Massey drops recusal lawsuit against W.Va. Supreme Court
Massey Energy Co. has agreed to drop its federal lawsuit against the West Virginia Supreme Court over how its justices recuse themselves.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Massey Energy Co. has agreed to drop its federal lawsuit against the West Virginia Supreme Court over how its justices recuse themselves.
In a stipulation entered in U.S. District Court in Charleston on Friday, both parties agreed to drop the lawsuit, in which Massey alleged that the court's recusal procedures were unconstitutional.
The recusal policy for West Virginia's highest court came under national scrutiny after Chief Justice Brent Benjamin refused to step down from Massey's appeal of a $50 million verdict in favor of Harman Mining Corp. and its owner, Hugh Caperton. Massey CEO Don Blankenship spent millions of dollars helping Benjamin secure his seat on the court in 2004.
Last month, by a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Benjamin should have recused himself and ordered him off the case.
In its lawsuit, filed in August 2006, Massey contended that Justice Larry Starcher, who had made derogatory comments about Blankenship in the media, should recuse himself from several cases involving Massey. By allowing Starcher, who retired and did not seek re-election when his 12-year term ended in 2008, to stay on the cases, the court's recusal rules violated the due-process clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Massey's lawsuit claimed.
"The current West Virginia Supreme Court is, by all accounts, handling matters before it with the utmost professionalism," said Massey general counsel M. Shane Harvey in a news release. "We initially brought the suit with great reluctance and we are pleased that we can drop the matter now that the forces driving the suit are no longer an issue."
Steve Canterbury, administrative director of the Supreme Court, said Friday that the agreement to dismiss the case still needs Judge John T. Copenhaver's approval before it becomes final.
"I think it's true for any [party] on the defense [in a lawsuit], that you did not seek the suit, and you are always happy when it goes away," he said.
The court has spent more than $400,000 defending the lawsuit, he said. According to the stipulation, the court is responsible for paying its own courts costs and attorneys' fees.
The court's expenses could go even higher, Canterbury said.
"The final bills aren't in yet," he said. "It was a complicated suit."
The five current justices, with retired Putnam County Circuit Judge James O. Holliday sitting in place of Benjamin, will rehear the Harman-Massey case on Sept. 8.
Reach Andrew Clevenger at acleven...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1723.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Massey Energy Co. has agreed to drop its federal lawsuit against the West Virginia Supreme Court over how its justices recuse themselves.
In a stipulation entered in U.S. District Court in Charleston on Friday, both parties agreed to drop the lawsuit, in which Massey alleged that the court's recusal procedures were unconstitutional.
The recusal policy for West Virginia's highest court came under national scrutiny after Chief Justice Brent Benjamin refused to step down from Massey's appeal of a $50 million verdict in favor of Harman Mining Corp. and its owner, Hugh Caperton. Massey CEO Don Blankenship spent millions of dollars helping Benjamin secure his seat on the court in 2004.
Last month, by a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Benjamin should have recused himself and ordered him off the case.
In its lawsuit, filed in August 2006, Massey contended that Justice Larry Starcher, who had made derogatory comments about Blankenship in the media, should recuse himself from several cases involving Massey. By allowing Starcher, who retired and did not seek re-election when his 12-year term ended in 2008, to stay on the cases, the court's recusal rules violated the due-process clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Massey's lawsuit claimed.
"The current West Virginia Supreme Court is, by all accounts, handling matters before it with the utmost professionalism," said Massey general counsel M. Shane Harvey in a news release. "We initially brought the suit with great reluctance and we are pleased that we can drop the matter now that the forces driving the suit are no longer an issue."
Steve Canterbury, administrative director of the Supreme Court, said Friday that the agreement to dismiss the case still needs Judge John T. Copenhaver's approval before it becomes final.
"I think it's true for any [party] on the defense [in a lawsuit], that you did not seek the suit, and you are always happy when it goes away," he said.
The court has spent more than $400,000 defending the lawsuit, he said. According to the stipulation, the court is responsible for paying its own courts costs and attorneys' fees.
The court's expenses could go even higher, Canterbury said.
"The final bills aren't in yet," he said. "It was a complicated suit."
The five current justices, with retired Putnam County Circuit Judge James O. Holliday sitting in place of Benjamin, will rehear the Harman-Massey case on Sept. 8.
Reach Andrew Clevenger at acleven...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1723.
Post a comment