CHARLESTON — The state Supreme Court says a man is not entitled to any relief in his case involving a Clarksburg law firm.
S.U., a self-represented man, appealed a Harrison Circuit Court order from May 16, 2022, according to an October 18 memorandum decision on Oct. 18 by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.
"Upon our review, finding no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error, we determine that oral argument is unnecessary and that a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court’s order is appropriate," the decision states.
In the case, S.U. appealed the 2022 order that granted Central Atlantic Legal Group, which is doing business as Booth, Strange & Daniel, attorney's fees and costs.
The court previously had heard S.U.'s appeal of a final order granting the respondents' motion for summary judgment and designating him a "vexatious" litigant, according to the decision.
The court detailed S.U.'s history of harassing conduct toward the mother of his children and her legal representatives. The court remanded the case for a hearing to determine if awarding the firm attorney's fees was appropriate.
During the hearing, S.U. did not attend, and the court noted his previous behavior. The court found that S.U.'s bad faith supported an award of attorney's fees and considered various factors to determine the appropriate amount.
"Of particular importance to this appeal, we detailed petitioner’s protracted history of harassing, vexatious conduct toward not only the mother of his children but also her legal representatives," the decision stated. "Aside from denying petitioner relief on his appeal in that matter, we additionally found it necessary to remand the matter 'for the limited purpose of holding a hearing to determine if awarding respondents attorney’s fees and costs is appropriate.'"
The court awarded the law firm $28,800 in attorney's fees, plus post-judgment interest. S.U. appealed, challenging the award on three grounds.
S.U. argued his conduct was in good faith, preventing the award of attorney's fees, but, the court had already determined his behavior was vexatious and in bad faith, making this argument invalid.
S.U. then contended that the firm's true costs were unascertainable due to fraudulent billing claims. He cited certain actions and accused J.S., another respondent, of dishonest testimony. He did not provide specific references to the record, as required by court rules, regarding the dishonest testimony allegations. The court dismissed these claims as unsupported and lacking merit.
S.U. finally contended it would be unfair to order him to pay attorney's fees as he lacked the financial means. However, the court found no legal basis for considering a party's ability to pay, and this factor was not relevant under established guidelines.
S.U. failed to demonstrate any errors in the court's findings related to these factors, leading to the denial of his appeal, according to the decision.
The high court affirmed Harrison Circuit Court's decision, stating there was no substantial question of law or prejudicial error. S.U.'s arguments were found lacking in merit, and the original award of attorney's fees to respondents was upheld.
Attorneys for the respondents declined to comment on the matter.
West Virginia Supreme Court case number: 22-0441
