West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin, targeted by allegations of bias in a $75 million case involving Massey Energy, yesterday named a replacement for Chief Justice Elliott Maynard, who recused himself from the same case after photos of him vacationing in Monte Carlo with Massey CEO Don Blankenship were made public Monday.

Justice Benjamin took the action after declining a second request that he recuse himself because Mr. Blankenship spent more than $3 million to defeat Justice Benjamin's opponent in the 2004 Supreme Court election.

Both justices were part of a 3-2 court majority that ruled Nov. 21 in favor of Massey, which had appealed a $50 million verdict won in 2002 by Hugh Caperton of Harmon Mining and two Harmon affiliates. They sued Massey in 1998 claiming they were defrauded and that Massey interfered with their ability to do business. Since the jury made its decisions, the judgment has grown to an estimated $75 million because of penalties and interest.

"It's amazing to us that a justice believes that he can be the beneficiary of over $3 million in political expenditures and nevertheless conclude that he can avoid the appearance of impropriety," said Bruce Stanley, the Pittsburgh attorney representing Mr. Caperton.

The state's highest court, including Circuit Court Judge Donald Cookman, who was appointed by Justice Benjamin yesterday to replace the chief justice, on Thursday will consider Mr. Caperton's request that the case be reheard.

Justice Benjamin in 2006 rejected Mr. Caperton's initial request that he recuse himself, a motion Mr. Caperton's attorneys made again on Thursday. In again rejecting the motion yesterday, Justice Benjamin said Mr. Caperton did not allege that the justice has any relationship with Mr. Blankenship or that he ever represented Mr. Blankenship or Massey when he was an attorney.

"Nor is this justice aware of any basis by which this justice should disqualify himself," Justice Benjamin wrote.

The decision caps a tumultuous week that began on Monday when Mr. Caperton filed 34 photos with the court, including several showing Chief Justice Maynard and Mr. Blankenship smiling and looking directly into the camera while they were in Monte Carlo in July 2006. Massey's appeal was before the Supreme Court at the time.

Ten of the photos depicting two women who Mr. Stanley said apparently traveled with Chief Justice Maynard and Mr. Blankenship were filed under seal and are not part of the public record.

Mr. Stanley said the photos raise "the specter of corruption or worse" over the court.

Chief Justice Maynard said Tuesday that he paid for the trip. "I have records and receipts to prove it," he said. "The suggestion I have done something improper is nonsense."

Yesterday, the chief justice said he was very concerned about the public's perception of the court. He said the appearance of impropriety "regardless of whether it is supported by fact, can compromise the public confidence."

"I will recuse myself despite the fact that I have no doubt in my own mind and firmly believe I have been and would be fair and impartial in this case," Chief Justice Maynard wrote.

Mr. Stanley had asked that Chief Justice Maynard withdraw his vote in the Nov. 21 decision in addition to disqualifying himself. The renewed motion seeking Justice Benjamin to disqualify himself made the same request.

A court spokesperson said yesterday that will be an issue for the court to decide. Mr. Stanley was clear about what he thought should happen.

"If he [Judge Maynard] is disqualified at this point, it's for actions he took before actions on the merits [of the case]," he said, adding that it is "inconceivable" that the chief justice's vote won't be withdrawn.

University of Pittsburgh law professor John Burkoff said the revelations of Chief Justice Maynard's relationship with Mr. Blankenship were "too suspicious for this judge simply to ignore."

"Whatever the true story really is about the nature and extent of his relationship with Mr. Blankenship, Justice Maynard did the right thing," he said.

Most states do not require judges to withdraw just because they received campaign contributions from a party to the case, said Mark Yochum, who teaches law at Duquesne University.

"It's almost never considered sufficient grounds," he said.

Normally, the Supreme Court's chief justice would appoint a temporary judge in the event of a recusal. But since the chief justice disqualified himself, responsibility for the appointment fell to the judge in line to be chief justice next year, said court spokeswoman Jennifer Bundy. That is Justice Benjamin, the court's newest member, who was chosen by a 4-0 vote of the judges in November.

The decision heightens tensions in a case that has sharply divided the court. On Monday, Justice Larry Starcher asked court administrator Steve Canterbury to order the court's staff to preserve information of evidence they have about the photos and to "insure that no documents be destroyed, or computer records, on servers or otherwise, of any document or digital photographs, be altered, removed or erased."

Justice Starcher, who voted to uphold the verdict in favor of Mr. Caperton, was critical of Mr. Blankenship's involvement in Justice Benjamin's 2004 campaign. His dissenting opinion referred to Mr. Blankenship's efforts to get him disqualified from the case so that the Massey CEO could "have in toto the kind of court he wants."

"Fortunately, the public can see through this kind of transparent foolishness," Justice Starcher wrote.