Massey Energy's lawsuit challenging how state Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from cases can now move forward, following a recent ruling by a federal appeals court.
The case has been on hold since last year, when U.S. District Court Judge John T. Copenhaver refused to dismiss Massey's lawsuit, which was filed in 2006.
The Supreme Court's counsel -- the Tinney Law Firm, of Charleston -- had argued that the federal court didn't have jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court's lawyers filed two separate actions with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., seeking a review of Copenhaver's decision.
On Friday, a panel of judges with the appeals court dismissed the Supreme Court's appeal and sent the case back to the federal court in Charleston, saying a review at this stage in the case would be premature.
Robert Luskin, Massey's lead lawyer, said the decision says nothing about the validity of the lawsuit.
"It's really not something that signals the position of the court of appeals on the merits in any way," said Luskin. "It simply clears the way to move forward."
Luskin said he expects a resolution in the case soon.
"I would assume that we will move relatively quickly toward motions for summary judgment and the court will rule one way or another on the legal questions we've presented," Luskin said.
Massey's lawsuit alleges that the court's method of recusal violates the company's right to due process. Each justice decides on his or her own whether or not to remove themselves from cases. There is no independent review of recusal requests or process to appeal a justice's decision.
John Tinney, the court's lead lawyer, did not want to speculate on the expediency of the case following the appeals court decision.
"I think the litigation will just have to take its course," Tinney said.
Massey Energy's lawsuit challenging how state Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from cases can now move forward, following a recent ruling by a federal appeals court.
The case has been on hold since last year, when U.S. District Court Judge John T. Copenhaver refused to dismiss Massey's lawsuit, which was filed in 2006.
The Supreme Court's counsel -- the Tinney Law Firm, of Charleston -- had argued that the federal court didn't have jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court's lawyers filed two separate actions with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., seeking a review of Copenhaver's decision.
On Friday, a panel of judges with the appeals court dismissed the Supreme Court's appeal and sent the case back to the federal court in Charleston, saying a review at this stage in the case would be premature.
Robert Luskin, Massey's lead lawyer, said the decision says nothing about the validity of the lawsuit.
"It's really not something that signals the position of the court of appeals on the merits in any way," said Luskin. "It simply clears the way to move forward."
Luskin said he expects a resolution in the case soon.
"I would assume that we will move relatively quickly toward motions for summary judgment and the court will rule one way or another on the legal questions we've presented," Luskin said.
Massey's lawsuit alleges that the court's method of recusal violates the company's right to due process. Each justice decides on his or her own whether or not to remove themselves from cases. There is no independent review of recusal requests or process to appeal a justice's decision.
John Tinney, the court's lead lawyer, did not want to speculate on the expediency of the case following the appeals court decision.
"I think the litigation will just have to take its course," Tinney said.
The court's legal bill in the case has already reached $243,650, according to information provided by Chief Justice Elliott "Spike" Maynard.
The federal appeals court decision comes as the state Supreme Court finds itself embroiled in controversy over the recusal issue.
Chief Justice Maynard has thus far removed himself from at least three cases involving Massey after photos surfaced showing Maynard and Massey chief Don Blankenship together while on separate vacations in the French Riviera in 2006. The photos were taken while Massey had a multimillion-dollar appeal pending before the court.
Maynard participated in the initial decision in the case, siding with Massey, but recused himself when the case was reheard. The court again sided with Massey in the case.
Justice Larry Starcher also recused himself from that case upon request of Massey. Starcher called on fellow justice Brent Benjamin to do the same.
But Benjamin rebuffed requests to remove himself from the case, saying he could stay neutral despite the fact that Blankenship spent about $3.5 million during the 2004 election, when Benjamin ran to oust incumbent justice Warren McGraw.
Starcher plans to hold an unprecedented public hearing Thursday on another Massey request that he remove himself from a separate $240 million appeal involving Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel.
Massey has sought, without success, to stop the hearing.
The ongoing controversy has received national attention.
ABC-TV crews interviewed Starcher and Maynard at the state Capitol for a story that ran Monday on the network's two evening news programs.
ABC producer Asa Eslocker found himself in a brief scuffle with Blankenship when Eslocker tried to interview the coal chief at his Belfry, Ky., office.
@tagline:Contact writer Justin D. Anderson at jus...@dailymail.com or 348-4843.
