Tag: 12(b)(6)

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 2, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions on Tuesday. Four are criminal appeals. The three civil cases involve child visitation modification, a 12(b)(6) motion, and a motion to compel arbitration.

Holifield v. State, 2023-KA-01320-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing the defendant’s heat-of-passion manslaughter instruction, that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence, and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and also declining to address the ineffective-assistance-of-appellate-counsel claim on direct appeal.
(8-2-0: Lassitter St. Pe’ for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing’ Westbrooks concurred in the result only without writing)

Rodgers v. State, 2024-KA-01116-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that there was sufficient evidence that he possessed a firearm on the date alleged in the indictment.
(9-0: Lassitter St. Pe’ for the Court)

Cosby v. State, 2024-KA-00518-COA, consolidated with Cosby v. State, 2024-KA-00522-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming two defendants’ convictions of sexual battery of a minor, holding that the trial court did not err by denying their motion for directed verdict or in denying their JNOV, that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, that the trial court did not err in failing to conduct a pretrial hearing on a tender-years issue, that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of witnesses, and that the plaintiff’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim lacked merit.
(10-0: Weddle for the Court)

Kirkland v. Kirkland, 2024-CA-00801-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s ruling on a visitation modification petition, holding that the chancellor did not abuse her discretion, commit clear error, or manifest error in denying the mother’s petition to modify visitation or in granting the father’s counterclaim for additional visitation.
(10-0: Weddle for the Court)

Martin v. Smith, 2024-CA-01027-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the trial court’s decision granting the defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion, holding that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently state claims for defamation, slander, malicious interference with employment, or intentional infliction of emotional distress under Mississippi’s pleading standard.
(7-2-1: Weddle for the Court; Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Barnes dissented without writing)

Jenkins v. Ford Motor Company, 2024-CA-00994-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the trial court’s decision granting a motion to compel arbitration, holding that although the defendant asserted arbitration in its answer waiting nearly one year before filing a motion to compel arbitration while engaging in the litigation process constituted failure to pursue it.
(6-4: Lawrence for the Court; Emfinger dissented, joined by Barnes, Wilson, and Lassitter St. Pe’)

Practice Point – Arbitration agreements have made a strong showing on here lately. Beware of recycled briefing on arbitration-related issues.

Butler v. State, 2024-KA-00821-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s imperfect self-defense instruction where the trial court also granted the defendant’s self-defense instruction.
(10-0: Westbrooks for the Court)

Other Orders

  • Green v. Presbyterian Day School, 2023-CA-01278-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Luster v. State, 2024-CA-00014-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Brownlee v. State, 2024-CA-00585-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Teel v. Boyd Biloxi, LLC, 2024-CP-00810-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Double Issue: Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of July 29, 2025 and August 5, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions last week and nine opinions today. With fifteen total opinions, there is something for everybody. Among the summaries below is a lawsuit filed on behalf of a minor who did not make his school’s baseball team.

July 29, 2025

Soto v. Mississippi Export Railroad Company, 2024-CA-00638-COA consolidated with Loveless v. Mississippi Export Railroad Company, 2024-CA-00639-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the railroad in a car wreck case, holding that the railroad had no statutory or contractual duty to maintain traffic control devices while the road crossing the railroad was in the midst of an resurfacing project.
(9-1-0: St. Pe’ for the Court; McDonald dissented without writing)

James v. Memorial Hospital at Gulfport, 2024-CA-00459-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Reversing summary judgment in a med mal case, holding that the plaintiffs’ response to the motion for summary judgment provided sufficient summary judgment proof including expert opinions and that the issue of whether a settled-defendant’s negligence was a superseding intervening act.
(10-0: Emfinger for the Court)

Strickland v. State, 2024-CP-00851-COA (Civil – PCR)
Reversing denial of PCR motion, holding that the indictment was void and remanding to set aside the guilty plea and for further consistent action.
(8-1-0: Lawrence for the Court; Carlton concurred in result only without writing; Emfinger did not participate)

Luster v. State, 2024-CA-00014-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not clearly earr in determining that proffered testimony was not newly discovered evidence.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks for the Court; McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

West v. Gulf Relay, LLC, 2024-WC-00816-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s order, holding that substantial evidence supported the Commission’s finding that the claimant sustained an 80% industrial loss of use of his left upper extremity but apportioning that loss of use by 95%.
(9-1-: Carlton for the Court; McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Ramsey v. State, 2023-CP-00440-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err in finding no merit to arguments that the guilty plea was involuntary and that counsel was ineffective.
(9-0: Barnes for the Court; St. Pe’ did not participate)

Other Orders

  • Jones v. State, 2022-KA-01124-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Ramsey v. State, 2023-CP-00440-COA (denying rehearing, substituting opinion)
  • 1st Step Sober Living LLC v. Cleveland, 2023-CA-00665-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Harris v. Casino Vicksburg, LLC, 2023-CA-00959-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Brooks v. State, 2023-KA-01081-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Jordan v. State, 2023-KA-01222-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

