The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down twelve opinions yesterday. One of my cases was in the mix which always derails my focus for the day. That is my excuse for the delay. Among the opinions are several direct criminal appeals, a workers’ comp case, a premises liability case, and two dismissals for lack of appellate jurisdiction. My case survived a jurisdictional challenge and then turned on whether the chancery court erred in deciding that a probated claim stemming from a divorce judgment was satisfied.
Greater New Hamilton Grove Baptist Church v. Hamilton Grove Missionary Baptist Church, 2025-CA-01008-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Dismissing the appeal of an order dissolving a preliminary injunction in an interment dispute, holding that the issue was moot and the court was without jurisdiction.
(10-0: Lassitter St. Pe’ for the Court)
Ajinomoto Foods North America v. Christy Moore, 2025-WC-01107-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s decision, finding that the claimant suffered a total occupational loss of use in both hands and work-related osteoarthritis and awarding permanent total disability benefits, holding that the commission did not err in applying the Jensen presumption and that its decision that the osteoarthritis was compensable was based on substantial credible evidence.
(10-0: Lassitter St. Pe’ for the Court)
Wilson v. State, 2024-KA-00725-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of felonious child abuse, holding that the issue of whether cross-examination was limited in violation of the defendant’s due process rights was procedurally barred, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in precluding certain testimony, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion denying a motion for mistrial after the State defied instructions not to introduce youth court rulings, that argument regarding the trial court not precluding evidence about false confessions was procedurally barred and without merit, that the trial court does not abuse its discretion in instructing the jury, that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and that the cumulative error doctrine did not apply.
(8-2-0: Emfinger for the Court; McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)
Walley v. State, 2024-KA-01443-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of uttering forgery and identity theft, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in prohibiting the introduction of some evidence and limiting cross-examination about a prior indictment.
(9-1-0: Lawrence for the Court; McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing)
C.D.M. v. Lee County Dept. of Child Protection Services, 2024-CP-01427-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the youth court’s decision terminating parental rights, holding that the youth court’s decision was based on sufficient evidence. (9-1-0: Wilson for the Court; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)
Gallion v. State, 2025-KA-00061-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of manslaughter, holding that the trial court properly sustained an objection to prosecutorial misconduct and that further arguments on that issue were waived for failure to request a contemporary jury instruction or to move for mistrial, that a hearsay objection should have been sustained but was harmless error, those arguments regarding police officer opinion testimony was waived, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting photographs of the victim, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and that it was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0: Wilson for the Court)
Brown v. State, 2024-KA-01376-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of murder and being a felon in possession of a firearm, holding that the trial court did not err in denying a Batson challenge or in denying a motion to sever the two counts.
(8-1-1: Carlton for the Court; McCarty concurred and result only without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing)
Strawn v. Southern Roots Salon & Day Spa, LLC, 2025-CA-00429-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming the trial court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant in the premises liability case, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the plaintiff failed to present evidence that the defendant created a dangerous condition or had actual or constructive knowledge of it.
(8-2-0: Carlton for the court; Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in result without writing)
Garfield v. Tate, 2025-CA-00104-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Dismissing the appeal of the entry of a chancery court’s final judgment disinheriting a party in a wrongful death case, holding that it was not an order, much less a final appealable order that would confer jurisdiction on the Court of Appeals.
(10-0: Barnes for the court)
Wilson v. State, 2024-CA-00686-COA (Civil-PCR)
Vacating and remanding the denial of a PCR motion, holding that the indictment was void for failure to charge the defendant with crimes cognizable under Mississippi law.
(4-3-3: Barnes for the court; Wilson specially concurred, joined by Emfinger and Weddle, and joined in part by Lawrence and Lassitter St. Pe’; McCarty concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Carlton and Lassitter St. Pe’ and joined in part by Lawrence)
Jones Family Medicine Clinic, PLLC, v. McCallum, 2024-CA-01332-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision affirming the county court’s grant of summary judgment in a breach of contract case, holding that it was error to dismiss the complaint based on the waived affirmative defense of unconscionability.
(6-1-3: Weddle for the court; Westbrooks concurred in part in the result without writing; McDonald dissented without writing; Lawrence dissented, joined by Barnes and McDonald and joined in part by Westbrooks)
In the Matter of the Estate of Pace: Pace v. Philips, 2025-CA-00223-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Reversing the chancery court’s finding that a probated claim arising from the decedent’s violation of property settlement agreement incorporated into a judgment of divorce had been satisfied, holding that the final disposition of a probated claim was a final appealable order notwithstanding ongoing litigation in the estate matter and that the chancellor failed to grant a proper remedy for the violation of the PSA/judgment of divorce.
(8-2: McCarty for the court; Barnes dissented, joined by Carlton)
Disclosure: I represented the appellant in this case.
Other Orders
- Leggett v. State, 2024-CP-01214-COA (denying rehearing)
- Howard v. State, 2025-KA-00171-COA (recalling mandate and allowing the appellant’s pro se motion for rehearing to proceed as timely filed)
- Morris v. State, 2026- TS-00276-COA (denying appellant’s pro se motion to reconsider dismissal of his untimely appeal)
Mississippi Appeals Blog 