By Justin D. Anderson
Daily Mail Capitol Reporter
Aug. 13, 2008 dailymail.com
CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Lawyers in a case against chemical giant DuPont say records show that Gov. Joe Manchin got a little too cozy with the company in its quest to have a $382 million circuit court verdict against it reviewed by the state Supreme Court.
A Harrison County jury last year ruled that DuPont carelessly dumped toxic chemicals near the site of a plant in Spelter, W.Va.
About 8,000 residents around the plant successfully sued the company, claiming DuPont endangered their health.
A jury agreed and ordered the company to provide cancer monitoring for the residents as well as clean up the site and pay the residents punitive damages.
DuPont appealed the verdict to the state Supreme Court on June 24. Manchin filed a friend of the court brief the same day, asking that the court consider the matter of the punitive damages.
Manchin's brief came one month after the state Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a $404 million verdict against NiSource and Chesapeake Energy and, separately, refused to consider Massey Energy's appeal of a $260 million verdict.
West Virginia is one of only two states that give their high courts complete discretion on whether to hear most civil cases.
Since Forbes magazine this year again ranked West Virginia among the worst places to do business, many considered Manchin's brief in the DuPont case an attempt to turn that around.
But critics say Manchin seems to be taking sides with DuPont over the safety of the Spelter residents and pressuring the Supreme Court. Trial lawyers representing the residents filed a Freedom of Information Act request and say the results show this.
A report published in the New York Times today included a review of those documents. The documents apparently show that Manchin consulted with DuPont before filing his brief. Company officials allege Manchin asked for a draft brief from the company's lawyers, though his office denies this.
According to the New York Times' review of the documents, on June 2, Manchin "met with the vice president of DuPont and one of the company's lawyers to discuss the brief."
Manchin, who is up for re-election in November, "also spoke on the phone with DuPont's chairman and chief executive, Charles O. Holliday Jr., on Nov. 20, 2007, less than a month after the verdict," the newspaper reported.
"Shortly before the governor filed his brief, DuPont lawyers provided his office with two draft briefs that made many of the same arguments he later used in his brief, documents show.
"The day Mr. Manchin filed the brief, his office also requested assistance by e-mail from DuPont with the procedural requirements for filing.
"When questioned by the plaintiff's lawyers about DuPont's draft brief, the governor's office said that some of the e-mail correspondence between the company and his office had been erased, according to documents from the governor's office."
Manchin's spokeswoman, Lara Ramsburg, told the Daily Mail today that DuPont sent the draft brief unsolicited and that the governor's brief is completely different.
Lawyers in a case against chemical giant DuPont say records show that Gov. Joe Manchin got a little too cozy with the company in its quest to have a $382 million circuit court verdict against it reviewed by the state Supreme Court.
A Harrison County jury last year ruled that DuPont carelessly dumped toxic chemicals near the site of a plant in Spelter, W.Va.
About 8,000 residents around the plant successfully sued the company, claiming DuPont endangered their health.
A jury agreed and ordered the company to provide cancer monitoring for the residents as well as clean up the site and pay the residents punitive damages.
DuPont appealed the verdict to the state Supreme Court on June 24. Manchin filed a friend of the court brief the same day, asking that the court consider the matter of the punitive damages.
Manchin's brief came one month after the state Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a $404 million verdict against NiSource and Chesapeake Energy and, separately, refused to consider Massey Energy's appeal of a $260 million verdict.
West Virginia is one of only two states that give their high courts complete discretion on whether to hear most civil cases.
Since Forbes magazine this year again ranked West Virginia among the worst places to do business, many considered Manchin's brief in the DuPont case an attempt to turn that around.
But critics say Manchin seems to be taking sides with DuPont over the safety of the Spelter residents and pressuring the Supreme Court. Trial lawyers representing the residents filed a Freedom of Information Act request and say the results show this.
A report published in the New York Times today included a review of those documents. The documents apparently show that Manchin consulted with DuPont before filing his brief. Company officials allege Manchin asked for a draft brief from the company's lawyers, though his office denies this.
According to the New York Times' review of the documents, on June 2, Manchin "met with the vice president of DuPont and one of the company's lawyers to discuss the brief."
Manchin, who is up for re-election in November, "also spoke on the phone with DuPont's chairman and chief executive, Charles O. Holliday Jr., on Nov. 20, 2007, less than a month after the verdict," the newspaper reported.
"Shortly before the governor filed his brief, DuPont lawyers provided his office with two draft briefs that made many of the same arguments he later used in his brief, documents show.
"The day Mr. Manchin filed the brief, his office also requested assistance by e-mail from DuPont with the procedural requirements for filing.
"When questioned by the plaintiff's lawyers about DuPont's draft brief, the governor's office said that some of the e-mail correspondence between the company and his office had been erased, according to documents from the governor's office."
Manchin's spokeswoman, Lara Ramsburg, told the Daily Mail that DuPont sent the draft brief unsolicited and that the governor's brief is completely different.
"We get briefs submitted to us all the time," Ramsburg said.
Ramsburg said any assumption that Manchin is siding with DuPont over the residents is "absolutely not true."
"We've been very clear and the brief is very clear that it's simply asking a legal question of the court," Ramsburg said. "The governor hopes everybody that needs monitoring gets monitoring. We are simply asking for a legal clarification on a due process question."
The New York Times also reported that Manchin's executive secretary, Peggy Ong, is a former DuPont employee. The newspaper reported that Ong was involved in community outreach related to the Spelter matter.
Goodwin and Goodwin, the former law firm of Manchin's general counsel, Carte Goodwin, had worked as a consultant for DuPont on the Spelter case, the newspaper said.
Goodwin told the newspaper that the firm performed a "minor role" in the case and that Ong was not involved in policy making.
Ramsburg said dragging Ong into the picture is "patently unfair."
The New York Times quoted Stephen Gillers, a professor of legal ethics at the New York University School of Law about Manchin's involvement.
"It is not part of the court's responsibility to consider the effect of the verdict on the economic climate," Gillers said. "Consequently, the governor should not be justifying his intervention or asking the court in this indirect way to consider the case for this reason."
Gillers said it was unusual that the governor, and not the state attorney general, would file such a brief in this kind of matter.
One expert cited by the newspaper said it was the first time a West Virginia governor had intervened in such a case when the state wasn't a party.
Carolyn Holbert, 62, is one of the plaintiffs. She grew up near the plant.
Her back porch overlooks the former plant site in Spelter, the New York Times reported. An aunt, uncle and three of her six siblings have died of cancer.
Holbert called the governor's involvement in the case "a total betrayal."
"The governor says he is not taking sides," Holbert told the newspaper. "But he is helping DuPont drag its feet, and people are dying while they wait for help."
dailymail.com
| 
