Mollohan v. Chambers Auto Repair & Towing — West Virginia appeals court affirms limited damages award

Case
Donald R. Mollohan v. Chambers Auto Repair & Towing
Court
Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia
Judge
Chief Judge Daniel W. Greear; Judge Charles O. Lorensen; Judge S. Ryan White
Date Decided
September 25, 2026
Docket No.
26-ICA-86
Topics
Appellate procedure; inadequate record; bench trial; damages
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Donald R. Mollohan sued Chambers Auto Repair & Towing in Kanawha County Circuit Court, alleging that it failed to pay for a Robinair AC machine he had purchased and provided to the repair shop. He alleged that the machine broke while in Chambers Auto’s possession and sought $12,867.42, including repair costs, depreciation, costs, and expenses associated with using other shops’ equipment while the machine was repaired.

After a bench trial, the circuit court found that Mollohan had not proved a contract for Chambers Auto to purchase the machine. It found, however, that the machine broke while in the shop’s possession and that Mollohan paid to repair it. The court awarded him $2,850.79. Mollohan, proceeding without counsel, appealed seeking the full damages he had requested. Chambers Auto did not participate in the appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The Intermediate Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that Mollohan had not supplied a sufficient appellate record to affirmatively establish error in the circuit court’s limited damages award.

Mollohan did not include relevant lower-court documents, an adequate briefing of his assignments of error, record citations showing preservation of those issues, or a trial transcript. The court explained that appellate error is not presumed and that self-represented litigants must comply with the appellate rules governing appendices, briefing, and record citations. On the limited record, it found no abuse of discretion or clear error.

Key Takeaways

  • An appellant bears the burden to provide a record that affirmatively demonstrates reversible error.
  • A trial transcript may be necessary to challenge the evidence, arguments, or objections underlying a bench-trial ruling.
  • Self-represented parties remain subject to the same appellate-record and briefing requirements as represented litigants.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that the merits of a damages challenge cannot be reviewed without the materials needed to assess the trial court’s ruling. A party seeking broader recovery after a bench trial must preserve issues below and provide the appellate court with the governing orders, pertinent evidence, and transcript excerpts.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top