Searching for Justice in West Virginia

Big Day For Harman

2008-08-05T15:59:00.010-04:00

Yesterday was a great day for the Harman companies and myself. August 4th was the deadline for the filing of any Amicus Briefs in support of our Petition for Cert and I am very pleased at the organizations who chose to do so. Instead of linking each brief separately, I have linked The Brennan Center's dedicated web page for the Harman Case here. It has direct links to all of the briefs filed on our behalf if you have an interest in reading them. First and foremost is the brief submitted by the American Bar Association which, if you didn't know, claims as members over 400,000 attorneys from all 50 states. I have been told that the ABA very rarely submits briefs of this nature but did so in this case because of the seriousness of the issue, not only in West Virginia, but across the United States. The organization has a model code of judicial ethics that it asks individual states to adhere to. The code actually focuses on the "appearance of bias" as much as it does "actual bias". Obviously, Brent Benjamin didn't get the memo and now he finds himself in direct conflict with 400,000 of his closest peers. It's pretty obvious that his rambling fifty nine page concurring opinion convinced no one at the ABA that his decision not to recuse was defensible. Along with the ABA's brief, the Brennan Center for Justice in conjunction with The Reform Institute, the Washington State Appellate Lawyers Association, Public Citizen's and the Committee for Economic Development all filed briefs on our behalf. What this group represents is a broad spectrum of political thinking. Public Citizens is Ralph Nader's organization and the Committee for Economic Development is a conservative based organization of business leaders from around the country. If these two diametrically opposed groups can agree on a cause, then you know that something is amiss in the West Virginia court system...particularly the Supreme Court. I am very grateful for the support these institutions have shown in filing these briefs.

Also, you may want to check out Larry Messina's blog (AP Reporter) from today. He has links to several of the news stories surrounding these filings. You can read it here.

Talk to you soon.

My Long Hiatus Is Over...For Now

2008-07-30T16:26:00.011-04:00

Well, it's been a little over 2 months since I last blogged...it seems like 2 years. A lot has gone on this summer so let's catch up a little....

On July 2nd, Harman and myself filed a joint Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari in the US Supreme Court. Massey had 30 days to respond but naturally, they asked for and received a 30 day extension because for the fifth time in this saga, they have changed attorneys...at least that's their excuse this time. Any Amicus Briefs filed in support of our petition have to be filed by August 4th so, I will keep you updated on those. You can read the Appendix to the Petition here.

What came as a shock to most people were the two big decisions handed down by the WV Supreme Court in late May...just a few weeks after the Maynard defeat. First, the Tawney v. Columbia Resources case which I spoke about in my May 5th blog came as a no surprise to myself or any of our attorneys. Maynard paved the way for this one and Robin's husband, Scott Segal who represented the plaintiffs, stands to pocket a hefty portion of the forty percent in contingency legal fees....that's 40% of $400 million. Maybe Robin and Scott can upgrade their private jet now. Wonder if Spike gets to ride on it? Poor Chesapeake Energy. They got nothing for their campaign contributions to Spike.

The other high profile case was the Wheeling Pitt v. Massey case which the supreme court decided 5-0 not to hear. Wow! 5-0! I guess Brent Benjamin and Robin Davis sure showed Massey and all the world that they are unbiased and impartial when it comes to Massey. They really stuck it to them. Now don't get me wrong, the court got this one right. Massey deserved this decision. But, before anyone out there goes touting the upstanding moral and ethical character of Davis and Benjamin for their votes, just remember that these votes come on the heels of the public outcry over their handling of the Harman case...not to mention the Maynard fiasco. My personal opinion is that most likely they knew they were going to be in the minority on this one so they voted along with the majority in an effort to rehabilitate their already in the gutter public image. How transparent can you possibly get? It's called throwing away your vote.

