Category: Hand Down Summaries

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 13, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions today. There are several interesting criminal cases and a couple of PCR cases. But the two opinions that strike me as the most significant are a med mal case and a wills and estates case. The med mal decision reversed summary judgment for the hospital, holding that the layman’s exception to the usual expert witness requirement applied. The wills case addressed the effect of a decedent’s handwritten note forgiving a promissory note upon his death by “accident or sickness” after he died by suicide.

Barfield v. State, 2021-KA-00660-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of accessory after the fact to murder and denial of post-trial motions, holding that the evidence that the defendant was included in conversations leading up to the effort to conceal the victim’s body and was present (but did not physically participate) during those efforts was sufficient; that the trial court did not err in giving instructions on aiding and abetting, accomplice testimony, or the definitions of “conceal” and “participate,” or in refusing an instruction that the defendant had no duty to disclose the location of the body to the police; that the trial court did not err by allowing certain rebuttal testimony; that the trial court did not commit plain error in allowing testimony by State’s witnesses that they pleaded guilty to manslaughter and accessory after the fact.
(7-3: Judge McCarty dissented, joined by Judge Westbrooks and Judge McDonald)

Smith v. State, 2021-KA-01104-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court erred in excluding the entirety of the defendant’s firearms expert’s testimony but that this error was harmless and that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.
(8-2-0: Judge Wilson and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Holliday Construction, LLC v. George County, Mississippi, 2021-CA-00667-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming trial court’s decision stemming from the County’s award of contract for hurricane debris cleanup to an out-of-state company, holding that the County’s award was illegal but not arbitrary and capricious; that the trial court had authority to allow the County to reject all bids, re-advertise, and allow re-bids for the work; and that the trial court did not err in denying the plaintiff’s compensatory damages claim since the plaintiff failed to show it was entitled to the original award of the contract.
(8-1-1: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Carlton concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion)

Hornsby v. Hornsby, 2020-CA-01091-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions related to child support, holding that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in denying the father’s request for reduction in child support, did not err in finding that the mother was not in contempt, and did not err in awarding the mother attorney’s fees.
(7-0: Judge Carlton, Judge Lawrence, and Judge Smith did not participate)

Siggers v. State, 2021-CP-01180-COA (Civil – PCR)
Reversing denial of PCR motion for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the plaintiff did not need to obtain permission from the Mississippi Supreme Court to file his PCR motion.
(10-0)

Obert v. AABC Property Management, LLC, 2021-CA-00612-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s dismissal of two complaints for collection on two promissory notes, holding that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in finding that a handwritten note from the decedent stating that a $700,000 promissory note would be forgiven if he died by “accident or sickness” was a holographic codicil to his will or in ruling that his death by suicide was death by “sickness” because it was causally related to debilitating medical issues surrounding his prostate cancer.
(10-0)

Clark v. Vicksburg Healthcare, LLC, 2021-CA-00173-COA (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a hospital in a med mal case, holding that the layman’s exception to the typical expert requirement applied in this case where a nurse allowed a 10-day-old baby to fall to the floor and reversing the dismissal of that aspect of the suit, but affirming denial of the other med mal claims for lack of expert testimony.
(Judge Greenlee concurred in part (application of the layman’s exception) and dissented in part (he would have remanded with ruling on the remaining claims) joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Westbrooks, Judge McDonald, and Judge Lawrence)

Practice Point – The Court of Appeals noted that the layman’s exception had not previously been extended to “falls” cases, but distinguished this case from other “falls” cases involving post-op or elderly patients.

