State ex rel. Justice v. The Honorable Charles E. King, Jr.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia denied Governor James Conley Justice II's petition for a writ of prohibition challenging a circuit court order allowing a mandamus action concerning the Governor's constitutional duty to reside at the seat of government. The court held that the residency requirement in Article VII, Section 1 of the West Virginia Constitution imposes a mandatory, nondiscretionary duty that may be enforced through mandamus.

Holdings

1. For purposes of Article VII, section 1, "reside" means to live primarily at the seat of government, with the executive official's principal place of physical presence located there for the duration of the term. Temporary absence does not terminate residency; the controlling factor is the intent to return to that principal place of physical presence.
2. The duty of executive officers to reside at the seat of government is a mandatory, nondiscretionary constitutional duty.
3. Mandamus may lie to require executive officers to comply with the mandatory, nondiscretionary duty to reside at the seat of government.
4. Governor Justice failed to establish that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction or exceeded its legitimate powers, and the Supreme Court therefore denied the writ of prohibition.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Circuit Court of Kanawha County had jurisdiction to entertain a mandamus petition seeking to enforce the Governor's constitutional duty to reside at the seat of government.
2. Whether the political question doctrine and separation-of-powers principles barred mandamus relief against the Governor.
3. Whether the constitutional term "reside" imposed a mandatory, nondiscretionary duty that could be enforced through mandamus.
4. Whether the circuit court clearly erred by denying Governor Justice's motion to dismiss.

Disposition

writ_denied