Let's fast forward to this past Tuesday...when, out of the blue, Justice Benjamin decides to issue his Concurring Opinion in our case, which you can read here. I know what you are thinking. You're wondering why this guy waited nearly four months to issue a concurring opinion? Good question. Well, for one, he obviously waited to file it until after we had filed our Petition for Cert with the SCOTUS. That way, he got the benefit of peeking at our arguments and then doing his best to refute those arguments. Secondly, he is trying to clean up the mess that he and Davis and Maynard made of the Harman case by taking us through a 60 page maze that hopefully after you have read it, you will be so enamored with his verbose BS that you will reach the conclusion that he is the one of brilliant legal mind and we are all just a bunch of idiots who had this all wrong from the get go. It didn't work and it never will. When you read the opinion, you will notice one very strange omission on his part. That would be the small fact that Don Blankenship contributed over $500,000.00 to Benjamin's campaign. I guess that bit of information just slipped the Justice's mind while he was spending 4 months writing this so called opinion in which he blasts the appellees (that would be me) for daring to question his impartiality or even the appearance of it. So, in summation, it has taken Robin Davis and Brent Benjamin about 160 pages to justify their indefensible position to overturn this jury verdict. Let's hope that the Supreme Court of the United States sees through their charade.

Unanswered Questions

2008-05-22T12:05:00.004-04:00

An article titled "In search of the puppeteer" appeared in the West Virginia Record's May 16^th edition which you can read here.

It struck me as strange the infatuation that the writers and editors of the Record have with just how the pictures of Don and Spike "surfaced" during our case against Massey Energy whose CEO is, as we all know now, Spike Maynard's long time buddy, Don Blankenship. Through a series of questions that were asked in the article, it is apparent that what the Record wants to know is, not only how in the world private pictures from a vacation spent in Monaco between two friends and their girlfriends could possibly become public but how they can make this the real story instead of the pictures and the individuals who are actually in them.

What I find equally as strange as the questions the Record asks is the questions that they don't seem at all interested in asking.…like the following :

Just how did Spike and Don come to be vacationing on the French Riviera together?
Why did Spike wait until five days before his trip to book his airline reservations and only two days before he left to reserve a hotel room?
Why didn't Maynard disclose his trip and relationship to the parties involved in the case as he is required by the Code of Judicial Conduct ?
Why didn't Maynard disclose gifts that he received from Blankenship as is required by the Code of Judicial Conduct? Remember, he admitted in a nationally televised interview that Don paid for at least one dinner and also said that it was no different from having dinner with Don in Charleston.
Just when did Spike know that his and Don's vacation pictures were going to become public and how did he know it?
Were members of the bar involved in some way? (Sorry, I stole that one from the Record)
When is Spike going to release his phone and email records so that the public can see just who he was communicating with and when he was doing it? He himself said he "probably " would release them during the campaign. Obviously, another broken campaign promise.
Why is the Supreme Court so vehemently fighting the release of Maynard's records but has no problem at all serving up Starcher's emails and phone calls? Isn't that a double standard?
Because of his admitted friendship with Don that goes back years, why didn't he recuse himself from our case before the pictures were made public?
And lastly, where is the Judicial Ethics Commission in all of this?

So, as you can see, there are a whole lot of unanswered questions regarding the photographs and the story surrounding them. After all, it was Spike who cast the original deciding vote that let his BFF Don's company off the hook to the tune of $75,000,000.00. Maybe it's me, but before we go digging into who was pulling backstage strings to "get" Maynard , maybe the Record and some other newspapers could help satisfy all of our curiosities by finding some answers to the questions I have posed above.

The Maynard Aftermath

2008-05-16T10:47:00.008-04:00

Cleaning up from the political storm that caused Spike Maynard to be swept up and blown away from his cozy perch on the bench of our highest court:

The Charleston Gazette had an article yesterday on the Chamber of Commerce's opening of their checkbook on Spike's behalf that you can read here. In the article, Steve Roberts, the President of the State Chamber of Commerce was quoted as saying:

We're not completely surprised by the outcome. We made a conscious decision several months ago to follow this course and stay this course. We understood that in the Democratic [Party] primary, there were two seats and four candidates. Anything could happen. We congratulate all of the candidates for very hard-fought campaigns.Ultimately, we believe the outcome of the race will not be known until we get through the November election. We will reiterate our position that fair and balanced courts are necessary if West Virginia is to compete in a global economy.

