SENATE
HOUSE
JOINT
BILL STATUS
STATE LAW
REPORTS
EDUCATIONAL
CONTACT
home
home

West Virginia Legislative Claims Commission

Volume Number: 30
Category(s): PRISONS AND PRISONERS
Opinion Issued May 23, 2014
RICKY VINCENT PENDLETON
VS.
DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS
(CC-09-0619)
     Claimant appeared pro se.
     Cynthia R. M. Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.
     PER CURIAM:
      Claimant, Ricky Pendleton, an inmate at Mount Olive Correctional Complex, brought this claim to recover lost wages from being improperly segregated and sanctioned by Respondent Division of Corrections.
      The Claimant testified at the hearing of this matter that before being sanctioned and segregated he was employed as a wheelchair pusher for an inmate and received $40.00 per month for his services. After being segregated, Claimant was sanctioned and did not receive his regular monthly payments. Claimant alleged that this was improper and soon filed a grievance. Eventually, Claimant sought habeas relief in the Circuit Court of Fayette County on the issue of back pay. The Circuit Court issued an Order granting Claimant’s relief, in part, and denying, in part. The Circuit Court ordered the Respondent Division of Corrections to return Claimant to his pre-segregation status. Claimant now alleges that the Respondent has not complied with the Circuit Court’s order and asks this Court to enforce said order. Claimant admits that he did not file a new grievance with Respondent concerning this matter, but he did file an informal “request” for payment.
      In this case, the Court does not reach the merits of the Claimant’s claim because Claimant has admitted that he failed to institute a new grievance with Respondent in order to have the Circuit Court’s Order complied with; moreover, enforcement of an order of the Circuit Court lies with the Circuit Court and this Court has no jurisdiction to enforce the Fayette County Circuit Court Order. Furthermore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce an Order of a Circuit Court of this State.
      Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion to, and does hereby, deny Claimant’s claim.
      Claim disallowed.
     
Summary:
     


If your search was unsuccessful, please try the full volume in Archived Decisions


Decisions | Home
This Web site is maintained by the West Virginia Legislature's Office of Reference & Information.  |  Terms of Use  |   Email WebmasterWebmaster   |   © 2024 West Virginia Legislature **