August 5, 2025

Polk v. State, 2024-KA-00591-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of sexual battery of a minor under fourteen, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sustaining a relevancy objection during cross-exam of the victim or in sustaining objections to questions about the victim’s character trait for truthfulness, and that the trial court did not commit plain error violating the Confrontation Clause.
(8-2-0: Weddle for the Court; Barnes and Westbrooks concurred in part and in the judgment without writing)

In the Matter of the Conservatorship of Bennett: Bennett v. Bennett, 2023-CA-01385-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the chancery court’s finding of criminal contempt for violation of of order prohibiting appellant from visiting his mother in an elder-care facility and distributing mass mailings about his mother and her court proceedings, holding that the finding of contempt did not violate his rights to due process, free speech, or counsel.
(8-1-0: McDonald for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Green v. Presbyterian Christian School, Inc., 2023-CA-01278-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming motion to dismiss, holding that the parents who sued a school over their son not making the baseball team failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
(7-2-1: Westbrooks for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger concurred in result only without writing; McCarty concurred in part and dissented in part without writing)

Johnson v. South Central Regional Medical Center, 2023-CA-00623-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming summary judgment dismissing a med mal case for failure to designate an expert witness, holding that the trial court did not err in granting the motion that was filed three years after the complaint was filed or in denying the plaintiff’s Rule 56(f) motion.
(10-0: Wilson for the Court)

Moyer v. Blades, 2023-CA-01180-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming dismissal for failure to prosecute, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice under Rule 37 after the plaintiffs failed to respond to discovery for over a year and then failed to comply with a court order compelling them to respond.
(6-3-0: Wilson for the Court; McDonald and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; Barnes did not participate)

Practice Point – I though this footnote was interesting from a civil defendant’s standpoint:

Goodloe v. State, 2023-KA-00960-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of two counts of sexual batter and one count of fondling and sentencing as violent habitual offender, holding that allowing an expert to testify about the victims’ truthfulness was harmless error because the evidence of guilt sufficiently outweighed any harm caused by the admission and that the defendant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to give an opening statement.
(7-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Swims v. State, 2023-KA-01244-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second degree murder and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing the instruct the jury on the Weathersby rule, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing lay testimony about blood on the ground, and that though the trial court abused its discretion in admitting an autopsy report and in allowing testimony that simply repeated the autopsy report those errors were cumulative of admissible evidence and harmless.
(8-2: Wilson for the Court; Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by McCarty in part)

Knox v. Alford, 2024-CA-00442-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the trial court’s order denying a Rule 60(b) motion to alter a judgment of a dismissal for want of prosecution, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that neither the plaintiff’s motion to leave his case on the docket filed in response to the clerk’s Rule 41 notice nor his request for a trial setting was a sufficient “action of record.”
(7-3: Barnes for the Court; Lawrence concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Westbrooks and McDonald and joined in part by McCarty)

Brownlee v. State, 2024-CA-00585-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Reversing and rendering the circuit court’s decision affirming MDOC’s denial of an ARP request for a parole-eligibility date, holding that MDOC lacked authority to disregard the sentencing court’s judgment and sentence even though the sentence was contrary to statute.
(6-1-3: Wilson for the Court; McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger dissented, joined by Lawrence and Weddle)

Other Orders

  • Phinizee v. State, 2023-KA-01090-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Caffey v. Forrest Health, 2023-CA-01232-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of May 15 and May 22, 2025

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions between last week and this week. One of today’s cases reversed the 12(b)(6) dismissal of a third-party-assault premises case in the face of the Landowners Protection Act that just might end up stirring the premises liability pot. There is also an interesting champerty decision answering a certified question from the Fifth Circuit.

May 15, 2025

Crabtree v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, 2024-FC-00827-SCT (Civil – Federally Certified Question)
Answering a certified quest from the Fifth Circuit, holding that Miss. Code Ann. § 97-9-11 (Rev. 2020) prohibits a disinterested third party engaged by a bankruptcy creditor from purchasing a cause of action from a debtor’s estate.
(5-4)

Other Orders

  • In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (granting rules committee’s motion to withdraw motion to amend Rule 7)
  • Chamberlin v. State, 2022-DR-00546-SCT (denying successor petition for PCR)
  • Short v. The Break Land Company, LLC, 2022-CT-01180-SCT (denying cert)
  • Carr v. State, 2023-DR-00503-SCT (directing Anthony Carr to notify the Court within 30 days of the federal district court’s ruling on the State’s motion; and that, until the federal district court rules on the motion to lift stay, Carr is directed to submit every 90 days from the entry of this order a status report on the posture of the federal case)