I'm sorry but I find Robert's quote appalling and the membership of his organization should feel equally appalled. Roberts and everyone at the Chamber had to know that Maynard was essentially a "dead man walking" in this campaign. With his connections to both Don Blankenship and Spike, it wouldn't surprise me if he knew more about their relationship than most of us and he certainly was completely aware of the photographs and the vacation the two took together. Even with Maynard's unethical behavior being at the front and center of almost every media outlet, he made the decision to pour nearly $600,000.00 into his ill-fated campaign.

If Roberts and the Chamber's position is that a fair and balanced court is necessary in West Virginia then they should have denounced Maynard and his behavior, which was anything but fair, and put their support behind someone that was worthy of having the title of Supreme Court Justice.

If I was a member of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce, I would be screaming for Mr. Roberts head for his complete lack of disregard in throwing their hard earned money down the drain...right along with Spike.

Ted Olson to Represent Harman

2008-05-15T15:27:00.004-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(May 15, 2008) Harman Mining Company and its President, Hugh M. Caperton, today announced that Theodore B. Olson, a partner with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Washington, D.C., has agreed to represent Harman in appellate proceedings before the Supreme Court of the United States. The principal issue that Harman will ask the High Court to hear is whether Harman was denied its constitutional rights by West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin's refusal to step down from Massey's appeal of a $50 million jury verdict despite being the beneficiary of over $3.5 million in campaign spending after the verdict by Massey CEO Don Blankenship. Justice Benjamin twice cast the deciding vote to throw out the jury's verdict and to instead absolve Massey of liability arising out of fraud and improper business interference. Justice Benjamin also played an important role in the proceeding by hand picking judges to hear the appeal after Chief Justice Elliott "Spike" Maynard and Justice Larry Starcher disqualified themselves.

"This is a case that needs to be heard by the Supreme Court," Olson stated. "The improper appearance created by money in judicial elections is one of the most important issues facing our judicial system today. A line needs to be drawn somewhere to prevent a judge from hearing cases involving a person who has made massive campaign contributions to benefit the judge. We certainly believe that, in this case, acting Chief Justice Benjamin crossed that line."

Mr. Olson is one of the nation's premier appellate and United States Supreme Court advocates. He has argued 49 cases in the Supreme Court, including the case of Bush v. Gore stemming from the 2000 Presidential Election, and he has prevailed in over 75% of those arguments. Mr. Olson is the former Solicitor General of the United States and has served as private counsel to two Presidents, Ronald W. Reagan and George W. Bush.

Mr. Olson successfully argued the case of Aetna Insurance Co. v. Lavoie, 475 U.S. 813 (1986), the leading United States Supreme Court decision regarding the Constitution's requirement that judges with a personal interest in the outcome of litigation step aside from handling that case.

You can read Mr. Olson's profile here.

TAKE A BIG HIKE SPIKE!!!!!!

2008-05-14T07:42:00.003-04:00

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SPIKE LOST...SPIKE LOST...SPIKE LOST...SPIKE LOST...SPIKE LOST...SPIKE LOST...

A message to Spike, the Chamber of Commerce, WVCALA, the Daily Mail,the WV Record and a few other newspapers around the state:

The citizens and voters of this state are pretty darn smart. They are well educated in the politcal game and they can smell a rat from a mile away. Shame on you all for thinking you could get away with this attempt to mislead West Virginia. All of the money you spent on Spike...and it was considerable...all went right down the drain along with Spike. This is a great victory for all of West Virginia because it shows that we the voters control and own the Supreme Court. The Justices that we elect are there to do the job we elect them to do. They work for us, not the other way around. It also shows that we are for fairness and that unfair individuals have no place in politics in our state.

A huge thank you to everyone who voted against Spike and the machine and also to all the volunteers of the candidates and to the candidates themselves for a job well done.

Why the red? Well, it's a red letter day here! Finally something good has come out of the shambles this court has left me, my family and my company in. The mission isn't complete but we got off to a fabulous start last night.