Colenberg v. State, 2021-CA-00673-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of motion for post-conviction collateral relief, holding that the circuit court did not err in ruling that the plaintiff failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that there was not sufficient factual basis for his guilty plea.
(5-4: Judge Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge McCarty, Judge Emfinger; Judge McDonald did not participate)

Other Orders

Gardner v. Jackson, 2020-CA-01313-COA (denying rehearing)

Johnson v. State, 2021-KA-00571-COA (denying rehearing)

Phillips v. City of Oxford, 2021-CA-00639-COA (denying rehearing)

Guinn v. Claiborne, 2021-CP-00997-COA (denying rehearing)

Jones v. State, 2021-CP-01088-COA (denying rehearing)

Young v. State, 2022-CP-00141-COA (granting pro se appellant’s pro se motion to recall mandate)

Ross v. State, 2022-TS-00901-COA (denying appellant’s pro se motion to show cause and dismissing untimely appeal)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 8, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down to five opinions today. One wades into a contingency-fee contract dispute, one is a statutory interpretation case involving the bond for appeals by former public school employees, one addresses the admissibility of a defendant’s lay testimony that he suffers from PTSD, and two are related to Bar disciplinary proceedings.

Gilmer v. McRae, 2021-CA-00028-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the trial court’s dismissal of a complaint stemming from a dispute over a contingency fee arrangement and its award of attorney’s fees, holding that the defendant’s attorneys (who were also defendants) were immune from suit as they were acting in their capacity as attorneys, there was no abuse of discretion in awarding attorney’s fees against the plaintiff, and there was no abuse of discretion in denying the plaintiff’s amended motion to amend.
(9-0)

Greenville Public School District v. Thomas, 2021-IA-00456-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming on interlocutory appeal the chancellor’s decision setting the bond for an appeal by a former public school district employee, holding that section 37-9-113(2) does not require a bond to cover the cost of the transcript and that there was no abuse of discretion in setting the bond at the statutory minimum of $200.
(8-1-0: Justice Ishee concurred in part and and in the result)

Bland v. State, 2021-KA-00973-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err by excluding the defendant’s lay testimony claiming he suffered from PTSD.
(5-4-0: Justice Kitchen concurred in part and in the result, joined by Justice King, Justice Coleman, and Justice Ishee–this concurrence opined that the exclusion was error but that the error was harmless)

Louvier v. The Mississippi Bar, 2022-BR-00205-SCT (Civil – Bar Matters)
Granting reinstatement over the Bar’s opposition.
(9-0)

The Mississippi Bar v. Petty, 2022-BD-00402-SCT (Civil – Bar Matters)
Ordering public reprimand and payment of the Bar’s costs.
(9-0)

Other Orders

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (appointing or reappointing members of the Advisory Committee on Rules)

Daniels v. Family Dollar Stores of Mississippi, Inc., 2021-CT-00781-SCT (denying cert where COA affirmed summary judgment for defendant in slip and fall case as summarized here) [*Corrected link]

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 6, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals wore me out with nine opinions today. There is something for just about everybody below including crimes, conservatorships, and contracts. One case includes a nightmare scenario where an order of dismissal was entered and the plaintiff’s attorney did not receive notice of it until well after the appeal deadline passed, and there is a special concurrence shining a beacon of hope for litigants who find themselves in this situation.

McLendon v. State, 2022-CP-00057-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming summary denial of a motion for post-conviction collateral relief, holding that a proper factual basis was shown as to each element of the offense during the guilty plea.
(10-0)

Davis v. State, 2021-KA-00759-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of armed robbery and kidnapping, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for mistrial based on inadmissible testimony from the police chief that the defendant had been previously incarcerated for burglary.
(7-3-0: Judge McDonald specially concurred, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Greenlee, and Judge Westbrooks; Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.

N0te – Here is how the trial court handled the inadmissible testimony:

Owens v. State, 2021-KA-00887-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a business, holding that the conviction was not against the weight of the evidence .
(7-3: Judge McCarty dissented, joined by Judge Westbrooks and Judge McDonald)

Note – The dissent argued that the conviction was against the weight of the evidence and discussed the evidence that was presented. The dissent embedded into the opinion stills from surveillance videos that were shown to the jury was extremely helpful in understanding the evidence that was presented and that was being discussed.

