Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Chemtall Inc. v. Madden
West Virginia Supreme Court
Decided December 2, 2004No. 31743PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MAYNARD, Chief Justice.
Petitioners, eight corporations who have manufactured, distributed, and/or sold polya-crylamide to coal preparation plants, seek relief through prohibition from the September 26, 2003, order of the Circuit Court of Marshall County that certified a seven-state class action for medical monitoring and punitive damages arising out of the alleged exposure to polyacrylamide of Respondents who are coal preparation plant workers and the offspring of such workers. For the reasons set forth below, we grant a writ of prohibition as moulded.
I
FACTS
Respondents and plaintiffs below…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Lloyd D. Alkire v. Judge Jane IrvingCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Allstate Insurance v. HagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- State Ex Rel. Hoover v. BergerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Perrine v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2010
- Audrey Kenney v. Independent Order of ForestersCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014
- Rhodes v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2009
- Perrine v. EI DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND CO.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2010
- Stern v. Chemtall Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2005
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.