Oh by the way, did I mention that Spike Lost???? I love those words

Your Chamber of Commerce Dollars At Work

2008-05-12T16:10:00.006-04:00

So far, as I reported in an earlier blog, Spike Maynard has raised and spent about $487,000.00 in his bid to get re-elected. That's only part of the story though.

The West Virginia Chamber of Commerce has spent nearly $600,000.00 on campaign ads in support of Maynard or against his opponents. What is as equally surprising is that, through their May 9th filing, they haven't spent a nickel on any other election according their Independent Expenditures/ Electioneering Communications Reports filed with the Secretary of States office which, you can read here (scroll down to the bottom of the page). I pity the poor candidates, other than Spike, who are running for other offices around the state that thought they would get money from the C of C in support of their "ideals". Sorry guys, not this time around. Spike sucked this well dry.

Another thing that is interesting about the list of organizations who are required to file is the absence of any filings by the West Virginia Citizens Against Law Suit Abuse. I can't wait to see how much they spent on Spike's behalf. I'm sure Don will give us a full accounting right after the election.

Don't forget to get out and vote...and make sure you vote to get rid of the unethical behavior that Spike Maynard has brought to this court for the last twelve years.

Gazette Op-Ed Column

2008-05-09T10:09:00.002-04:00

The Charleston Gazette printed an opinion column in today's edition that yours truly wrote. You can read it here.

I though it was about time that I spoke out publicly about the injustices going on in the Supreme Court. It isn't going to be the last time that I do so.

Even Better Anti-Spike Ad

2008-05-08T10:35:00.007-04:00

If you think the anti-Maynard ad I posted below had Don upset, wait till he sees this new one out of the Menis Ketchum camp. You can watch it here.

Finally, someone had the nerve to step up to the plate and nail Maynard and Blankenship for their unethical actions. Maybe now Maynard will have to answer some questions before the primary on Tuesday. Maybe his best friend Don can help him with his answers. He sure hasn't been able to help him any other way...like he did Brent Benjamin.

Enjoy the ad. You are getting a sneak preview...it won't start running until tomorrow.

Blankenship Speaks Out and Other Stuff

2008-05-06T09:57:00.005-04:00

Well, the Anti-Maynard ad finally got to Don. Which means it must be effective. You can read the article "Latest ad in Supreme Court sparks controversy" in the Charleston Daily (We Carry Don and Spike's) Mail right here.

The name of the article is a little misleading...no, it's a lot misleading. I mean, what controversy? I haven't spoken to one person who thought it was controversial. Let me get this straight. If Don Blankenship thinks it's controversial that means we all do?

Pardon me Don and Spike but the ad is not the controversy here. You are. The controversy is that the two of you were vacationing together in Europe while a pending judgment of $75,000,000.00 was in Maynard's court. The controversy is that neither of you have made public any of your receipts or records from your trip. The controversy is that Don Blankenship assaulted an ABC News cameraman and has not been punished by so much as a slap on the wrist by his board or the press. And the most important controversy of all is that Maynard has not been forced to resign his post for his unethical behavior.

Don may find the ad "childish" but you can rest assured that the ad has also been effective. If it hadn't been, Don wouldn't be talking.

One more thing Don, according to you we are last in judicial system. Why is that? You've had your hands all over the system for the last four years. Why haven't you and Spike and Brent changed it? You need to get your stories straight because according to Spike, in a speech he gave last week, we aren't "Tort Hell" anymore. Which one of you is lying about this?

Two other articles of interest are from the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (read here) and the Huntingtonnews.net (read here).

The Huntington article is about Steve Canterbury, Chief Administrator of the Supreme Court and his utterly ridiculous press release basically saying that the Supreme Court is not governed by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Therefore, it has no obligation to release any of Maynard's records to the public. You can read his press release here.

The BDT article is interesting on two fronts. First, Spike Maynard said that he would "probably" release his emails to the public. Of course, he doesn't use email that much because he's a slow typist. Yeah...right. Let's see if he keeps his promise. I'll wager he doesn't. Second, every justice participating in the discussion wholeheartedly disagreed with Mr. Canterbury and his assertion that the Supreme Court has some sort of blanket immunity from FOIA. There are some exceptions but Maynard's emails to persons outside the court isn't one of them.