State v. Hudson, 2021-KA-01232-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Dismissing the State’s appeal of a directed verdict of acquittal, holding that the appeal was not authorized by section 99-35-103(b) because the issues on appeal did not present the Court with a pure question of law.
(10-0)

The Banking Group, Inc. v. Southern Bancorp Bank, 2021-CA-01077-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of the defendants on a breach of contract and fraud complaint related to fees the defendant allegedly owed the plaintiff for recruitment services, holding that there was a fact dispute over the existence of a contract.
(9-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Atkins v. Moore, 2021-CA-00780-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s final judgment approving a conservator’s final accounting, holding that the conservator had not misspent or converted funds and that the plaintiff was not otherwise entitled to relief.
(9-1-0: Judge Westbrooks specially concurred, joined by Judge McDonald and joined in part by Judge McCarty)

Note – The Court of Appeals took issue with several aspects of the proceedings below, but found none warranted reversal. Here is the Court’s conclusion:

Another Note – This opinion cites a post by Jane Stroble Miller from Judge Larry Primeaux’s The Better Chancery Court Practice Blog, noting that it “provides a very helpful discussion on the need for ‘vouchers’ to support and accounting.” I fail to see a downside in favorably citing law blogs in judicial opinions.

Rhea v. Career General Agency, Inc., 2021-CA-00580-COA (Civil – Contract)
Dismissing the appeal in part and affirming in part, holding that the Court did not have jurisdiction to review the order granting the motion to dismiss where it was not timely filed because counsel did not receive notice of the judgment and dismissing that part of the appeal and affirming the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider.
(8-2-0: Judge McCarty specially concurred, joined by Judge Greenlee, Judge Westbrooks, Judge McDonald, Judge Lawrence, and Judge Smith; Judge Emfinger concurred in the result only without separate written opinion)

Practice Point – Judge McCarty’s special concurrence highlights a lifeline to litigants in the unfortunate situation of not receiving notice of an appealable judgment until after the deadline to file a notice of appeal:

Note – It is a credit to the appellee and appellee’s counsel for not arguing untimeliness under these circumstances at any point in the process.

DeSoto County v. Vinson, 2021-CC-00864-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s reversal of the DeSoto County Board of Supervisors’ approval of a landowner’s application to subdivide a residential lot, holding that the landowner’s failure to accompany the application with names of persons adversely affected or directly interested and their signatures approving the division violated section 17-1-23(4).
(8-1-1: Judge Emfinger concurred in the result only without separate written; Judge Wilson dissented)

Burchett v. State, 2021-KA-00776-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder, holding that there was no evidence to supporting a lesser-included instruction on heat of passion manslaughter.
(8-1-1: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined in part by Judge McDonald)

Other Orders

Young v. Freese & Goss, PLLC, 2020-CA-01280-COA (denying rehearing)

Simpson County School District v. Wigley, 2021-CA-00009-COA (denying rehearing)

Boyd v. State, 2021-KA-00066 (denying rehearing)

Nguyen v. Bui, 2021-CP-00538-COA (denying rehearing)

McGilberry v. Ross, 2021-CP-01076 (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 1, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. The first addresses the applicable standards for taking testimony of minors 12 or older in custody disputes. The other is a 5-4 split on whether a minor can be bound by a noncompete that covers intellectual property and provides for liquidated damages under the exception for contracts “affecting personal property.”

Denham v. Denham, 2020-CT-00675-SCT (Civil – Custody)
Affirming and part and reversing in part a chancellor’s rulings in a custody dispute, holding that the chancellor applied the incorrect legal standard in deciding that the children could not testify and erred by failing to record the in-chambers interviews, that a parent does not have an absolute right to call an unemancipated teenager to testify in open court, and that if one parent is permitted to present evidence of adultery the other parent must also have the opportunity to present such evidence.
(9-0)

NOTE – This opinion has an interesting discussion of the tender years exception as it applies to teenagers on page 13:

Watercolor Salon, LLC v. Hixon, 2021-IA-01151-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of a salon’s motion for TRO and preliminary injunction against a former employee who was 20-years-old when she signed a noncompete, holding that it was not fundamentally a contract affecting personal property and that it was unenforceable since the former employee disaffirmed the contract.
(5-4: Chief Justice Randolph concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Justice Chamberlin, Justice Ishee, and Justice Griffis.)

