Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 2, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a consolidated appeal resolving a “circuit split” where two state circuit courts reached opposite conclusions on the same legal issue involving UM coverage for accidents caused by MTCA-immune tortfeasors. (Come for the holding, stay for the strong words about the Fifth Circuit’s earlier Erie-guess on this issue.) The other opinion involves the rights of a successor in title to a reciprocal easement.


Lee v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2021-CA-00882-SCT consolidated with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Cooper, 2021-IA-01006-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Resolving a “circuit split” by holding that under the UM statutes (as amended in 2009) the UM carrier was required to provide UM coverage to plaintiffs for damages sustained in collisions with entities afforded immunity under MTCA, reversing summary judgment in one case and affirming the denial of summary judgment in the other case.
(7-0: Chief Justice Randolph and Justice Beam did not participate.)

Practice Point – The Supreme Court specifically addressed the limited precedential value of this decisions:

Note – The Supreme Court would like us to remember that the Fifth Circuit’s Erie-guesses are not binding precedent in Mississippi. McGlothin is a Fifth Circuit opinion from 2019 that the Mississippi Supreme Court did not exactly agree with:

So what does the Mississippi Supreme Court do?

You can read that approach (that involves the doctrine of in pari materia) in the opinion.


TransMontaigne Operating Company, L.P. v. Loresco I, LLC, 2021-CA-00980-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s denial of the plaintiff’s request for declaratory and injunctive relief, holding that the express language of a reciprocal easement was specific and clear and allowed the successor in title to the easement to full use of the easement per its terms and did not limit the successor to the scope of actual use by the predecessor in title.
(7-2: Justice Griffis dissented, joined by Justice King.)


Other Orders

In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (granting motion to amend Miss. R. Civ. P. 45 – *An order amending Rule 45 was also on the hand down list last week. The link to the order on the hand down page last week is no longer active, but you can see a copy of the PDF that was handed down last week on my post from last week. I quickly compared the two and didn’t immediately see any differences except the date that the amendment will go into effect based on the date the orders were entered.)

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (appointing County Judge Carol Jones Russell of Forrest Countyas a member of the Supreme Court of Mississippi Advisory Committee on Rules on the nomination by the Mississippi Conference of County Court Judges)

Fannings v. State, 2015-M-01061 (denying petition for application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the petition frivolous, and warning against further frivolous filings)

Cook v. State, 2017-M-00455 (denying motion for PCR, finding the filing frivolous, and restricting the plaintiff from further filings in forma pauperis)

Moffett v. State, 2021-CT-00622-SCT (denying cert)

Billie v. State, 2022-M-00416 (denying petition for application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the petition frivolous, and warning against further frivolous filings)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 31, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions today. Two affirm felony convictions and one is a PCR dismissal. One of the criminal cases contains a robust Confrontation Clause discussion between the majority and the dissent.


Williams v. State, 2022-KA-00100-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction for armed robbery, holding that there was no reversible error in admitting testimony from a detective that was not objected to and that neither the failure to object to that or defense counsel’s cross-examination of the detective constituted ineffective assistance.
(7-3-0: Judge Wilson, Judge McCarty, and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


McConn v. State, 2021-CP-00431-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion asserting ineffective assistance, holding that the trial court did not err in summarily dismissing the motion that was supported only by the movant’s affidavit and an immaterial affidavit and was contradicted by the record.
(9-1-0: Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Pitts v. State, 2021-KA-00740-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery of his minor daughter, holding that placing a screen between the child and the defendant during the child’s testimony did not violate the Confrontation Clause or the Due Process Clause where the defendant was able to observe the child via camera during the entirety of her testimony; the trial court did not err in excluding the testimony of the defendant’s expert witnesses where their disclosure was untimely or in allowing the testimony under the tender-years exception; and there was no cumulative error.
(6-1-2: Judge McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Wilson dissented, joined by Judge Westbrooks and joined in part by Judge McDonald. Judge Emfinger did not participate.)

NOTE – The dissent argued that the use of the screen was a violation of the Confrontation Clause:


Other Orders

Burns v. State, 2021-KA-00310-COA (denying rehearing)

Wilson v. State, 2021-KA-00608-COA (denying rehearing)

Loblolly Properties, LLC v. Le Papillon Homeowner’s Association Inc., 2021-CA-00767-COA (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 26, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down just one opinion today, but it was a significant decision in the PCR arena. Of great interest to civil practitioners, the Supreme Court also amended Rule 37 and Rule 45 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure. The amendments to Rule 45 should make life easier, especially for paralegals and the circuit clerks’ offices.


