Cameron Brown v. Grayson Assisted Living, 17-0176

Cameron Brown, a former employee, sued Grayson Assisted Living under West Virginia’s Wage Payment and Collection Act alleging unpaid wages; Brown alleged he had been paid the disputed wages plus liquidated damages before filing suit.
Grayson moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim or judgment on the pleadings, arguing Brown’s complaint admitted full payment and thus no judgment or attorney’s fees under the Act were possible.
The circuit court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint, reasoning no justiciable issue remained after pre-suit payment.
Brown filed a post-judgment "motion for reconsideration" (treated as a Rule 60(b) motion), arguing that attorney’s fees remained unpaid and the court’s dismissal deprived the Act’s fee-shifting provision of effect.
The circuit court denied relief, finding Brown merely reargued matters already considered and failed to identify grounds under Rule 60(b).
Brown appealed only the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion; the Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the denial was within the trial court’s discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Rule 60(b) motion should be granted to reconsider dismissal because attorney’s fees remained unpaid	Brown: Reconsideration warranted because the Act allows attorney’s fees when a judgment is awarded and fees were not paid, so a justiciable controversy remained	Grayson: Motion repeats prior arguments; no new grounds under Rule 60(b); dismissal was correct because Brown admitted full payment	Held: Denial affirmed — Brown only reargued previous claims; Rule 60(b) relief was not justified and trial court did not abuse discretion
Whether the appellate court may review the original dismissal via this appeal	Brown: Claims the dismissal misinterpreted the Act and failed to accept pleadings as true	Grayson: Appeal from Rule 60(b) only; original dismissal was not before this appeal	Held: Court declined to address dismissal merits because Brown failed to timely appeal that ruling; appeal limited to the Rule 60(b) denial

Toler v. Shelton, 157 W.Va. 778, 204 S.E.2d 85 (W. Va. 1974) (standards for appellate review of Rule 60(b) denials and that such motions do not toll appeal time)
Dempsey v. Builders' Serv. & Supply Co., 224 W.Va. 80, 680 S.E.2d 95 (W. Va. 2009) (Rule 60(b) is not a vehicle to reargue issues already decided)
Law v. Monongahela Power Co., 210 W.Va. 549, 558 S.E.2d 349 (W. Va. 2001) (a motion styled otherwise may be treated as Rule 60(b) if not timely filed as Rule 59(e))