The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday agreed to hear a case involving campaign contributions that Massey Energy chief executive officer Don Blankenship made during a West Virginia Supreme Court race, which critics allege played a major role in electing a justice who subsequently overturned a $50 million ruling against Massey.

Lawyers who sought the appeal hope the nation's highest court will issue clearer guidelines for when a judge must excuse himself from a case involving a major campaign contributor.

"We are confident the high court will not allow this case to stand, because people would have a license to contribute vast sums of money to elect judges with the expectation that those judges can then decide their case," said David Fawcett, a Pittsburgh attorney.

Mr. Fawcett of Buchanan Ingersoll and Bruce Stanley of Reed Smith represent Hugh Caperton, a West Virginia coal company owner who sued a Massey affiliate for fraud in 1998. A lower court awarded Mr. Caperton $50 million in damages in 2002. Massey appealed to the West Virginia Supreme Court. The judgment now is valued at more than $76 million because of interest accrued during the appeal.

Mr. Caperton's attorneys sought the recusal of Justice Brent Benjamin, who won a seat by defeating incumbent Warren McGraw in 2004. Justice Benjamin's campaign benefited from $3 million in contributions made by Mr. Blankenship.

Justice Benjamin declined to step down. The court ruled in Massey's favor twice by a 3-2 margin, with Justice Benjamin casting the deciding vote both times.

"The facts are so striking and so extreme. If you weren't concerned about this situation, I don't think there will be many situations where the Supreme Court will be concerned," said Duquesne University law professor Ken Gormley. "The fact that they are accepting a case like this can only mean that they were troubled by what they saw."

Former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson is Mr. Caperton's lead counsel. Mr. Fawcett expects the case to be argued the last week of February or the first week of March.

The issue of whether escalating campaign contributions are undermining judicial integrity has drawn increasing attention from lawyers and judges alike, including former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

"The challenge for us and the court will be to ... draw a line that's workable and gives good guidance to state court judges," Mr. Fawcett said.