Howell v. State, 2020-CA-00868-SCT (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of a motion for PCR, overruling Rowland and holding that the plaintiff could not overcome the statute of limitations bar by asserting a fundamental-rights exception and holding that the petition otherwise lacked merit.
(7-3: Justice Kitchens dissented, joined by Justice King and Justice Ishee)

NOTE – Here is the language overruling Rowland:

ANOTHER NOTE – When both the majority and dissent cite Newell v. State you know its a classic, Mississippi separation of powers throw-down.


In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT
Amending Rule 37 and Rule 45 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure. Both amendments will impact civil practice and need to be studied and accounted for once they take effect. The big news from my perspective is that the amended Rule 45 provides a mechanism for attorneys to issue subpoenas in their cases not unlike the federal court rule. See the text of the amended rule and comment below for the details.

Here is the En Banc Order with the amended Rule 37 attached:

Here is the same for Rule 45:


Other Orders

Butler v. State, 2020-CT-00806-SCT (dismissing cert that had previously been granted)

Nelson v. State, 2020-M-01417 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding it frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing further PCR petitions in forma pauperis)

Camphor v. State, 2021-CT-00048-SCT (denying cert)

Fisher v. State, 2021-KA-00828-SCT (denying rehearing)

Anderson v. State, 2022-M-00582 (denying motion for PCR, finding it frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2023-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $148,438.33 in civil legal assistance funds among the MS Center for Legal Services, MS Volunteer Lawyers Project, and North MS Rural Legal Services)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 24, 2023

The Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today. Three criminal cases and three PCR cases. I don’t anticipate any of the PCR cases today drawing the sort of attention the Hathorn case drew last week.


Wells v. State, 2021-KA-00747-COA (Civil – Felony)
Affirming conviction for sale of meth, holding that testimony from a confidential informant about the defendant’s past drug selling activity was elicited by defense counsel on cross and not purposeful elicited by the DA and that it was not error to refuse the defendant’s preferred instruction on weighing confidential informant testimony.
(10-0)

Note – Pithy introductory paragraphs like this could put me out of business:


Thomas v. State, 2021-CP-00060-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the sentence was not illegal, that there was a sufficient factual basis for the kidnapping plea, that the retroactive competency hearing was adequate and proper, and that there was no error in finding the plaintiff competent.
(7-3-0: Judge Wilson, Judge Smith, and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the judgment without separate written opinion)


Green v. State, 2021-CP-01299-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of PCR motion, holding that the claims were barred by the doctrine of res judicata and the three-year statement of limitations, and the motion was an impermissible successive motion.
(9-0: Judge Lawrence did not participate)


Bradley v. State, 2022-CP-00173-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the motion was both successive and time-barred.
(9-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Melendez v. State, 2021-KA-00775-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder and aggravated assault, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, dismissing the ineffective assistance claim without prejudice, and holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in giving a flight instruction.
(10-0)


Alford v. State, 2022-KA-00025-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of trafficking meth with intent to distribute and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(5-5-0: Judge Wilson, Judge McDonald, Judge Lawrence, and Judge McCarty concurred in part and in the result; Judge Westbrooks concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.)


Other Orders

Nguyen v. Bui, 2021-CP-00548-COA (granting appellee’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees) (don’t get excited, they were contractual fees)

Wallace v. State, 2021-CP-01149-COA (recalling mandate and accepting pro se motion for rehearing as timely)

Hendrix v. State, 2022-TS-01217-COA (dismissing appeal for want of appealable judgment)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 19, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today and both are reversals. One is an appeal of a property tax valuation and the other is an appeal of a chancellor’s decision disqualifying an attorney under Rule 4.2 of the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct due to the attorney’s prior representation of a partnership in a lawsuit involving one of the partners.


