CIVIL CASE INFORMATION CIVIL CASES IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MARSHALL COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA i :3 - . WW, (A P1ai11tiff(3) - Case '2 Judge: fig?? gar? THE MARSHALL COUNTY COAL - H, COMPANY THE MARION COUNTY - . 3.3.75.711 COAL COMPANY, THE MONONGALIA COUNTY COAL COMPANY, THE HARRISON COUNTY COAL COMPANY, THE OHIO COUNTY COAL COIVIPANY, and MURRAY ENERGY CORPORATION, . 46226 NATIONAL ROAD ST. CLAIRSVILLE, OHIO 43950 VS. Days to . Answer Type of Service THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY 3.0 - Secretary of State- Arthur 0. Sulzberger, Jr. 620 EIGHTH AVENUE NEW YORK. NEW YORK, 10013 Original and copies of Complaint furnished herewith. PLAINTIFF: THE MARSHALL COUNTY COAL COMPANY, Iet al CASE NUMBER: DEFENDANT: THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY II. TYPE OF CASE: TORTS OTHER CIVIL Asbestos Adoption Appeal from Magistrate Court Professional 'Malpractice Contract Petition for . Modi?cation of Magistrate Sentence Personal Injury . Real Property Miscellaneous Product Liability Mental Health Other Other Tort - Appeal of Administrative - Agency 111. JURY DEMAND: Yes No CASEWILL BE READY FOR TRIAL YOUR CLIENTS OR WITNESSES IN THIS CASE REQUIRE SPECIAL - ACCONINIODATIONS DUE TO A DISABILITY OR YES NO IF YES, PLEASE SPECIFY: Wheelchair accessible hearing room and other facilities. Interpreter or other auxiliary aid for the hearing impaired. Reader or other auxiliary aid for the Visually impaired. Spokesperson or other auxiliary aid for the speech impaired. Other: Attorney Name: JeffrexI A. Grove, Esq. (#6065). Representing: . David L. Delk. Esq. (#6883) Firm Name: Grove. Delk, PLLC Plaintiffs '_Defendants Address: 44 1/2 15th Street Wheeling, WV 26003 Telephone: (3 04) 905?1961 Dated: I 53/3/57 Signature IN COURT OF MARSHALL COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA THE MARSHALL COUNTY COAL COMPANY, THE MARION COUNTY COAL COMPANY, THE MONONGALIA COUNTY COAL THE HARRISON COUNTY COAL COMPANY, THE OHIO COUNTY COAL COMPANY, and MURRAY ENERGY if; CORPORATION, new Plaintiffs, I cl?? V. . No.: $1:ng i E: . - a; THE NEW YORK TIMES, COMPANY, Judge: it; an Kerr Defendant. COMPLAINT 1. Without making a single call to anyone in the Murray Energy organization to fact check its false assertions, Defendant Widely published defamatory?statements that injured the reputation and business of Murray Energy, including the ?ve companies within that organization that Operate coal mines in this state. 2. Robert E. Murray is the President, CEO, and the sole Director of each of those five companies that do substantial business in West Virginia and employ more than 2,500 people here. 3. On April 24 and 25, 2017, ?rst online and then in print, Defendant falsely stated to the world that Mr. Murray lied about the cause of a collapse at a mine that tragically killed six people. In addition, Defendant also falsely implied that Mr. Murray?s organization acts outside the norms of industry regulatory compliance. 4. Plaintiffs cannot know with certainty why Defendant would publish these false and defamatory statements about the _Murray Energy organization, knowing them to be false or in reckless disregard of their falsity. Nor can Plaintiffs know whether it has anything to do with the politics at play in the article Defendant published that contains those false statements, ?Money Talked Loudest at Donald Trump?s Inaugural? (the ?Defamatory Article?). It is, however, known that Defendant supported Hillary Clinton, who publicly stated her agenda to ?put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.? I 5. In addition, what is also clear is that those false statements risk furthering that agenda. I 6. I Plaintiffs have brought this action to hold Defendant accountable for its defamatory statements. I PARTIES . Plaintiffs 7. Plaintiff the-Marshall County Coal Company .owns and operates the Marshall County Coal Mine, which is located in Marshall County, West Virginia. The operation of that coal mine in West Virginia is the Marshall County Company?s primary business. The Marshall County Coal Company is incorporated under the laws of Delaware. 8. Plaintiff the Marion County Coal Company owns and operates the Marion County . Coal Mine, which is located in Marion County, West Virginia. The operation of that coal mine in West Virginia is the Marion County Company?s primary business. The Marion County Coal Company is incorporated under the laws of Delaware. I 9. Plaintiff the Monongalia Cotmty Coal Company owns and operates the I Monongalia County Coal Mine, which is located in Monongalia County, West Virginia. The operation of that coal mine in West Virginia is the Monongalia County Company?s primary business. The Monongalia County Coal Company is incorporated under the laws of Delaware. 10. Plaintiff the Harrison County Coal Company owns and operates the Harrison - County Coal Mine, which is located in Harrison County, West Virginia. The-operation of that coal mine in West Virginia is the Harrison County Company?s primary business. The Harrison County Coal Company is incorporated under the-laws of Delaware. ll. Plaintiff the Ohio County Coal Company owns and operates the Ohio County Coal Mine, which is located in Ohio County, West Virginia. The operation of that coal mine in West Virginia is the Ohio County Company?s primary business. The Ohio County Coal Company is incorporated under the laws of Ohio. - 12. Plaintiffs the Marshall County Coal Company, the Marion County Coal Company, the Monongalia County Coal Company, the Harrison County Coal Company, and the Ohio County Coal Company (the ?Coal Company Plaintiffs?) are owned by Plaintiff Murray Energy Corporation (the ?Parent Company Plaintiff?). The Parent Company Plaintiff is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Ohio. Its principal of?ce (and the principal office of each of the Coal Company Plaintiffs) is located at 46226 National Road, St. Clairsville, Belmont County, Ohio 43 950. I Defendant I 13. The New York Times Company is a corporation organized under the laws of New York. The New York Times Company publishes The New York Times Newspaper. its headquarters is located at 620 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York, 10018. - 14. Venue lies in this Court purSuant to W. 