It's been nearly four months since the pictures were made public. Since then, the only documents that have been released to the public were an airline ticket and a hotel receipt.

Real forthcoming guys.

Maynard, Davis and Segal

2008-05-05T08:17:00.009-04:00

In case you missed it, there was an article in the Charleston Gazette yesterday about campaign finance in this year's Supreme Court race. You can read that article here.

I found the most interesting paragraph in the story was the one that said the following:

Maynard received $5,000 from Scott Segal's Charleston-based firm, which won a $405 million jury verdict in Roane County that found Oklahoma-based Chesapeake Energy withheld gas royalties legally owed to individual and corporate property. Segal also is married to Supreme Court Justice Robin Davis.

Chesapeake Energy officers gave Maynard $4,000 in donations. The Supreme Court is likely to review the huge Roane County verdict in the near future.

First of all, my condolences to Chesapeake Energy. A $405 million judgment against them and they can only come up with a measly four thousand dollars for Spike's campaign? Scott Segal, who is representing plaintiffs in this case, not only got his firm to pitch in five thousand dollars but he also threw a fundraiser at his home for Spike that netted him about seventy thousand dollars for his campaign war chest. Let's see Chesapeake get a return on that investment.

The amazing thing about the donations to Maynard's campaign from Chesapeake and some of it's employees is that it occurred after Maynard wrote an opinion on a certified question that was brought in front of the Supreme Court court in the Estate of Garrett Tawney v. Columbia Natural Resources case. Columbia is a subsidiary of Chesapeake. You can read the opinion here. His answer to the certified question posed to the court enabled the plaintiffs, represented in part by Scott Segal, the husband of Justice Robin Davis, to continue their case against Columbia which ultimately led to the $405 million jury verdict. The case is being appealed to the Supreme Court who will decide Columbia's fate. I think I have a pretty good idea where Maynard's vote is going on this one but I'll let you figure it out for yourself.

If the verdict is upheld, (as I said in an earlier blog, Harman's case is the only plaintiff's award that has been reversed in the last three years) Segal and the other attorneys representing the plaintiffs would stand to make around $150 million in legal fees. I'd say that is a pretty nice payday for Segal....who, as I have stated a hundred times, is married to Justice Robin Davis.

Something has to done now to change the way this court conducts it's business.

Lifestyles of the Rich and Not So Famous

2008-05-03T00:19:00.004-04:00

For those of you who don't live in West Virginia, here is an anti-Maynard ad for your viewing pleasure. You can watch it here. Let's hope it does some good.

WVPB Outlook Segment

2008-04-30T22:56:00.003-04:00

I am out of town for a few days but thought I would post this piece that aired on West Virginia Public Television a few weeks ago. See if you can figure out who appears to be less than forthcoming with their answers in these clips. It isn't very hard. I can see from the Blankenship video that if you are a perceived liberal with a camera that he will make you pay if you attempt to interview him. Somehow, it was difficult for me to work up any tears over how tough his life has been over the last twenty years. By the way Ms. Sale is right. Since the pictures from the Riviera were made public, Maynard has raised over $200,000.00 for his campaign. Go figure.

The "Tort Hell 2008" Tour

2008-04-25T10:58:00.008-04:00

I don't mean to keep writing about Spike Maynard but he just keeps giving me ammo every time I pick up a newspaper. This time it comes from an article in the Wheeling Intelligencer that you can read here.

In a recent speech to the Wheeling Chamber of Commerce, Maynard brought greetings from as he called it "Tort Hell". He also brought along his back up band on his latest stop on the "Tort Hell 2008" tour which consisted of Brent Benjamin and Robin Davis. Warning! This was not a campaign stop. If it would have been, the Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 5 A(1)(b) would have prohibited their openly campaigning for him. Of course, that rule doesn't mean much to Davis. She's already mangled it in openly campaigning for Maynard. Evidence here. She's the person to the right of Spike with the big smile. But, I digress. "Tort Hell" was in reference to the Supreme Court of which he is the Chief Justice. After the applause ( I'm sure there had to be applause. It was, after all, the Chamber of Commerce) died down, Spike made a startling statement. He said that he didn't think that "Tort Hell" was accurate in describing West Virginia's legal climate. Say what? We aren't a "judicial hell hole" anymore? According to Spike we aren't. So Spike, if we aren't a hell hole anymore, then why do you and people like your best buddy Don Blankenship keep referring to it as just that? Why aren't you out there denouncing the US and West Virginia Chambers of Commerce for perpetuating this myth? Why no press conferences hailing the end of "Tort Hell"? Why isn't Don out there claiming West Virginia is now a great place to do business? After all, Massey's stock is approaching it's all time high. Things are good. But instead, you all keep referring to our justice system as a "hell hole".

