The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. There is a lengthy personal jurisdiction case, a direct criminal appeal, a circuit vs. chancery jurisdiction dispute, and a death-penalty PCR decision.
K&C Logistics, LLC v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc., 2022-CA-00939-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming judgment of the circuit court finding no personal jurisdiction in a negligence case stemming from a car wreck in Arizona, holding that the Mississippi Business Corporation Act did not confer personal jurisdiction by virtue of the foreign corporation being registered to do business in Mississippi and that the defendant did not waive the personal jurisdiction defense when its attorneys entered appearances that did not expressly reserve the right to assert the personal jurisdiction defense.
(9-0)
Practice Point – This decision has a lengthy discussion of personal jurisdiction that is worth your time to read. On the waiver issue, the Court clarified persistent confusion over “special appearances” as follows:
Lollis v. State, 2022-KA-00711-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder and conspiracy to commit murder, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict on both counts.
(9-0)
Riverhills Capital Corporation v. At Home Care, Inc., 2022-IA-00568-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a motion to transfer a breach of contract, fraud, and quite title claim to chancery court, holding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pleaded legal claims the circuit court did not err in denying the request to transfer to chancery court even if it is a “close call” and if the legal claims were ultimately found to be without merit.
(9-0)
Note – The Supreme Court said this about circuit court jurisdiction:
Bennett v. State, 2021-CA-01313-SCT (Civil – Death Penalty – PCR)
Affirming the denial of a PCR petition, holding that Cronic did not apply and there was no per se ineffective assistance, that the trial court’s refusal to allow the petitioner to depose two proffered witnesses did not affect the outcome of the trial, and that the petitioner failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel.
(9-0)
Other Orders
Smith v. State, 2021-CT-01003-SCT (granting cert)
Dawson v. Burgs, 2021-CT-01038-SCT (denying cert)
Baker v. State, 2021-CT-01277-SCT (denying cert)
McFarland v. State, 2021-CT-01311-SCT (denying cert)
Fagan v. Faulkner, 2022-CT-00130-SCT (granting cert)
The Mississippi Bar v. Hessler, 2023-BD-00057-SCT (granting emergency motion to clarify opinion to clarify that Hessler is authorized to continue practicing law in Mississippi while his one-year-and-a-day suspension remains in deferred status) *The “motion to clarify” is a handy item to keep in one’s tool belt. It was used here to get a result that had a significant impact on the movant.
Mississippi Appeals Blog 