The Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia (ICA) is launching a new judicial educational initiative—ICA On-Campus—during which the ICA will host oral argument at college campuses across West Virginia. The inaugural program will be held at Concord University on Sept. 21.
The arguments will begin at 10 a.m. in the main auditorium at the Alexander Fine Arts Center. The proceedings are open to the public and will be webcast live online on the West Virginia Judiciary YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/c/wvsupremecourt.
After each argument, the ICA’s three judges will step aside so students and the public can have a short question and answer session with the attorneys about the cases they argued. After the argument docket is over, the judges will be available informally to answer questions about the judiciary. “We, as a Court, are thankful to faculty, students, and staff at Concord University for their willingness to host the inaugural ICA On-Campus,” said Chief Judge Dan Greear. “The ICA plans to host one on-campus argument day during each term of court moving forward, with a different West Virginia college or university selected each time. My son is a recent Concord graduate, and so it is particularly special for me to hear argument on that campus,” Judge Greear said. “Access to justice has always been a priority of the ICA. I look forward to furthering that goal amongst college students with the launch of this program,” Judge Charlie Lorensen said. “I look forward to engaging with the students and providing them a closer look at the West Virginia judiciary in action,” said Judge Tom Scarr.
The ICA will hear the following cases:
10:30 a.m. Rule 20 Argument
Earl J. Nicholson and Joyce A. Nicholson v. Severin POA Group, LLC, Antero Resources
Corporation, Rockwell Resources, LLC, JEC Production LLC, and Robert R. Jones, et
al., No. 22-ICA-207.
11:15 a.m. Rule 19 Argument
IPI, Inc. and Matthew Joseph Taylor v. Axiall Corporation and Eagle Natrium, LLC, No.
22-ICA-164.
According to the West Virginia Rules of Appellate Procedure:
Cases suitable for Rule 19 argument include but are not limited to: (1) cases involving assignments of error in the application of settled law; (2) cases claiming an unsustainable exercise of discretion where the law governing that discretion is settled; (3) cases claiming insufficient evidence or a result against the weight of the evidence; (4) cases involving a narrow issue of law; and (5) cases in which a hearing is required by law.
Cases suitable for Rule 20 Argument include but are not limited to: (1) cases involving issues of first impression; (2) cases involving issues of fundamental public importance; (3) cases involving constitutional questions regarding the validity of a statute, municipal ordinance, or court ruling; and (4) cases involving inconsistencies or conflicts among the decisions of lower tribunals.
Original source can be found here.