Sounds to me like Spike and Don and the Chamber want to keep this myth alive. It helps them politically in attempting to flood the court with justices that they perceive to be more in step with their views and it helps Don continue his rants about abuse of our court system by the trial lawyers. At the same time Don is out crusading against these abuses, he and his company, Massey Energy, continue to be one of the biggest abusers of the justice system in West Virginia. Don't believe me? Just in our case alone, Massey frivolously sued me in Harman's bankruptcy court to attempt to persuade the judge that I had been stealing money from the company. Never mind that I owned 100% of the company. They also sued the court reporter, the Supreme Court, and threatened to sue the sitting circuit court judge in our case. How's that for tying up a couple of court systems? Don't forget Don's words to me ten years ago..."If you take me to court, I'll tie you up for years". Prophetic words huh?

Also from the same speech, according to the article, Spike informed the crowd that he didn't initially recuse himself because Massey was the litigant and Don wasn't...and that Don was just a minor stockholder in Massey. What a crock of BS. Let's see, Don is the CEO of Massey and owns an enormous amount of stock, whatever that has to do with it. Don personally directed the corporate murder of Harman. He didn't leave it to his lieutenants. This one was his baby. If Spike would have bothered to read the record of this case, he would have seen tons of evidence of Don's involvement. And now, Spike, after his little rendezvous on the Riv with Don wants us to believe that the thought never crossed his mind that Don was a party to all of this. How disingenuous is that?

One question for Spike. If Don wasn't a party to this litigation, then what was the basis for Massey's recusal motion against Justice Starcher? All he did was make some candid remarks about a person who is not a litigant. According to your logic, they had no basis.

I'm waiting for an answer Spike.

It's is very obvious that Spike Maynard is fighting to save his political life. Let's hope for the sake of all West Virginian's that his attempts fail.

Facts About Overturning Jury Verdicts

2008-04-22T16:13:00.005-04:00

Here are some interesting facts about the West Virginia Supreme Court and their history, or non history, of overturning jury verdicts:

In West Virginia, not a single case can be found in which the enforcement of a forum selection clause in a contract has resulted in a jury verdict being overturned. That is in our state's recorded history. Caperton v. Massey was the first.

Only seven jury verdicts have been overturned by the Supreme Court in the last three years.

Of those seven, Caperton v. Massey is the only verdict overturned in which the jury awarded plaintiffs damages. Of the other six cases, four were overturned for error in jury selection bias and two were overturned for an unconstitutional statute providing for non-unanimous verdicts in medical malpractice cases.

Caperton v. Massey was the only case of the seven in which the decision did not allow for a new trial.

Now you have to ask yourself, why did Robin Davis, the author of the opinion, Brent Benjamin, Spike Maynard and then Fred Fox all of the sudden decide that this was the case in which to make history?

The Video Bar

2008-04-21T10:41:00.005-04:00

Sorry everyone, I've been attending to some personal matters and haven't been able to post for a few days. Rest assured that I am working on some new material that I will post either later today or tomorrow.

In the mean time, if any of you missed the Nightline episode about our case and Don whipping up on some poor camera man, you can now view that report in the Video Bar over here======================================================>.

There are also videos of a report that aired on West Virginia Public Broadcasting shortly after the Supreme Court's first vote (and I use that word loosely) on Caperton v. Massey and a short clip of Don espousing his views of capitalism for anyone who feels the need to hear Don espouse.