Mississippi Hub, LLC v. Baldwin, 2021-CA-00935-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing summary judgment that found an appeal of a property tax valuation was untimely, holding that the appeal was timely and that there were genuine issues of material fact as to the value of the underground natural gas facility at issue.
(8-1-0: Chief Justice Randolph concurred in result only without separate written opinion)


Pettis v. Simrall, 2021-IA-01253-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the chancellor’s decision disqualifying counsel under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct because of an alleged conflict of interest, holding that no attorney-client relationship between an attorney and a partner in a general partnership can be implied from an attorney’s representation of the general partnership and that a chancellor may not preemptively disqualify an attorney for practices and proceedings that were not before the court.
(9-0)


Other Orders

Chism v. State, 2018-M-01436 (denying application for leave to file motion for PCR, finding that the filing was frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

Parker v. Ross, 2020-CT-01055-SCT (granting cert)

Roberson v. State, 2022-CT-01208-SCT (denying cert)

Skinner v. State, 2021-CT-00080-SCT (denying cert)

Sel Business Services, LLC v. Lord, 2021-CT-00368-SCT (granting cert)

Terpening v. F.L. Crane & Sons, Inc., 2021-CT-00544-SCT (denying cert)

Longo v. City of Waveland, 2021-CA-00735-SCT (denying rehearing)

Lewis v. State, 2021-CT-00736-SCT (denying cert)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 17, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. There are several criminal cases, a reversal of summary judgment in a slip and fall case, an arbitration denial, and several PCR cases.


Jones v. State, 2021-KA-01263-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder, holding the trial court did not err in denying a mistrial after a prospective juror mentioned the defendant’s past wrongdoing, that the verdict was based on sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence, and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim could not be appropriately addressed on direct appeal and denying the issue without prejudice.
(10-0)


Creel v. State, 2021-CP-00977-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of a motion for PCR, holding that the plaintiff was properly sentenced under the statute in place at the time of his offenses and that his guilty pleas were entered knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily.
(9-0: Judge Emfinger did not participate)


Smith v. State, 2021-CA-01259-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the denial of a motion for PCR without evidentiary hearing, holding that the plaintiff’s guilty pleas were knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily given, and that the trial court did not err in ruling without an evidentiary hearing.
(9-0: Judge Smith did not participate)


Anderson v. State, 2021-KA-01340-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary, holding that the trial court did not commit reversible error by admitting evidence of crimes in other counties under Rule 404(b) and that there was no merit to the ineffective assistance of counsel claims based on lack of objections to hearsay.
(9-1-0: Judge McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Hathorne v. State, 2021-CA-00306-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of a motion for PCR, holding that the indictment was defective for failing to charge a crime but that the claim was procedurally barred.
(2-4-4: Judge Wilson and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Lawrence and Judge Smith concurred in the result only; Judge McCarty dissented, joined by Judge Carlton, Judge Westbrooks, and Judge McDonald)


Brooks v. Jeffreys, 2021-CA-01113-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of a defendant in a slip and fall case, holding that there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether the cleaning company breached the duty of care where the plaintiff slipped and fell on the floor of her residence that was actively being mopped when she slipped.
(9-1: Judge Greenlee concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion)

NOTE – Because the plaintiff slipped and fell in her own residence that was being cleaned by the defendant, the Court of Appeals analyzed this is a general negligence action and not a premises liability case.


Liberty National Life Insurance Company v. Hancock, 2021-CA-00605-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming denial of a motion to compel arbitration, holding that where a life insurance policy was voluntarily entered into, cancelled, and then reinstated via forgery of the insured’s signature, the arbitration agreement in the policy was not enforceable.
(6-4: Judge Emfinger dissented, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Wilson, and Judge Greenlee)


Other Orders

$153,340.00 v. State, 2020-CA-01409-COA (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 10, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. These decisions cover a wide range of areas including wills, felonies, personal injury, defamation, and adoption. One of the more interesting and potentially useful decisions analyzes the admissibility of images from Google Earth and measurements generated by Google Earth.


Perrigin v. State, 2021-KA-00858-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery of a minor, holding that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, that the Confrontation Clause was not violated since the victim did testify at trial, and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim should be raised on a PCR petition.
(9-1-0: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Wilkerson v. Wilkerson, 2021-CA-01208-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s ruling in a will contest, holding that the word “should” was permissive and that, in any event, even if there was a mandatory requirement that one son have an opportunity to purchase a property there was sufficient evidence to support the chancellor’s finding that he did have such a chance.
(10-0)


