CHARLESTON – An amended bill that would create a new intermediate appellate court has passed the House of Delegates and now heads back to the state Senate.
The House passed Senate Bill 275 by a 56-44 vote March 30. It goes back to the Senate because the House made some significant changes to the plan.
Instead of the Senate plan for two districts, the House version only has one district. That also trims the estimated initial budget from nearly $8 million to about $3.6 million and the continuing annual cost from about $5.7 million to $2.1 million.
The Senate also had the judges serving 12-year terms, like those of the state Supreme Court justices. The House version changes that to 10-year terms.
The new intermediate court would review civil cases between the circuit court and Supreme Court. It also would review workers’ comp cases and final orders from family courts.
At first, the judges would be appointed to staggered terms. Their salary would be $142,000 per year. Hearings are expected to take place in current public offices, so no new building would be needed.
“Under our Constitution, this is a policy question for the Legislature to decide, not the courts,” Chief Justice Evan Jenkins said in a statement to The West Virginia Record. “If this bill becomes law, the Supreme Court is committed to operating an Intermediate Appellate Court that West Virginians will be proud of.
“It will be efficient, fair, transparent and accessible, and it will be a court dedicated to the rule of law, as are all the courts in West Virginia.”
In each of the last four years, Republicans have introduced similar bills. None of them have passed. Last year, the bill made it to the House, but it was voted down by a 56-44 margin.
“I think opportunity is born from a good economy, from a government that supports a good economy, not with money, but with structure that can support economic growth, and I think that’s what this bill does,” House Judiciary Chairman Moore Capito (R-Kanawha) said during debate on the bill.
One proponent says the creation of such a court is important to the state.
“Passage of the bill would provide a level of predictability in the court system, including increased review of West Virginia statutes and rules, and it would allow West Virginia to join the overwhelming majority of states having such a court,” attorney Danielle Waltz told The Record. Waltz is a lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, which owns The Record.
The leader of a statewide legal reform group agrees.
“The House should be commended for passing this important legislation,” said Greg Thomas with West Virginia Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse. “Let’s now hope that the state Senate reaffirms their position that West Virginians need an automatic right of appeal and the creation of an intermediate appellate court. This year is proving to be yet another great year for legal reform in West Virginia.”
Thomas noted that West Virginia is the largest state without an intermediate appellate court.
“West Virginia has been in desperate need to improve its legal climate," he said. "We are encouraged that liability protections have already made their way through the Legislature to the Governor's desk, and we are optimistic that the legislature will also pass S.B. 275, which will be another important step in the right direction."
The president of a statewide group for trial attorneys still opposes the plan.
“Today, the West Virginia Legislature abandoned core conservative values of shrinking government and fiscal responsibility,” said Jonathan Mani, president of the West Virginia Association for Justice. “Rather than spending our limited resources combating the opiate epidemic and helping abandoned and abused children, the Legislature allocated millions of dollars to create another layer of government and provide six-figure salaries for judges.
“Our state lawmakers put the wants of billion-dollar corporate special interests and their lobbyists ahead of the needs of West Virginia and the people who live here. The intermediate court is an unnecessary expansion of our state government that will cost taxpayers millions every year.”
Mani said there are many other more pressing needs.
“Our tax dollars are limited and should be spent on what our state needs – better roads, improved services for seniors, job training programs and statewide broadband access,” he said. “Too many West Virginia families are still dealing with the opioid crisis and drug use. Our state's drug court program has helped these individuals through recovery and rebuilding their lives successfully.
“Yesterday, lawmakers rejected a commonsense amendment to the Intermediate Court that would have added these court programs statewide. This intermediate court isn't about helping West Virginia. It's about helping global corporations increase their profits at the expense of West Virginia taxpayers.”
One delegate, who is an attorney, said he does not favor the bill and that none of his constituents have asked him to support the measure.
Delegate Nathan Brown (D-Mingo) said a representative of an out-of-state company recently told him his clients in an age discrimination case should settle before the intermediate court is started.
“You never hear the talk of the need for an intermediate court,” Brown said. “What you hear routinely is the talk about roads or broadband or a drug-free workforce.
“If you want to move the state forward, you should focus on those three things, not on a court that’s not needed.”