Maynard's Compensation Hill

2008-04-15T13:43:00.002-04:00

Interesting article in the Williamson Daily News today covering Spike Maynard's speech to the Tug Valley Chamber of Commerce which you can read here. In his speech, Spike offered up his latest sacrificial lamb in his quest to pull the wool over the voters of this states eyes...the trial lawyers. This time he referred to the area in Charleston in which some of these lawyers live as "Compensation Hill", a pointed reference to all the money this group of attorneys have alledgedly made on comp cases over the years.

Of course, one thing that Spike keeps forgetting to mention in these campaign speeches is that tens of thousands of dollars of contributions to his campaign have come from "Compensation Hill". That's right, the same group he is blasting as out to get him in the "mother of all smear campaigns" are the ones that are throwing thousands of dollars into his campaign war chest. The most notable of these trial lawyers is Scott Davis-Segal...or is it Segal-Davis? You know who I'm talking about, the husband of Robin Davis, the Supreme Court justice. Mr. Segal and his firms partners have donated thousands of dollars to Spike's re-election bid. He even hosted a fund raiser at the Segal-Davis home in November that raised nearly $70,000.00 for Maynard. Thousands of those dollars came from trial lawyers...and not just in state attorneys but out of state attorneys donated also. You can see for yourself right here .

Now, I'm not an attorney, but I know one thing and that is if I were a trial attorney, living on "Maynard Compensation Hill" and I and my attorney friends had given thousands of dollars to Mr. Maynard to help get him re-elected only to find out that he is using our contributions to throw us under the bus to cover up his own transgressions then I would get up off my backside and go do something about it. If you don't, then all that money you threw at Spike is going to blow up in your face when he gets re-elected.

Perish that thought.

Maynard's offensive "offensive"

2008-04-13T09:58:00.019-04:00

Spike Maynard's latest bid to get himself resuscitated and back in the Supreme Court race is more than a bit offensive if you ask me. The West Virginia Record, who has to be getting pretty tired of carrying all that water for both Spike and Don, has their one sided version of the story that you can read here or you can read the AP version here. While reading this article, I honestly didn't know whether to laugh or cry. Poor Spike, a victim of "gotcha politics" as he calls it. The "mother of all smear campaigns". I mean, this poor guy just can't get a break. If only those stupid pictures wouldn't have shown up of he and Don Blankenship and their girl friends whoopin' it up on the French Riviera, or his admissions that he and Don have always been good friends, or that they always have dinner together while in Charleston or that Don has paid for at least one (and I say that with tongue planted in cheek) dinner that Spike has failed to report then maybe, just maybe this whole crazy "out to get Spike politically" might never have happened.

This is a classic political manuever. Nothing new here. What Spike is trying to do is divert attention (remember the old "it was just sex defense that Clinton supporters used?) away from the far more serious issues of him failing to uphold the laws of the very state in which he was elected to do just that...and making a mockery of it all as he goes. We're just friends...we've always been friends. There's nothing wrong with it. Well Spike, you are so wrong. There is a whole lot wrong with it.

The Judicial Code of Conduct governs all judges and justices in West Virginia. Think of this code as the judges own set of laws. These laws should be enforced just like any of the laws that govern us as citizens. Well, fat chance of these rules being enforced by the triumverate of justices currently controling things at the court. The justices just kind of decide which of these rules they want to enforce and which ones they don't. The best part is they can decide on a case by case basis. Canon 3(E) pretty much covers the appearance of impropriety of which Spike committed several and not just in my case, but every case he ever heard that Massey Energy was a party to. Canon 3(E) makes it very clear that a judge has an affirmative duty to disclose any relationship to both parties whether or not he thinks the information is relevant to recusal or not. To this date, Maynard has never disclosed to any parties any of the details of his friendship with Don Blankenship. For any case. Ever. at best, Spike hasn't followed the rules that were put forth to govern this sort of behavior. He also hasn't disclosed any gifts, money or anything of a value of over $100.00 which he, as a state employee, has to do in accordance with state law.

