Jacob A. Manning

Experience

Progressive Minerals, Inc. v. Muhammad Haroon Rashid, et al., Civ. Action No. 5:07 CV 108, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90437 (N.D. WV 2009)

The Court found in the favor of the firm's client, Progressive Minerals, Inc., in a tort action alleging that the defendants defrauded the client in a mineral transaction in West Virginia.

Lead Counsel in Class Action Personal Injury Litigation

Denise served as lead counsel in a personal injury litigation filed on behalf of 19 coal preparation plant workers alleging personal injuries, including cancer, reproductive toxicity, genotoxicity, neurological, including peripheral neuropathy, and CNS damage.

After nearly one decade of fierce litigation, all claims were dismissed based on Summary Judgment Motions or by the court on other grounds.

Lead Counsel in Defense of Medical Monitoring Class Action Suit

Denise served as lead counsel in defense of a medical monitoring class action lawsuit filed by coal-preparation plant workers alleging exposure to polyacrylamide flocculant.

International Arbitration

We represented a scrap steel company in International arbitration before the American Arbitration Association concerning alleged breach of several sale contracts by an Indian company.

Dinsmore attorneys prepared the case for its final hearing but were able to negotiate a favorable settlement before the client incurred the fees associated with a final hearing, and one that resulted in payment to the client quickly without protracted litigation in India. Because we were cognizant of legal costs and processes throughout the case, the result was a quick recovery for the client, but reached in a cost-effective manner.

Adoption Proceeding

Represented foster parents who were attempting to adopt the foster child that had been living with them for almost three years. The maternal grandmother of the child, who had been named in the original abuse and neglect petition, was also attempting to adopt the child. The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources recommended that the child be removed from the foster parents and adopted by the grandmother. The Guardian ad Litem recommended that the child remain where he was and be adopted by the foster parents. We presented the only expert testimony that the child’s best interest was served by remaining with the foster parents and being adopted by them. The Circuit Court ordered the child to be immediately removed from the foster parents and placed with the grandmother for adoption. We filed an appeal to the West Virginia Supreme Court. The Supreme Court overturned the Circuit Court and found that it had not properly considered the best interest of the child, which supersedes the grandparent preference in both the DHHR policies and case law, in making its ruling. The Supreme Court ordered that the child be returned to the foster parents and placed with them for adoption. The grandmother and DHHR filed a motion for rehearing that was denied by the Supreme Court. The clients are in the process of moving forward with the adoption.