State of West Virginia ex rel. Troy Group v. David J. Sims and Nakita Willis

Summary

This is a dissenting opinion in a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case concerning whether an employer authenticated an alleged arbitration agreement bearing an employee’s signature. The dissent argues that, under Rules 104(a) and 901(a) of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence, the party seeking to enforce the agreement had the burden to establish its authenticity and that the circuit court properly found the evidence insufficient. It further contends that the majority improperly reweighed factual evidence and shifted the authentication burden to the employee.

Holdings

1. The dissent would hold that when a plaintiff disputes the authenticity of an arbitration agreement and signature, the defendant offering the agreement bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the document and signature are authentic before the agreement may be considered to establish a contract.
2. The dissent would hold that the Supreme Court should not grant extraordinary relief by reweighing the evidence and replacing a plausible circuit-court finding that the arbitration agreement was unauthenticated.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the party seeking to enforce a disputed arbitration agreement bears the burden of authenticating the agreement and the purported signature by a preponderance of the evidence.
2. Whether a trial court may consider surrounding circumstances under West Virginia Rule of Evidence 104(a) when determining whether a disputed arbitration document is admissible and authentic.
3. Whether the Supreme Court improperly displaced the circuit court's factual findings and evidentiary assessment in granting a writ of prohibition.

Disposition

writ_granted