So now, Spike's on the offensive, he's hired, or someone has hired, Greg Thomas, Don Blankenship's long time political consultant/waterboy to get after all these special interest groups that are out to get him. One such group that he mentions are the trial lawyers. Funny thing though, the trial lawyers, spearheaded by a large fundraiser given by Scott Segal who is Robin Davis's husband (how's that for a cozy arrangement?), are pouring thousands of dollars into his campaign. You can check out the lists of donors here. Maybe he's mad at them because they haven't given as much as other special interest groups such as coal and doctors. I mean the poor guy only has about $450,000.00 left in his campaign war chest which dwarfs the amounts that any of the other candidates funds.

All I can say is shame on Spike and his supporters for trying to make this out to be a political witch hunt. There is only one person responsible for the mess he is in and it is Spike himself. If he would have done the right thing and disclosed his ties to Don Blankenship and recused himself in Caperton v. Massey in the first place, then he wouldn't be in this self induced "mother of all smear campaigns". And maybe, I would have received a fair trial in West Virginia. So my question to Spike is very simple....why didn't you disclose your friendship with Don to us as you were bound to do by the Code of Judicial Conduct?

Getting Started

2008-04-11T11:48:00.003-04:00

I have remained silent long enough.

I have endured a ten year legal battle with coal giant Massey Energy only to have a majority of Supreme Court justices, whose ethical behavior is more than questionable, overturn the jury verdict and award of $50,000,000.00 plus interest. This verdict was reached after a seven week trial in which the jury heard from dozens of witnesses and expert witnesses from both sides. They sifted through hundreds of exhibits and listened to opening and closing statements from each party. They deliberated and found Massey guilty.The verdict was followed by Judge Jay Hoke's Final Order. It was forty pages long and among other things he called Massey's actions "evil and self serving".

On October 10th, 2007, five years after the verdict, the West Virginia Supreme Court finally heard oral arguments. It was all window dressing. It became apparent that this court had made up its mind long before I walked into their court. There was Robin Davis seemingly trying to help Massey's lawyer state his case with softball leading questions while treating my attorneys with little respect and a certain frustration at their ability to have an answer to all of her curve balls. There was Spike Maynard rudely getting up and leaving the bench just as my attorney, Dave Fawcett, started to speak. Don't worry, he managed to make it back in time to hear what Massey's attorney had to say in his rebuttal time.

My wife Kathy and I left the courtroom with a sick, hollow feeling but hoped that we had just over-analyzed things too much. We hadn't. On Wednesday, November 21st at about 3:00 PM the day before Thanksgiving, the court overturned the jury's verdict by a 3-2 vote with Maynard, Benjamin and Davis being the three who sealed our fate. Just like that, our lives were devastated. I hope they enjoyed their Thanksgivings.

Robin Davis wrote the opinion. One attorney not connected to the case called it "legal garbage". We'll get into the "garbage" some other time.

In January, the pictures of Maynard and Massey CEO Don Blankenship cavorting on the French Riviera became public. A new trial was ordered and we started again...this time with Brent Benjamin as the Chief Justice after Maynard recused himself. Suffice to say, it was more of the same. Another 3-2 decision on April 3rd basically upheld their earlier opinion. This time the deciding vote was cast by a man, Brent Benjamin, who was the beneficiary of Massey CEO Don Blankenships' $3,000,000.00 spending spree that got him elected in 2004. We asked for his recusal twice. Twice he refused.

So, here we are today getting ready to take our case to the US Supreme Court. Hopefully, we can find justice there. It is painfully apparent that we won't find it in West Virginia.

What I hope to do on this site is ask questions for which I do not have the answers. Questions like why Brent Benjamin didn't recuse himself? Why didn't Spike Maynard produce his receipts other than his airline and hotel receipts for his visit to the Riviera? I have questions about those airline and hotel receipts too but let's save those for another day. And while we're at it, why did Robin Davis in one year preside over votes that skipped over Justices Starcher and Albright for their scheduled turns to be Chief Justice? That little trick hadn't been used in almost thirty years.

I will be discussing these questions and a lot more in the coming months. If I can't find justice here in West Virginia, Maybe I can help some other citizen of this state before it's too late.

I hope you enjoy the site.