W.Va. justice schedules hearing on Massey case
Share with others:
West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Larry Starcher yesterday scheduled a rare public hearing on whether he should disqualify himself from a case involving Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel and Massey Energy, whose CEO he accused of creating "a cancer in the affairs of this court."
His decision follows Chief Justice Elliott Maynard's announcement that he would disqualify himself and Justice Brent Benjamin's decision not to withdraw.
Chief Justice Maynard stepped aside after photos of him vacationing on the French Riviera in 2006 with Massey CEO Don Blankenship were filed with the court in January. Wheeling-Pitt's attorneys sought the disqualification of Justice Benjamin based on the more than $3 million Mr. Blankenship spent to defeat Justice Benjamin's opponent in the 2004 Supreme Court election.
Questions about the court's impartiality and Mr. Blankenship's influence have drawn national attention. Federal investigators have questioned court employees about the ties between Chief Justice Maynard and Mr. Blankenship, the Wall Street Journal reported last week.
Typically, West Virginia's Supreme Court justices consider motions to recuse themselves in private, then make their decision public. Justice Starcher's decision to hold a hearing was hailed by David Fawcett, the Downtown attorney representing Wheeling-Pitt.
"Without a doubt, the more open and transparent the process, the more likely it is West Virginia's court will regain credibility," Mr. Fawcett said. "It would be a great step forward if Justice Benjamin allowed the same kind of hearing."
The case involves $240 million in damages a Brooke County jury ordered Massey to pay Wheeling-Pitt last summer for violating terms of a coal supply agreement.
Justice Starcher turned down Massey's initial request to step aside, a request Massey renewed March 10. The Richmond-based coal company argued Justice Starcher could not be impartial because of comments he made that were critical of Mr. Blankenship's campaign expenditures.
Justice Starcher has already disqualified himself from a second case involving Massey. That case, involving a more-than-$75 million judgment Massey was ordered to pay Hugh Caperton, Harman Mining and two affiliates, is being reheard by the court.
The court originally overturned the judgment in favor of Harman in a 3-2 decision issued Nov. 21. Justice Maynard and Benjamin sided with the majority for Massey while Justice Starcher dissented. The court unanimously decided to rehear the case after the vacation photos were made public and Chief Justice Maynard stepped aside.
Chief Justice Maynard said he paid for the European vacation himself, adding "the suggestion I have done something improper is nonsense."
"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," he wrote.
Chief Justice Maynard is seeking re-election this year.
In disqualifying himself from rehearing the Harman matter, Justice Starcher said the behavior of Mr. Blankenship has "created a cancer in the affairs of this court."
"I am stepping aside, hoping that Justice Benjamin does the same, so that we can end the public controversy about the case and restore confidence in our court," he said.
In answering Wheeling-Pitt's request that he remove himself, Justice Benjamin wrote that "inaccuracies and innuendo do not serve as a proper basis for seeking the disqualification of a judicial officer."
Most states do not require judges to withdraw just because they received campaign contributions from a party involved in a case according to Mark Yochum, who teaches law at Duquesne University.
Bruce Stanley, the Pittsburgh attorney who represents Mr. Caperton, said Justice Starcher is to be applauded for his decision to hold a public hearing on the issue of his impartiality.
"It would have been nice to have a similar opportunity with Justice Benjamin," Mr. Stanley said.
First Published March 21, 2008 12:00 am
