West Virginia’s economy is growing, and faster than the national rate. ¹ To support the increased business activity and encourage additional commerce, West Virginia’s highest court, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, has been proactively improving the state’s common law regarding contracts. In the past couple of years, the court has clarified its position on arbitration clauses, incorporation by reference of auxiliary documents, and forum selection clauses. Further, these decrees have conformed to federal authority and helped establish “a predictable, uniform, and reasonable set of legal standards under which individuals and businesses may commercially flourish.” ² West Virginia’s common law on contracts is now more predictable, equitable, and valuable. 

This Essay explores three areas of contract law that have been recently developed by the West Virginia Supreme Court. Part II surveys the current jurisprudence on arbitration clauses in West Virginia following the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Marmet Health Care Center v. Brown. ³ Part III analyzes State ex rel. U-Haul Co. of West Virginia v. Zakaib, ⁴ which announced the requirements for an accessory document to be incorporated by reference into a contract. Part IV reviews Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. ⁵ and the West Virginia Supreme Court’s adoption of an intricate four-part test for enforceability of a forum selection clause. Each section concludes with practical advice on how to achieve a desired outcome—whether judicial enforcement of an arbitration clause, incorporation of an auxiliary document, or enforcement of a forum selection clause—through contract drafting and contemporaneous behavior.

Generally, the public misunderstands the relationship between individual property rights and government owned national forests and monuments. This is the result of a confusing area of law, combined with an increasing number of national forest proclamations and national monument designations. For example, President Obama has designated eleven national monuments during his term of office and enlarged two. ¹ Out of all the national monuments, twelve have been converted from national forests. ² National forests are a great source of recreation as well as resources. Therefore, it is common to designate areas within national forests as national monuments to immortalize the recreational and resource capacity.

Due to West Virginia’s mountainous terrain and geography, it is no wonder that over one million acres of the state lie within national forests. ³ However, no national monuments currently exist within the state’s vast quantities of national forest land. Currently, a proposal to create the Birthplace of Rivers National Monument is in the works. The proposed monument area consists of over 120,000 acres in the southern Monongahela National Forest, but the boundary has yet to be finalized. ⁴ As to be expected, the proposed monument has met some resistance from local residents. ⁵ One common concern West Virginia residents share, as well as those outside the state with interest in national monument property, is the continued use of their property rights.

It would be difficult to find someone who does not agree that society must do all it can to protect children from harm. It would be hard to find a culture anywhere in the world that does not at least pay lip service to the ideals of child protection. Keeping them from suffering, preserving their innocence, and shielding them from emotional and mental distress are all-important goals. A political regime can instantly sway public opinion in its favor by showcasing harm suffered by children at the hands of political opponents. ¹ It is a universal ethos; we must protect our children, even if doing so puts adults at risk.

The basic premise is easy to agree upon, but protecting children is not as simple as it sounds. What constitutes harm can be hard to determine, balancing the harm in removing children from their parents’ care against the harm of staying in an abusive or neglectful circumstance is difficult, and maintaining a productive relationship with at-risk children and parents is challenging. It is a delicate process that requires flexibility and care. The Supreme Court has made clear that the constitutional rights of parents are fundamental and must only be invaded after a thoughtful evidentiary analysis and a high level of deference to those compelling rights. ² Unfortunately, some courts do not bring a surgeon’s scalpel to aid them in the termination of parental rights process—they bring a sledgehammer.