'Va. Code 56-1?1 subsections (1) and (2) because the causes of action arose in this county and Defendant does business in this County. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS 15. On April 24, 2017, Defendant published the Defamatory Article on its website. (available at I trwrips~inaugural. The following day, Defendant published a print version of the - Defamatory Article in the April 25, 2017 edition of its newspaper, which was circulated in Marshall County. 16. As Defendant knows, the public Views Mr. Murray as the ultimate controlling owner and manager of the Plaintiffs. Mr. Murray is the Chairman, President and CEO of the Parent Company Plaintiff that owns each of the Coal Company Plaintiffs. In addition, Mr. Murray is the President, sole Director of each Coal Company Plaintiff. Further, the Mine Safety and Health Administration also of?cially lists Mr. Murray as the ?Current Operator?; of all the mines owned by the Coal Company Plaintiffs. 17. The Defamatory article falsely states that ?Mr. Murray falsely insisted that the 2007'collapse of his Crandall Canyon mine, which killed six workers, was due to an earthquake.? This statement is false because the triggering event of the collapse was what is commonly understood as an earthquake. Because the public equates the mining business of each Plaintiff with Mr. Murray, the New 'York Times? false statement that Mr. Murray lied about the cause of a I deadly mine collapse inj ured?the reputation and business of each Plaintiff. 18. The Coal Company Plaintiffs, along with their corporate affiliates, and the Parent Company Plaintiff, comprise an organization that is known to the public as ?Murray Energy.? 19. The Defamatory Article also states that ?Murray Energy is a serial violator of federal health and safety rules,? which falsely implies that Murray Energy was found guilty of a signi?cant number of violations or repeat violations outside the norms of industry regulatory compliance. As part of the group that constitutes Murray Energy, the Plaintiffs suffered injury to their reputations and. business as a result of the false statement that ?Murray Energy is a serial - violator of federal health and safety rules.? 20. While having had every opportunity to do So, and despite having contacted ?Murray Energy in the past, the Defendant did not make a single call to Mr. Murray or anyone in the Murray Energy organization to fact check any of the false statements in the Defamatory Article (the ?Defamatory COUNT I DEFAMATION ?21. Plaintiffs restate and reallege all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint as. if fully set forth herein. I . 22f Upon information and belief, Defendant caused the Defamatory Statements to be published with knowledge of the falsity of those statements or with reekless disregard as to the falsity of those statements. 23. The Defamatory Statements are defamatory per se in that, on their face, they re?ect upon Plaintiffs? reputation and character in a manner that: (1) injured Plaintiffs? reputation and subjects Plaintiffs to public hatred, ridicule, shame, or disgrace; and (2) adversely affected Plaintiffs? trades or businesses. In, the alternative, the Defamatory Statements are defamatory per quod in that they are capable of being interpreted as re?ecting upon Plaintiffs? reputation or character in a manner that: (1) injured Plaintiffs? reputation or exposes them to public hatred, ridicule, shame, or disgrace; and (2) adversely affected Plaintiffs? trades or businesses. 24. The Defamatory Statements were published and continue to be published with malice and Without any lawful privilege or basis. 25. Publication of the Defamatory Statements vvill cause Plaintiffs to encounter more dif?culty in securing performance surety bonds from lenders to support their businesses and Plaintiffs may have to collateralize them at higher levels. I 26. Publication of the Defamatory Statements will cause lenders to be less Willing to engage in ?nancing transactions with Plaintiffs, thereby preventing them from gaining access to capital needed to operate their businesses or making it more difficult and expensive for them to obtain such capital. I 27. Publication of the Defamatory Statements, will cause Plaintiffs to encounter dif?culty in having effective discussions with public officials, including regulatory agencies, regarding matters of concern to Plaintiffs? businesses. 28. Publication of the Defamatory Statements Will cause Plaintiffs to suffer a loss of business opportunities and loss of potential or existing customers for their businesses. 29. Publication of the Defamatory Statements has caused and will continue to cause damage to Plaintiffs? reputation and good standing in their community and industry. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request, as to all Counts: Judgment for general damages in favor of Plaintiffs and against the Defendants in an amount in to be determined at trial; .2. - Judgment for special damages in favor of Plaintiffs and against the Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial; 3. Judgment for p?nitive damages in favor of Plaintiffs and against the Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial; A 4. An award to?Plaintiffs of attorneys? fees and costs of suit; and 5. 3 Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.- PLAINTIFF DEMAND A TRIAL BY JURY IN THIS ACTION. Respectfully Submitted: 5M4 Of Counsel for Plaintiff Jeffrey A. Grove, Esq. (#6065) David L. Delk, Jr. ,Esq. (#6883) DELK PLLC 44 1/2 15th Street Wheeling, WV 26003 (304) 905?1961 (304) 905-8628 (facsimile)