1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 625 S.E.2d
  5. 625 S.E.2d 274 (2005)
 

PIPEMASTERS, INC. v. PUTNAM COUNTY COM'N

No. 32667.

625 S.E.2d 274 (2005)

218 W.Va. 512

PIPEMASTERS, INC., a West Virginia corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. PUTNAM COUNTY COMMISSION, a West Virginia public corporation and political subdivision of the State of West Virginia; and The West Virginia-American Water Company, a West Virginia corporation, and Putnam County Building Commission, a West Virginia public corporation and political subdivision of the State of West Virginia, Counterclaim Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Pipemasters, Inc., a West Virginia corporation, Counterclaim Defendant Below, Appellee, and Putnam County Building Commission, a West Virginia corporation and political subdivision of the State of West Virginia, and West Virginia-American Water Company, a West Virginia corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs Below, v. HNTB Corporation, a Delaware corporation, Third-Party Defendant Below, Appellee, Putnam County Building Commission and West Virginia-American Water Company, Appellants.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Filed: December 2, 2005.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Carl J. Roncaglione, Jr., Esq., Charleston, for Appellee.

John Philip Melick, Esq., Jackson Kelly, PLLC, Jay M. Potter, Esq., Schumacher, Francis & Nelson, Charleston, for Putnam County Building Commission and West Virginia-American Water Company.

Harold F. Salsbery, Esq., Leah Perry Macia, Esq., Bailey & Glasser, Charleston, for Mid-State Surety Corporation.

Mark W. Browning, Esq., Shuman, McCuskey & Slicer, Charleston, for HNTB Corporation.

The Opinion was delivered PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This case arises from a dispute over the installation of a waterline in rural Putnam County. After a three and one-half week jury trial, a verdict was rendered in favor of Pipemasters, Inc., plaintiff below/appellee. The West Virginia-American Water Company and the Putnam County Building Commission appeal the decision of the trial court in denying post trial motions. For the reasons stated herein we affirm...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases