You are here

Opinions

The Southern District of West Virginia offers a database of opinions starting in the year 2001, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search to the right or sort using the drop-downs below.

Tammy Thomas v. Brooks Run Mining Company, LLC 08/15/2007
1:07-cv-00310

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before this court are plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. No. 7) and defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 4). Having reviewed the record and applicable law, for the reasons outlined below, the court (1) GRANTS plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. No. 7), (2) REMANDS this case to the Circuit Court of McDowell County, West Virginia, (3) DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Remand Order to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of McDowell County, West Virginia, and (4) DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this action from the court’s active docket.  Because the court finds that it lacks jurisdiction, the court does not reach defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Author:
David A. Faber
United States of America v. Patricia Lee McMillion 07/25/2007
5:06-cr-00064

Memorandum Opinion

Before the Court is the Government’s Motion to Reduce Defendant’s Sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 [Docket 33].  A hearing was held on the motion on April 2, 2007.  For the reasons stated herein, the motion is GRANTED.

Author:
Thomas E. Johnston
Turnpike Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company and Ford Motor Credit Company 07/10/2007
2:05-cv-00398

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Compel Deposition Testimony of Stephen F. Parsons, filed May 22, 2007. (Docket # 97.)  Plaintiff responded on June 8, 2007 (# 100), and Defendants replied on June 21, 2007 (# 102).  The court heard oral argument on July 9, 2007, making the matter ripe for decision.

Author:
Mary E. Stanley
Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc., et al. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al. 06/19/2007
3:05-cv-00784

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Fourth Supplemental Complaint [Doc. #250] and Motion for Leave to File a Fifth Supplemental Complaint [Doc. #291].  The Court finds that allowing Plaintiffs to supplement their Complaint will not prejudice existing parties or parties not present to this suit.  Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motions for leave to file a Fourth Supplemental Complaint and Fifth Supplemental Complaint.

Author:
Robert C. Chambers
United States of America v. Marvin L. Smith 06/13/2007
2:07-cr-00082

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the court is the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment [Docket 25]. For the following reasons the motion is GRANTED.

Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
United States of America v. George Lecco 04/06/2007
2:05-cr-00107

Sealed Ex Parte Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending are defendant George Lecco's ex parte, sealed motion in limine to permit testimony by his penalty phase expert, filed March 14, 2007, and the government’s motion to exclude the expert witness’ testimony, filed March 21, 2007.

Author:
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
Carrie A. McMellon, et al. v. United States of America, et al. 04/02/2007
3:00-cv-00582

Order

Pending before the court is the parties’ joint motion for vacatur pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6).  For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED.

Author:
Joseph R. Goodwin
Mack C. Knuckles and Pamela K. Knuckles v. RBMG, Inc., et al. 03/27/2007
2:03-cv-02414

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the court is plaintiffs’ motion, filed January 8, 2004, seeking to remand the above-captioned civil action to the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia.

Author:
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc., et al. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al. 03/27/2007
3:05-cv-00784

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Plaintiffs brought this action seeking declaratory relief that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act in issuing four permits to fill headwater streams in conjunction with mountaintop removal coal mining.  Plaintiffs request injunctive relief to prevent the conduct authorized under these permits and seek judicial review of the agency’s decisions under the Administrative Procedure Act.  For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS judgment in favor of Plaintiffs, RESCINDS the permits and decisions, ENJOINS Defendants and Intervenors from all activities authorized under those permits, and REMANDS the permits to the Corps for further proceedings consistent with this Memorandum Opinion and Order.

Author:
Robert C. Chambers
Felman Productions Inc., et al. v. Boris Bannai, et al. 03/05/2007
3:06-cv-00644

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Claims. The Court DENIES the Motion.  Also, Plaintiffs sought leave to file a surreply to Defendants’ Reply.  The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion and has reviewed Plaintiffs’ Surreply in making the determination on the issue of what law applies in this controversy.

Author:
Robert C. Chambers

Pages