NOTE – Here is the Court’s summary of its rationale for its holding that the employment contract was not a contract “affecting personal property”:

Other Orders

Loden v. State, 2002-DP-00282-SCT (granting motion to set execution date)

Brewer v. Bush, 2020-CT-00214-SCT (denying cert)

Gordon v. Dickerson, 2020-CT-00601-SCT (denying rehearing)

Seals v. Stanton, 2020-CA-00741-SCT (denying rehearing)

Pipkin v. State, 2021-CT-00517-SCT (denying cert)

Pickle v. State, 2021-CT-00972-SCT (denying cert)

Luster v. State, 2022-M-00248 (granting application for leave to proceed on filing petition for post-conviction collateral relief in the trial court)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 29, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals returned from Thanksgiving break with five opinions. Two cases are medical malpractice cases (one an appeal of summary judgment for lack of expert testimony and the other an appeal of a denied motion to compel arbitration). Two are criminal cases, and the other case is a custody case with cross motions for modification and a motion for contempt.

Davis v. State, 2021-KA-00908-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree, deliberate design murder, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the defense’s cross-examination of a detective to exclude testimony about other investigations and noting that the Confrontation Clause does not open the door to irrelevant testimony on cross-examination.
(10-0)

Mixon v. Berry, 2021-CA-00494-COA (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a doctor in a med mal case for lack of medical expert testimony, holding that summary judgment was proper because the plaintiff failed to produce sworn expert testimony to establish the applicable standard of care, breach, and proximate cause, and that the trial court did not err in not granting a 56(f) continuance that was not requested or in denying the motion for reconsideration.
(10-0)

Practice Point – Here is some useful black-letter law from this opinion:

Turnage v. State, 2021-KA-01229-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of a high school teacher of two counts of sexual battery of a student, holding that there were no issues warranting reversal after reviewing appellate counsel’s Lindsey brief and independently reviewing the record.
(10-0)

Lamy v. Lamy, 2021-CA-00770-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancery court’s rulings on competing complaints for modification and a motion for contempt, holding that the chancellor did not err in admitting evidence used by the GAL and attached to her report, did not err in classifying one agreed custody order as temporary but did err by interpreting that order as awarding sole physical custody to the mother, and did not err in not finding the mother in contempt.
(5-1-4: Judge McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Westbrooks, and Judge McCarty concurred in part and in dissent in part without separate written opinion; Judge Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Westbrooks, and Judge McCarty, and joined in part by Judge McDonald.)

Note – In response to the motion for contempt, the mother pleaded COVID in her explanation of why she kept the children during the father’s period of custody. The dissent didn’t buy the excuse:

Durant Healthcare, LLC v. Garrette, 2021-CA-00823-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming denial of a motion to compel arbitration in a wrongful death case, holding that the evidence in the record supported the trial court’s finding that the resident lacked the mental capacity to sign the nursing home’s arbitration agreement on the date of admission, that the resident’s daughter did not have authority to sign as his agent, and that the proof was sufficiently clear to affirm the trial court’s denial of the facility’s request for arbitration-related discovery.
(7-3: Judge Carlton dissented, joined by Judge Wilson and Judge Lawrence.)

Other Orders

Turner & Associates P.L.L.C. v. Estate of Watkins, 2021-CA-00258-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 22, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions before making a break for the turkey this week. There is a custody case reviewing a contempt order related to visitation rights, a civil asset forfeiture case, a previously-decided MTCA wrongful death case with a substituted opinion, a real property contract case with a claim by the would-be purchaser for specific performance or damages, and a couple of PCR cases.

