Critics of West Virginia's judicial system say the U.S. Supreme Court has opened the floodgates to lawyers shopping for a friendly venue. The Supreme Court declined to review a case in which a Virginia man sued over a forklift accident that happened at his worksite in Virginia -- because the forklift's distributor was in West Virginia. The state Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling that would have kept the case out of West Virginia's legal system.
The West Virginia Chamber of Commerce criticized the court's decision saying it further damages the business and legal climate in the state. "In the case at hand, you had a Virginia worker employed at a Virginia worksite using a product from Virginia," said Brenda Nichols Harper, vice president and general counsel at the state Chamber of Commerce.
"That shocks the conscious of West Virginians who feel that West Virginia courts should be for the West Virginia taxpayers."
Defense attorneys in the case claimed the suit's only connection to West Virginia was too flimsy -- the equipment distributor's home office is in St. Albans. The forklift, however, was actually distributed through a Virginia location.
Jeremiah "Bart" Morris, the plaintiff, severely injured his foot in 2004 while operating a stand-up forklift at work in Grottoes, Va. Morris went on to sue Ohio-based forklift manufacturer Crown Equipment Corp. and St. Albans forklift distributor Jefferds Corp. in West Virginia.
The state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff 4-1 and also ruled as unconstitutional the Legislature's effort to prohibit nonresidents from suing in West Virginia.
Lawyers for the defendants then requested the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case, which the high court just rejected to hear. "West Virginia now becomes a place where you can have very minimal nexus with the court system," Harper said. "(Out-of-state residents) are able to benefit from taxpayers paying for a system they never contributed a nickel to."
Harper said such cases prolong those involving actual West Virginia residents and entities. "West Virginia taxpayers, both businesses and individuals, are delayed in their quest for justice," she said. "It also reopens the door to mass litigation."
Harper explained that mass litigants are able to file suit in West Virginia and pay just one filing fee. She noted that a Chamber study revealed $1 million in lost filing fees in Marshall County before the 2003 legislative session.
Despite the outrage over what's been dubbed the venue case, the West Virginia Trial Lawyers Association believes the rulings from the state and U.S. supreme courts are just.
"Steve Roberts (Chamber president) and big business are always screaming about West Virginia having activist judges," said Jeff Jones, president of the trial lawyers association. "The U.S. Supreme Court has now agreed with us, and no one accuses them of being activist judges.
"If both courts come to the same decision, then it's a merited case."
The Chamber and tort reform advocates including West Virginia Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse hope lawmakers can fill the gaps and prevent similar suits from being filed this legislative session.
Steve Cohen, executive director of Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, called on legislators to "fix this gap in our laws allowing a swarm of personal injury lawyers brining lawsuits here from beyond our borders."
Jones said the state could not deny people access to the court system.
Legislators passed a law three years ago aimed at restricting the filing of lawsuits by nonresidents who think they have a better shot at winning cases here than in their own states.
The measure was part of a legislative movement to improve the state's legal system.
But the state Supreme Court called the law unconstitutional.
Sen. Clark Barnes, R-Randolph, said he wasn't too familiar with this case at hand, but believes he and his cohorts must pass significant tort reform legislation. "In a particular case like this, there are some loopholes somewhere," Barnes said.