Bolton v. Lee, 2020-CA-00344-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming a dismissal for failure to state a claim in favor of a banker and a bank and affirming summary judgment in favor of a lawyer and law firm, holding that collateral estoppel barred the plaintiff from recovering in a civil action on the same facts that formed the basis of their criminal convictions of tax evasion and filing false tax returns.
(8-2-0: Judge Wilson and Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Pope v. Martin, 2021-CA-00367-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming in part and reversing in part summary judgment granted in favor of the defendant in a defamation and wiretapping suit, holding that there was no error in granting summary judgment without a hearing or without issuing findings of fact or conclusions of law, and that summary judgment on the defamation claim was proper but that there were genuine fact issues on the wiretapping claim.
(9-1-0: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

NOTE – Summary judgment rulings made without any accompanying findings of fact and conclusions of law to explain the basis for the decision are frustrating for litigants and parties. This is especially true when no hearing was given. There are certainly cases where such rulings make sense, but when the parties have spent considerable time and energy in briefing issues it is helpful to know why you won or lost. Without an explanation of why summary judgment was granted or denied, litigants do not have an opportunity to see where they went wrong and hone their craft. It also does not help the parties focus the issues on appeal. It is clear that Rule 52 does not apply to summary judgments but rules can always be amended.

Evilsizer v. Beau Rivage Resorts, LLC, 2021-CA-01222-COA (Civil – Personal injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the owner of a cooking trailer who was sued by an 18-wheeler driver who struck the awning of the cooking trailer, holding that the there were no genuine fact issues where the evidence showed that the awning was closed approximately one hour before the collision and there was no evidence that the trailer owner opened the awning before the accident or had actual or constructive notice that the awning was open and extending into the roadway.
(8-1-0: Judge McDonald concurred in result only without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks did not participate)


Boutwell v. Fairchild, 2021-CA-01046-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming termination of parent rights and allowing adoption, holding that the court had subject matter jurisdiction, that the child was eligible for adoption because the chancery court had properly assumed original and exclusive jurisdiction over the matter, and that the chancellor did not err in finding that parental rights should be terminated.
(8-2-0: Judge McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McCarty concurred in result only without separate written opinion)


Green v. State, 2021-KA-00613-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated domestic violence, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing the defendant’s lesser-included instruction for simple domestic violence because the evidence did not support that instruction.
(10-0)


Taylor v. State, 2021-KA-00721-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of violating state law by living within 3,000 feet of a playground as a registered sex offender, holding that the sex-offender-registry law is not unconstitutionally vague by what is meant by “playground” or how 3,000 feet should be measured and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, but reversing because the Google Earth map used to calculate the distance was not properly authenticated and contained hearsay.
(6-2-2: Judge Greenlee and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Wilson concurred in the result and dissented in part, joined by Judge Greenlee and joined in part by Judge McDonald and Judge McCarty)

NOTES – The majority and the partial dissent engage in a collegial discussion of whether the term “playground” encompasses the property on which a playground sits or just the playground itself, the dissent arguing for the narrow construction. Both the majority and the partial dissent have interesting analyses of the admissibility of Google Earth images and measurements generated by it (without much disagreement on this issue).


Colburn v. State, 2021-KA-00865-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction for sale of meth within 1,500 feet of a church, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of the defendant’s prior conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell.
(5-1-4: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McCarty dissented, joined by Judge Westbrooks and Judge McDonald, and joined in part by Judge Lawrence)


Other Orders

None


Hand Down List

Nothing from the Mississippi Supreme Court on January 5, 2023

I was expecting opinions from the Mississippi Supreme Court today but the Court’s hand down page now says its next hand down is scheduled for January 12. Those will be the Supreme Court’s first opinions of the year, and its first since December 15. The Mississippi Court of Appeals is scheduled to hand down its second slate of the year on January 10. See you then!

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 3, 2023

Happy New Year! The courts are back in action so I am too. The first hand down list of 2023 has four opinions from the Mississippi Court of Appeals. Two are personal injury cases, one is a custody modification case, and the other is a PCR case.