Kay v. Kay, 2021-CA-01377-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancery court’s contempt ruling, holding that there was substantial credible evidence supporting the finding of the father willfully failed to comply with visitation guidelines and denied the mother visitation rights but reversing the part of the order directing the children to report to jail if they chose not participate in future scheduled visitation with their mother.
(10-0)

McDonald v. State, 2021-CP-01040-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the denial of a PCR motion, holding that the circuit court had jurisdiction to resentence the plaintiff and that there was no merit to the claims that the guilty plea was not voluntary or for ineffective assistance of counsel.
(1o-0)

Parker v. State, 2021-CP-01102-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of a PCR motion, holding that the plaintiff did not overcome the time bar, there was no merit to his claims that he was wrongly sentenced as a habitual offender, and the illegal-sentence claim was waived by meritless anyway.
(9-1-0: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Forty-One Thousand Eighty Dollars v. State, 2021-CA-00692-COA (Civil – Other/Civil Asset Forfeiture)
Affirming seizure of case, holding that the funds were subject to forfeiture, the argument that the K-9 alerted to the cash because the case was contaminated was unpersuasive, and that the forfeiture was not grossly disproportionate.
(8-1-0: Judge Westbrooks concurred in the result only without separate written opinion; Judge Emfinger did not participate.)

Simmons v. Jackson County, Mississippi, 2020-CA-01014-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Denying a motion for rehearing but substituting a new opinion, but still affirming circuit court’s ruling that the county bore no responsibility for a driver’s fatal accident that occurred when his vehicle left the road and struck a culvert, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the circuit court’s finding that the driver’s negligence in failing to exercise vigilant caution as he drove through a work zone was the sole proximate cause of the accident.
(7-3: Judge Westbrooks dissented, joined by Judge Carlton and Judge McDonald.)

NOTE – Since the old opinion is no longer available, I am not sure what changed. Apparently what I took away as the core holding did not change because my prior summary still seems to fairly characterize the opinion.

Haidar v. Margetta, 2021-CA-00683-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the chancery court’s dismissal of a purchaser’s claim for specific performance or damages after the seller refused to honor the contract after the initial closing date passed, holding that time is not automatically of the essence in real estate transactions and there was no evidence in the record to establish that time was of the essence here.
(6-1-3: Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Greenlee dissented, joined by Chief Judge Barnes and Judge Carlton, and joined in part by Judge Westbrooks)

Other Orders

Murry v. State, 2020-KA-01363-COA (denying rehearing)

Wilson v. Lexington Manner Senior Care, LLC, 2021-CA-00072-COA (denying rehearing)

Wilson v. City of Greenville, 2021-CA-00316-COA (denying rehearing)

White v. White, 2021-CP-00333-COA (denying rehearing)

Beasley v. State, 2021-CA-00653-COA (denying rehearing)

Mitchell v. MDES, 2021-CC-00795-COA (denying pro se motion for rehearing as untimely)

Norwood v. State, 2021-CA-00802-COA (denying rehearing)

Patrick v. State, 2022-TS-00683-COA (dismissing appeal as moot)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 17, 2022

I did not post Court of Appeals decisions on Tuesday because I was in an all-day deposition and went from there to a pinewood derby. I will try to catch up on those later. But today the Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions. One deals with the MTCA’s venue provisions in a wrongful-death case and the other disposes of an appeal of felony convictions and sentencing with an interesting Fourth Amendment analysis.

