June 8, 2009
Benjamin's replacement in Massey case not known
AP Photo
The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin should have stepped aside from a case involving the man who spent more than $3 million to put Benjamin on the court.

Advertiser

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The state Supreme Court will soon name a temporary justice to replace Chief Justice Brent Benjamin when it reconsiders two earlier rulings in favor of Massey Energy.

The November 2007 and April 2008 rulings overturned an August 2002 Boone County verdict in favor of Hugh Caperton and Harman Mining, now worth $82.5 million with interest.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court said Benjamin should have recused himself from the case because Massey chief executive Don Blankenship spent more than $3 million to help Benjamin get elected.

Whoever becomes temporary chief justice when Benjamin steps down will pick his replacement for the Massey-Harman case. But court officials would not say who would become temporary chief justice.

"I am not at liberty to comment about what the court might, or might not, do," Supreme Court Clerk Rory L. Perry II said on Monday. Supreme Court spokeswoman Jennifer Bundy also declined to answer.

However, sources inside the court believe Justice Robin Davis, who wrote the opinion overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, would become temporary chief justice.

Justices Margaret Workman, Menis Ketchum and Thomas McHugh would be next in line, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to speak on behalf of the court.

In a statement Monday, Benjamin said, "I am pleased that the Supreme Court has not questioned my ethics, my integrity, or my personal impartiality or propriety. As a personal matter, that is very important to me and I appreciate the fact that the justices made a specific point of clarifying that issue."

Benjamin said new standards set by Monday's ruling will place more future emphasis "on perceptions and independent actions of external parties than on a judge's actual conduct or record."

"Specifically, the Supreme Court focuses on whether there may be a risk to due process in a case when an external party's influence in a given situation, such as in an election, is sufficiently substantial that it must be presumed to engender the potential for actual bias by a judge despite there being no direct relationship between the judge and the external party, and despite the lack of any benefit to the judge."

Benjamin sent his statement out on Supreme Court letterhead, but added at the bottom, "This release is personal and is not a release of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia." He did not return a telephone call to his office. 

Reach Paul J. Nyden at pjny...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-5164.

Report a violation or offensive comment.
[X] Close
to report abuse.
Posted By: FYI25203 (5:14pm 06-10-2009)
Report Abuse


Unlike Brett Benjamin, Warren McGraw has publicly been shown to be biased. That more then the money spent by Blankenship is the reason he lost his election and for anyone to suggest he is the perfect choice is delusional.

Posted By: jdude (4:05pm 06-10-2009)
Report Abuse


Didn't two other Justices vote with Benjamin?

What's their excuse?

Posted By: lux (11:52am 06-10-2009)
Report Abuse


I would love to see McGraw back on the Court. He is a good man from a family of great public servants.

Posted By: sodbuster (11:04am 06-09-2009)
Report Abuse


Well it's like the old saying goes if you give them enough rope they will trip over their own shoelaces.

You cant just take the judge to the Riviera and wine and dine them and you cant just give them $3 million.

Even the republican Supreme Court had to cringe at that.

Advertisement - Your ad here
Advertisement - Your ad here
Advertisement - Your ad here