World Business

CHARLESTON, W.Va. —

Watch original video:

Gov. Joe Manchin wants the West Virginia Supreme Court to clarify whether DuPont has the right to be heard as it appeals $196.2 million in punitive damages, about half the amount a jury awarded in a case involving health threats from a former spelter smelting plant.

The lead attorney in quest of the plaintiffs on Wednesday called the governor’s exercise unprecedented.

“I’ve never seen anything like this,” said Florida lawyer Michael Papantonio. “This precisely farther on delineates in that which way badly the apparel is stacked in West Virginia against men trying to recover when they’re taking on DuPont. It’s stacked against people who have been wronged by means of corporate America.”

The jury in Harrison County Circuit Court last drop down awarded damages totaling nearly $400 million to residents living near the quondam plant in Spelter. The plaintiffs argued the chemical giant spent decades downplaying and lying about health threats from arsenic, cadmium and spend that contaminated air, soil and water.

Punitive damages are designed to deter future misconduct, and the jury ruled that DuPont had engaged in wanton, willful and reckless manner of life in its operation of the smelter. Non-punitive damages included $130 million to fund a 40-year health screening contrivance to monitor plaintiffs for any ailments related to exposure to chemicals.

Last week, DuPont appealed the entire verdict, arguing it has been unfairly punished for doing the right thing at the position and against the common. The state Supreme Court, which is in summer recess, has not yet indicated whether the appeal will be heard.

In a “confidant of the court” breviary filed last week, Manchin urged the justices to clarify what race of appellate review is to be afforded DuPont in its constitutional right to due process. His lawyers cited a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision to argue that the 14th Amendment guarantees appeals of punitive damages.

The brief essentially questions whether consideration of a written appeal alone is competent.

“Ensuring that West Virginia courts provide the appropriate level of appellate review to (DuPont), in the same manner with good like all other parties seeking inspect of penal damages awards, is an issue of vital public importance,” the brief argued.

DuPont spokesman Anthony Farina said the company was pleased with Manchin’s intercession and urged the court “to conduct a detailed and exacting retrospect of the award.”

The plaintiffs, however, contend DuPont can do the part of its arguments in a petition, without a flatter appearance.

Attorney Brian Barr said he hadn’t seen Manchin’s brief. But he said trial Judge Thomas Bedell already reviewed the punitive damages as being propriety during and after trial.