Jones County v. Estate of Bright, 2021-IA-00631-SCT (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Reversing the circuit court’s denial of venue change in an MTCA case stemming from a police chase that killed a bystander, holding on interlocutory appeal that under the MTCA venue was only proper in the counties where the administrative offices of the political-subdivision defendants are located (Jones or Lauderdale), and not where the acts or omissions occurred (Pearl River) because the state was not a named defendant.
(8-0: Chief Justice Randolph did not participate)

Fisher v. State, 2021-KA-00828-SCT (Civil – Felony)
Affirming convictions of drug possession and trafficking charges and sentencing as a habitual offender, holding that the defendant was not denied the right to testify on his own behalf where the record was silent as to whether he wanted to testify, that there was no Fourth Amendment search when officers climbed a ladder in a common area with the building owner’s permission to look into the defendant’s ceilingless storage unit, and that resentencing was not necessary because the trial court imposed the mandatory minimum for the aggravated trafficking conviction not on his habitual offender status that was determined without sufficient evidence.
(9-0)

Other Orders

In Re: Commission on Mandatory Continuing Legal Education, 89-R-99011-SCT (granting Petition of the Mississippi Commission on Continuing Legal Education allowing attorneys to complete their CLE obligations set forth in Rule 3 through online, webinars or live, in-person programs for the 2022-2023 CLE reporting year)

In Re: Rules Governing Admission to the Mississippi Bar, 89-R-99012-SCT (granting Petition to Amend the Rules Governing Admission to the Mississippi Bar filed by the Mississippi Board of Bar Admissions; denying Petition to Amend Rule IV §8 of the Rules Governing Admission to the Mississippi Bar filed by Jefferson Carl Harvey on April 21, 2022 and the Emergency Petition to Amend Rule IV Section 8 of the Rules Governing Admission to the Mississippi Bar filed by Applicant 11596 on June 25, 2021; and dismissing Petition for Ruling Regarding Motion #2022-1321 A/K/A “Petition to Amend the Rules Governing Admission to the Mississippi Bar” filed by Jefferson Carl Harvey on October 31, 2022)

Rules for Court Reporters, 89-R-99021-SCT (amending The Rules and Regulations Governing Certified Court Reporters)

Beale v. State, 2020-CT-00614-SCT (granting cert)

Devine v. Cardinal Health 101, LLC, 2020-CT-01101-SCT (granting joint motion to suspend cert proceedings and dismiss cert petition as moot)

Adams v. State, 2020-CT-01383-SCT (denying cert)

Adams v. State, 2020-CT-01383-SCT (denying pro se cert petition)

Watts v. State, 2021-KA-00873-SCT (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 10, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two interesting opinions today. One dealt the final blow in a lawsuit a former judge of the Mississippi Court of Appeals filed against a sitting US Congressman. The other is a case of first impression dealing with the federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act.

James v. Thompson, 2021-CA-00458-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming dismissal of a lawsuit against a U.S. Congressman, holding Mississippi law does not provide relief for the plaintiff’s claims of tortious interference with the election and her job as a judge on the Mississippi Court of Appeals.
(4-0: Justice Kitchens, Justice King, Justice Coleman, and Justice Griffis did not participate)

NOTE – The plaintiff’s claim stemmed from a “sample ballot” distributed by Congressman Thompson:

Carr v. Mississippi Lottery Corporation, 2021-CA-01304-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming the trial court’s decisions in a case of first impression interpreting and applying the federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove that he lawfully registered and used five domain names that infringed on the Mississippi Lottery mark under the ACPA and that the trial court did not err in consolidating the hearing for preliminary injunction with a trial on the merits, by denying the plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint, or by denying the plaintiff’s motion to dissolve or modify the permanent injunction.
(9-0)

Other Orders

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (authorizing and directing the disbursement of $20,000.00 from the Court’s Judicial System Operation Fund to the Mississippi Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Rules for its necessary work through September 30, 2023)

Manning v. State, 2020-CA-01096-SCT (denying rehearing)

Wall v. Wall, 2020-CT-01096-SCT (denying cert)

McGee v. Neel Schaffer Engineers and Planners Inc., 2020-CT-01277-SCT (denying cert)

Wofford v. State, 2020-CT-01341-SCT (denying cert)

James v. Thompson, 2021-CA-00458-SCT (denying motion for sanctions for frivolous appeal)

Unifund CCR Partners v. Estate of Jordan, 2021-CT-00761-SCT (denying cert)

Harris v. State, 2022-M-00417 (vacating sentence to serve a term of life without parole and remanding to the trial court for resentencing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 8, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals covered a lot of territory in six opinions handed down today. They areas covered include divorce, criminal issues, MTCA police-protection immunity, third-party liability for work injuries, criminal, and one PCR case for good measure.

