Experience
State ex rel. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Wilson
Justice Holdings, LLC v. Glade Springs Vill. Prop. Owners Ass'n
Spangler v. Washington
Knotts v. Nelson
Hutchinson v. Underwood
AC&S Inc. v. George
Jones v. Slotnick
Howell v. W. Va. Bd. of Law Exam'rs
J.A. St. & Assocs., Inc. v. Bitco Gen. Ins. Corp.
State ex rel. Gallagher Bassett Servs. v. Webster
Vaughn v. Flanigan
State ex rel. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Wilson
Coffman v. Nicholas Cty. Comm'n
Blyler v. Matkovich
State ex rel. Golden v. Kaufman
State ex rel. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. Webster
Osborne v. Carey
Lieving v. Pleasant Valley Hosp.
Shoemaker v. Tazewell Cnty. Pub. Sch.
Received Favorable Ruling for Trucking Company at Trial
We represented an international trucking company and its driver at trial over an accident that occurred when the driver stopped his tractor-trailer on a rural road in order to make a home delivery. The tractor-trailer was stopped approximately 290 feet past a blind curve, with its flashers on. Plaintiff was driving around the curve and drove straight into the rear of the trailer, without hitting her brakes until the instant before the collision. Plaintiff alleged the driver and company were negligent because the tractor-trailer was stopped in the road and the driver did not provide sufficient advanced warning to oncoming traffic. At trial we convinced the jury that the Plaintiff was 40 percent at fault for causing the accident because she had adequate time and distance to see the tractor-trailer and either stop or safely go around it. This resulted in a very favorable verdict for our clients.
Successfully Defended a Claims Administrator
A third-party claims administrator (TPA) for Workers’ Compensation claims was sued by a former employee of a company for whom the TPA administered claims. The employee alleged the TPA had fraudulently denied her workers’ compensation claim and committed workers’ compensation discrimination. The TPA was originally represented by other counsel, who filed and lost a motion to dismiss. We then filed a writ of prohibition with the West Virginia Supreme Court, seeking dismissal of the employee’s lawsuit based upon the statute of limitations and statutory immunity provided to third-party administrators with respect to workers’ compensation discrimination lawsuits. We prevailed on these arguments before the supreme court, which resulted in the dismissal of all claims against our client.
Successfully Obtained Dismissal Order
A real estate lawyer conducted the closing for the sale of a house to plaintiff. Approximately 10 years after the closing, plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging the lawyer negligently failed to provide him with clear title to the property. The basis of plaintiff’s lawsuit was the opinion of another lawyer (whom plaintiff had initially contracted to work on an unrelated matter) who opined the title work was not correct and therefore plaintiff did not have clear title to his house. Plaintiff, however, still owned his house and had never had any challenges to his title to the property. We successfully caused the dismissal of all claims against our client at the trial court level because plaintiff did have clear title to the property. Plaintiff objected to the dismissal order but did not do so in a timely manner. The trial court then denied plaintiff’s objections to the dismissal order, and he appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. The West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, resulting in a full and final dismissal of all claims against our client.
Obtained Favorable Ruling in Malpractice Lawsuit
Our clients previously represented plaintiffs in a Court of Claims lawsuit against the West Virginia Department of Highways. At issue was a culvert plaintiffs alleged caused flooding on their property. The lawyers obtained an $85,000 settlement for the plaintiffs in exchange for a release by plaintiffs of their claim and release of any future claims arising from the alleged defective culvert. Five thousand dollars of the settlement was earmarked for plaintiffs to use to hire a contractor of their choice to clean out the culvert, which they never undertook. Plaintiffs, however, alleged they were not informed the settlement included a release of future claims and sued their lawyers for malpractice. We represented the lawyers in the legal malpractice lawsuit.
