Authors: Kristen M. Leddy, Russell S. Sobel, Matthew T. Yanni
State High Court | Judicial Selection Process | Legal Authority |
---|---|---|
General
Interim Vacancies
|
Latest News
- West Virginia attorney general to take transgender sports case to the Supreme Court - Fox Business
- Federal appeals court rules in favor of allowing boys in girls sports - The Lion
- Sissonville resident wins coveted WVU College of Law Baker Cup competition - The State Journal
- Whittington and chief justice | | wvnews.com - WV News
- West Virginia Supreme Court reverses decision in officers' lawsuit against Shepherd University - Martinsburg Journal
- Bonkers Fourth Circuit Ruling Against West Virginia Law Would Ban Women’s and Girls’ Sports - National Review
- WVU law students hear WV Supreme Court arguments - WDTV
- US appeals court rules for trans athlete - Bay Area Reporter, America's highest circulation LGBT newspaper
- This Week in West Virginia History – Clay County Free Press - Clay County Free Press.com
- E-News | Supreme Court to hear arguments at College of Law - WVU ENews
Scholarship & White Papers
-
CAPERTON Decision Prompts Changes to Judicial Recusal Standards and Procedures
In June of 2009, the Supreme Court decided the case Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co.1 The Court ruled, in a 5-4 decision, that the due process clause of the 14th Amendment is violated when a judge denies a recusal motion based on the judge’s benefit of “extraordinarily large” campaign contributions or independent expenditures from the opposing party.2 Before this ruling, the 14th Amendment required recusal only when the judge had a financial interest contingent on the outcome of the case, or if the judge had participated in a previous stage of the case and was likely biased from that participation.
-
West Virginia Court Expands COPPERWELD Doctrine
In the 1984 case Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.,1 the United States Supreme Court forever altered antitrust law by holding that a parent company cannot conspire with one of its wholly owned subsidiaries such as to violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act.2 Since that time, lower courts have been left to decide the scope of what has become known as the Copperweld Doctrine. A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia clarified just how far the Copperweld Doctrine extends within West Virginia’s own antitrust law jurisprudence.