The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions today. There is one direct criminal appeal, one § 1983 case, and one case about huntin’ dogs.
Pittman v. State, 2023-KA-00367-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a dwelling, passing on the issue of whether evidence of prior bad acts were improperly admitted and holding that if there was any error it would be harmless.
(9-0)
Clay v. Tunica County, Mississippi, 2022-CA-01106-SCT (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming summary judgment in a § 1983 action on qualified immunity grounds, holding that the plaintiffs failed to establish deliberate indifference and that local governments cannot be held vicariously liable based on employer-employee relationships.
(9-0)
Allen v. Dickerson, 2023-CA-00067-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s rulings in a case pitting the right to quite enjoyment of property against the right to hunt and harvest wildlife, holding that the trial court’s finding that repeated intrusion of deer hunting dogs onto neighboring property constituted private nuisance and warranted an injunction.
(5-1*-3: Maxwell specially concurred, joined by Coleman, Beam, Chamberlin and Griffis; Ishee dissented, joined by Randolph and Kitchens)
Practice Point – Maxwell’s special concurrence received four other votes, giving it precedential value. The special concurrence agreed with the majority’s ruling but emphasized that the decision is not a blanket and should not be read to besmirch lawful dog hunting.
Note – The dissent waded into the regulatory morass of what you can hunt when.
My Parting Thought – Mind your dogs.
Other Orders
- Goldbolt v. State, 2020-DP-00440-SCT (denying rehearing)
- Durr v. State, 2021-CT-01109-SCT (dismissing cert sua sponte)
- Gilmer v. State, 2022-CT-00257-SCT (denying cert)
- Premier Radiology, P.A. v. Davis, 2022-IA-00916-SCT (dismissing interlocutory appeal)
Mississippi Appeals Blog 