In the malpractice lawsuit, plaintiffs alleged but for the release of their future claims, they would have been able to sue the Department of Highways repeatedly with respect to the culvert. At trial, via cross-examination of the plaintiffs, we proved the terms of the settlement were explained to plaintiffs prior to the settlement being consummated. We ultimately obtained judgment as a matter of law in favor of our clients at the close of the plaintiffs’ case-in-chief.
Successfully Represented Insurance Company in Policy Dispute
We represented our client, an insurance company, in a dispute over the application of a $5 million commercial umbrella policy following a fatal car accident. The case involved the owner of a car dealership, whose son was driving a dealership car that struck and killed a motorcyclist and the motorcyclist’s estate. The estate and the owner of the dealership contended that the dealership’s commercial umbrella insurance policy covered the owner’s son because he was driving a car owned by the dealership, even though the son was not working for the dealership. After significant discovery disputes and motions practice, we sought a writ of prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals based, in part, upon what was eventually found to be “outrageous conduct” by the owner of the dealership during the course of discovery. Ultimately, the West Virginia Supreme Court agreed with our position that the commercial umbrella insurance policy did not apply, and all claims against our client were dismissed.
Received Favorable Ruling for Client During Age Discrimination Trial
We represented our clients, a coal company and two of its management employees, in a case involving age and disability discrimination, hostile work environment and two other counts before a southern West Virginia jury in Logan County. Before the case went to trial, we successfully obtained dismissal for the individual defendants and, through summary judgment, whittled the multi-count complaint down to three causes of action: age and disability discrimination and a hostile work environment. At the closing of the plaintiff’s case in chief, we successfully argued for judgment as a matter of law on the disability and hostile work environment claims. By cross-examining the plaintiff with the admissions he made during his videotaped deposition, we then showed the company did not take into account the plaintiff’s age when it terminated him for sleeping while underground. At the conclusion of the three day trial, we obtained a full defense verdict, with the jury finding that the company did not discriminate against the plaintiff due to his age.
Obtained Writ of Prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court Dismissing Insurance Bad Faith Claims for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction
We represented an insurance carrier accused of acting in bad faith in violation of West Virginia common law and the West Virginia Unfair Trade Practices Act in connection with the defense of an ongoing personal injury lawsuit and related declaratory judgment action concerning the scope of insurance coverage applicable to the personal injury lawsuit. The insurance carrier had offered what it considered the limits of the applicable coverage in order to settle the personal injury lawsuit, but this was insufficient to resolve the matter and the underlying plaintiff initiated a declaratory judgment action to seek an expansion of the amount of applicable coverage. Because the insureds wanted as much coverage afforded to them as possible for the personal injury lawsuit they asserted bad faith claims against the insurance carrier for taking the position it had offered its limits. The West Virginia Supreme Court found the insureds’ bad faith claims were not ripe because the question of what coverage applied to the personal injury lawsuit had not been resolved. The West Virginia Supreme Court further noted there is basis for a bad faith cause of action when an insurance carrier retains independent counsel to defend an insured and separate counsel to prosecute a declaratory judgment action concerning the scope of coverage afforded to the insured.
Dismissal of Malpractice Claims Against an Attorney
We represented an attorney accused of intentionally inadequately defending his client, the plaintiff, due to the attorney’s relationship with the opposing counsel and because of the plaintiff’s race. We successfully obtained dismissal of all claims, with the court finding that the plaintiff’s complaint was frivolous and failed to state a claim.
Obtained Writ of Prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court that caused the dismissal of a potential class action
Obtained Writ of Prohibition from the West Virginia Supreme Court dismissing all claims
Dismissal of ERISA Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims
We represented an employer accused of failing to properly process an employee’s benefits enrollment form, which resulted in the employee’s spouse not receiving life insurance coverage. The employee alleged that our client negligently failed to procure the insurance coverage and breached its fiduciary duties under ERISA by failing to procure the coverage. We successfully argued that the employee’s state law claims were preempted by ERISA and that she had failed to allege a cognizable breach of fiduciary duty claim under ERISA, which resulted in dismissal of all claims.
- Page 1 of 2