Mallard v. State, 2022-CA-00152-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the denial of a PCR motion, holding that the plaintiff’s right to a speedy trial was not violated and that a discrepancy in the sentencing order and transcript was a scrivener’s error not warranting reversal.
(10-0)


Yarborough v. Singing River Health Systems, 2021-CA-00668-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming judgment in favor of the defendant hospital after a bench trial in a negligence suit stemming from a fall while the plaintiff was get onto a medical transport bus, holding that the duty owed was the duty owed to an invitee and there was no evidence that the steps to the bus were not reasonably safe, that the decision was not against the weight of the evidence, that the trial court did not err in excluding testimony that the driver was in the habit of of being late, and that an objective person could not find the judge biased based on a comment she made while stepping down from the bench.
(7-2-0: Judge Westbrooks and Judge McDonald concurred in the result only without separate written opinion; Judge Lawrence did not participate)


Moreland v. Spears, 2021-CA-00714-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming modification of custody and visitation, holding that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion by awarding the mother sole legal custody, by restricting the father’s visitation, or by not finding the mother in contempt for withholding visitation during March 2020 while the COVID “stay-home order” was still active.
(10-0)

COVID AND THE LAW – The father argued that the mother should be held in contempt for withholding a visitation that was due to occur during the March 2020 COVID shutdown. The mother testified that she tried to set up alternate times but the father refused. The Court of Appeals held that the particular facts of this case supported the chancellor’s decision of no contempt:


Cornell v. MDHS, 2021-SA-00784-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming in part and reversing in part summary judgment in favor of MDHS in a case alleging that MDHS placed the plaintiff in foster care with a know pedophile, holding that MDHS is statutorily immune from suit regarding the investigation and licensing of the foster parents’ home but reversing the grant of summary judgment on the issues of whether MDHS’s failure to report allegations of abuse and MDHS’s failure to conduct required visits were the proximate cause of continued abuse.
(8-2: Judge Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Chief Judge Barnes)


Other Orders

Edwards v. State, 2021-KA-00261-COA (denying rehearing)

Virden v. Campbell Delong, LLP, 2021-CA-00478-COA (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 15, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a criminal case dealing with a Confrontation Clause violation and the other is a judicial estoppel case that reversed the trial court because of an intervening decisions with a special concurrence that garnered a majority of the Court. The Supreme Court also granted cert in a slip-and-fall case that I had not summarized because the decision from the Court of Appeals was handed down back in June on a Thursday instead of Tuesday so it escaped my notice.


Saunders v. NCAA, 2020-CA-01146-SCT (Civil – Torts)
Reversing the trial court’s dismissal of claims based on judicial estoppel, holding that the plaintiff had no duty to disclose claims for declaratory relief during his Chapter 7 bankruptcy and that the dismissal of the money damages claim was in error per an intervening special concurrence that held that judicial estoppel should not be presumed and is, rather, a fact-specific inquiry that must include how the bankruptcy could dealt with the omission.
(7-2: Justice Coleman concurred in part and dissented in part; Justice Griffis concurred in part and dissented in part)

PRACTICE POINT – Regular readers might recall a discussion about the special concurrence referenced in today’s decision. The case is Jones v. Alcorn State University, 337 So. 3d 1062 (Miss. 2022) and Justice Maxwell’s special concurrence in that case was joined by four other justices. I wondered aloud about the precedential effect of a five-justice special concurrence and then later passed along the answer. In Saunders, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the trial court based upon the holding of the special concurrence in Jones.


Willis v. State, 2021-KA-00734-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, holding that the trial court violated the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause by not allowing cross-examination of the lead investigator about prior inconsistent statements but that the error was harmless, that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s self-defense instruction, and that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence.
(6-3-0: Justice Beam concurred in part and in the result, joined by Chief Justice Randolph and Justice Maxwell)

NOTE – For some reason it jumped out that both Kitchens’s majority opinion and Beam’s concurrence utilized the superior (per Strunk & White) “-s’s” to make Williams’s name possessive.


Other Orders

In Re: Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi Bar, 89-R-99010-SCT (appointing Hon. Mark A. Maples as a member of the Complaint Tribunal)

In Re: Tavares Reed, 2017-M-01391 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding it frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing further applications in forma pauperis)

Moffett v. State, 2018-DR-00276-SCT (denying rehearing and/or reconsideration)

Thomas v. Boyd Biloxi LLC, 2021-CT-00265-SCT (granting cert)
NOTE – I did not recall this case from June. I looked back and realized it escaped my notice because it was an an off-cycle hand-down from the Court of Appeals on Thursday, June 2. The plaintiff slipped and fell on a pool deck after exiting a hot tub. A 5-1-4 Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment dismissing the case, holding that the evidence did not satisfy the standard to defeat summary judgment and that the trial court did not err in denying part of the plaintiff’s 56(f) request.


Hand Down List