked jurisdiction to hear the underlying matter; and (2) no legal principle prevented the City’s action. View "Boggess v. City of Charleston" on Justia Law

Plaintiff, Appalachian Leasing, Inc., purchased four coal trucks from Defendants, Mack Trucks, Inc. and Worldwide Equipment, Inc.. Claiming that each of the trucks were defective, Plaintiff filed a complaint grounded on Article 2 of the West Virginia Uniform Commercial Code, alleging that Defendants breached both express and implied warranties relating to the four trucks. For relief, Plaintiff sought revocation of acceptance of the vehicles, a refund of the purchase price, and incidental and consequential damages. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants, concluding that Defendants had satisfied their obligations under the trucks’ express warranty and that the implied warranties had been disclaimed. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that although the implied warranties were validly disclaimed, genuine issues of material fact existed concerning whether Defendants satisfied their obligations under the trucks’ express warranty. Remanded. View "Appalachian Leasing, Inc. v. Mack Trucks, Inc." on Justia Law

Petitioner, the Commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles, revoked Respondent’s drivers license for driving under the influence of alcohol. Following an administrative hearing before the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), the chief hearing examiner affirmed the Commissioner’s order of revocation. The circuit court reversed the revocation ordered by the OAH, finding as fact that Respondent requested a blood test and was not provided one in violation of her constitutional and statutory rights. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that Respondent did not satisfy her burden of showing that she properly asserted her statutory right to a blood test, and the circuit court’s order, to the extent that it made findings of fact and conclusions to the contrary, was in error. View "Dale v. Painter" on Justia Law

Plaintiff, the former employee of Defendant, filed this action brought pursuant to the Wage Payment and Collection Act (WPCA), alleging that Defendant violated the WPCA by failing to pay him the commissions which he was due and owing by the next regular payday upon his resignation. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Defendant, finding that Defendant did not violate the WPCA because Defendant’s employment agreement with Plaintiff contemplated that Plaintiff was paid commissions upon shipment of products. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that where the parties disagreed as to how commissions were calculated, the circuit court improperly focused on when the commissions were paid and therefore incorrectly determined that there were no genuine issues of fact. View "Adkins v. Am. Mine Research, Inc." on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner was convicted of second degree murder. Petitioner was sentenced to a determinate term of forty years in prison. Petitioner appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in the manner in which it conducted a suppression hearing concerning his videotaped statement and erred in finding that a statement he made was voluntarily given to the police. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Petitioner’s challenges to the suppression hearing failed; and (2) under the circumstances, the circuit court correctly determined that Petitioner’s statement was voluntary and in admitting the statement into evidence. View "State v. Marcum" on Justia Law