King v. State, 2021-CA-01145-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a PCR motion, holding that there was no merit to the claim that his guilty plea was not voluntary or to his ineffective assistance claim.
(9-0: Judge Emfinger did not participate)

Owens v. State, 2021-KA-01256-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm after receiving a Lindsey brief, receiving no pro se brief, and reviewing the record and concluding no issue warranted reversal.
(9-0: Judge Smith did not participate)

Blount v. State, 2021-KA-00204-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth after a jury trial in absentia, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s request for a continuance after concluding that the defendant waived his right to be present at trial.
(7-1-2: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McDonald concurred in the result only without separate written opinion; Judge McCarty dissented, joined in part by Judge McDonald.)

Practice Point – Don’t possess meth and then miss your trial date. As Bob Dylan reminds us, “To live outside the law, you just be honest.”

Alves-Hunter v. Hunter, 2021-CA-00644-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming decisions in a divorce proceeding, holding that the chancellor did not commit reversible error in awarding the father standard visitation with their child, dividing the martial estate, or denial of attorneys fees after a contempt finding.
(10-0)

Tennesen v. City of Hattiesburg, 2021-CA-00137-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies/MTCA)
Affirming judgment for the defendants in a personal injury case brought under the MTCA stemming from a police chase, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the police officer did not act with reckless disregard and that the City was entitled to police-protection immunity.

Mayberry v. Cottonport Hardwoods, 2021-CA-00246-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of a defendant in a third-party lawsuit arising from a workers’ comp injury, holding that the defendant at issue was not an “up the line” contractor but instead was the owner of the project and was therefore a third-party not entitled to exclusive remedy immunity.
(6-4: Judge Carlton dissented, joined by Judge Greenlee, Judge McCarty, and Judge Smith.)

Practice Point – This is a fact-intensive opinion. It does not appear to disturb the general rule that “up the line” contractors are entitled to MWCA immunity as long as they are true contractors.

Other Orders

Moffett v. State, 2021-KA-00622-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 3, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down no opinions today. The hand-down list had three orders, one was an interesting cert grant in a criminal case.

Powers v. State, 2017-DR-00696-SCT (denying the State’s Motion to Dismiss Petitioner’s Motion to Rehear the Court’s June 21, 2022 Order Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Hold PCR Proceedings in Abeyance)

Manuel v. State, 2020-CT-00711-SCT (granting cert)

Here is the COA opinion in Manuel v. State. The dissent's contention was limited to the sentencing as a habitual offender. Specifically, the dissent concluded that the habitual-offender portions of the sentence were not supported by sufficient evidence and should be reversed under plain error review.

Manuel v. State, 2020-KA-00711-COA (Criminal – Felony/Excited Utterance)
Affirming convictions and sentences for second-degree murder and aggravated assault, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by (1) admitting testimony under the excited-utterance hearsay exception, (2) excusing a juror mid-trial for failure to disclose information during voir dire, (3) collecting the parties’ jury panel information sheets following jury selection and placing them under seal, or (4) sentencing the defendant as a habitual offender.
(Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Judge McDonald and Judge McCarty; Judge McDonald and Judge McCarty concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion; and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

The cert petition led with the sentencing issue, but also raised issues related to the trial court's finding that certain defense witnesses' testimony was hearsay and not excited utterances and the trial court's admission of State witness testimony under that hearsay exception.

Edwards v. State, 2021-CT-00259-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List