IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED June 13, 2024 HP, INC., ASHLEY N. DEEM, DEPUTY CLERK Defendant Below, Petitioner INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA v.) No. 23-ICA-203 (Cir. Ct. Putnam Cnty. No. CC-40-2021-C-142) JUDITH THOMAS, Plaintiff Below, Respondent MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner HP, Inc. (“HP”) appeals the Circuit Court of Putnam County’s April 26, 2023, “Order Denying HP Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment.” Judith Thomas filed a response. HP timely filed a reply.1 The issue on appeal is whether the circuit court erred when it granted Ms. Thomas’ motion for default judgment and awarded her $43,638.25 in damages. This Court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to West Virginia Code § 51- 11-4 (2022). After considering the parties’ oral and written arguments, the record on appeal, and the applicable law, this Court finds that there is error in the circuit court’s order, but no substantial question of law. Therefore, this case satisfies the “limited circumstances” requirement of Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, the circuit court’s order in this case is affirmed, in part, reversed, in part, vacated, in part, and remanded. Ms. Thomas purchased an HP laptop on July 15, 2019. A little over a year later, upon Ms. Thomas’ request, HP replaced the laptop when it began malfunctioning. Soon thereafter, the replacement laptop also became inoperable. On May 10, 2021, Ms. Thomas made a warranty claim on the laptop and requested a purchase price refund. 2 She alleges that HP denied her request for a refund and instead offered to diagnose and/or repair the replacement laptop or provide Ms. Thomas with an HP gift card of equal or lesser value. On September 2, 2021, Ms. Thomas filed a complaint against HP in circuit court alleging breach of warranty and misrepresentation regarding her purchase of an HP laptop and 1 HP is represented by Patrick Timony, Esq., Gabriele Wohl, Esq., and J. Tyler Barton, Esq. Judith Thomas is self-represented. 2 Ms. Thomas purchased a 3-year extended warranty from HP following her purchase of the first laptop in 2019. The coverage was available from June 26, 2020, to June 26, 2023. 1 extended warranty. Ms. Thomas sought “judgment against [HP] in the amount of $10,000, plus costs, attorney fees, and such other relief as the Court or jury deems proper.” Importantly, although not actively practicing, Ms. Thomas is a licensed attorney in the state of West Virginia but was self-represented in the underlying matter. HP was served through the West Virginia Secretary of State but did not respond to the summons. HP maintains it did not timely respond because the complaint, after receipt at HP, was mistakenly misrouted to the wrong division, and the HP employee who handled the forwarding of such matters was on medical leave for cancer treatments, resulting in the complaint and summons not being delivered to HP’s legal department. On February 28, 2022, Ms. Thomas filed a motion for default judgment based …
Original document