Hand Down Page

May 22, 2025

In the Matter of the Estate of Tatum: Haynie v. Estate of Tatum, 2023-CA-01366-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Dismissing appeal as moot, holding that a decision on the chancery court’s rulings involving the public sale of a one-half interest in a land and cattle company would be of no practical benefit to the appellant because the United States will receive any additional funds over and above what the appellant has already received.
(9-0)

Doby v. South Park Village Apartments, 2023-CA-01094-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of a personal injury, holding that under the state’s notice pleading standard the complaint sufficiently pleaded a negligence claim against an apartment complex after one of the plaintiffs was shot on the premises, but affirming dismissal as to the other plaintiff because the complaint contained no allegations as to him.
(9-0)

Practice Point – This is an fascinating result in an area of premises liability seems to have been gutted by the Landowners Protection Act that became law in 2019:

Other Orders

  • Harris v. State, 2023-CT-00460-SCT (denying cert)
  • Dollar General Corporation v. Dobbs, 2023-IA-00617-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • Lenoir v. State, 2023-IA-01181-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • Doukas v. Kiln Self Storage, 2023-CT-01195-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 11, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions today. Two criminal appeal (one with a reversal), a sales tax liability case, and a 12(b)(6) dismissal of a tort suit against an attorney for filing a motion to quash a post-trial deposition subpoena on behalf of a client.

McCoy V. Graham, 2024-CA-00286-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the DOR assessment of tax liabilities for failure to pay sales tax, holding that the evidence showed that the DOR filed its responsible person assessment within thirty-six months from the date the tax liability became final.
(10-0)

Sullivant v. Freeland, 2023-CP-01393-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming order granting motion to dismiss complaint and denying the motion to amend the complaint, holding that the plaintiff’s tort suit against an attorney who moved to quash the plaintiff’s post-trial deposition on behalf of a client in another case failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) and that any amendment would be futile.
(10-0)

Harper v. State, 2022-KA-00758-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming in part and reversing in part after convictions of three counts of culpable negligence manslaughter and one count of felony fleeing, holding that the prosecution for the offense of felony fleeing was not commenced within two years of the date of the offense and was therefore barred by the statute of limitations, and remanding for resentencing on the three counts of culpable negligence manslaughter.
(7-3: Westbrooks dissented, joined by McDonald, and Lawrence)

Jordan v. State, 2023-KA-01222-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Other Orders

  • Tisdale v. South Central Regional Medical Center, 2023-CA-00231-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Eason v. South Central Regional Medical Center, 2023-CA-00261-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Baker v. State, 2023-KA-01111-COA (recalling mandate to allow pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on its merits)
  • Collins v. State, 2024-TS-01333-COA (granting motion to proceed out of time)
  • Siggers v. State, 2025-TS-00041-COA (finding pro se appellant’s response to show-cause issue well taken)
  • Ashby v. State, 2025-TS-00076-COA (allowing appeal to proceed on the merits)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of June 11, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. There are four divorce-related decisions, two direct criminal appeals, a tort case dismissed for failure to state a claim, a negligence case dismissed for want of prosecution, and a PCR case.

Roley v. Roley, 2022-CP-01104-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancery court’s rulings in a divorce action, holding that that the chancellor did not err in denying appellant’s Rule 60 motion that was filed after the mandate from the appeal of the case had been entered because the mandate rule barred reconsideration and that the chancellor did not err in finding the appellant in contempt or in incarcerating him for it.
(8-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion; Lawrence did not participate)

Clark v. State, 2023-KA-00011-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of simple possession of a controlled substance, holding that after reviewing counsel’s Lindsey brief, appellant’s pro se brief, and the record that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and that there were no other issues to warrant reversal.
(10-0)

Scott v. State, 2022-KA-00830-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of touching a child for lustful purposes, nine counts of sexual battery, and one count of exploitation of a child, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for change of venue because the motion to change venue was procedurally defective and lacked merit.
(9-0)

Ware v. Ware, 2023-CA-00605-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s rulings in a divorce action, holding that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion finding that the martial home was a marital asset, in distributing the marital home equally between the parties, or in not making specific findings of fact and conclusions of law as to each Ferguson factor.
(10-0)

Hasley v. Hasley, 2023-CA-00914-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancellor’s ruling that temporary orders of separate maintenance had been converted to a final order of support, holding that the order being appealed was entered while the case was previously on appeal and that the issue sub judice was encompassed in the Court of Appeals’ prior ruling and remanding for further proceedings.
(8-2-0: Barnes and Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Archer v. Harlow’s Casino Resort & Spa, 2022-CP-01060-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the pro se plaintiff’s motion to amend her complaint after the initial complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim and failure to plead fraud with particularity, holding that the proposed amended complaint failed to state a claim for relief.
(10-0)

Pace v. Pace, 2022-CA-01259-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and vacating in part the chancellor’s rulings in a divorce matter related to the sale of a jointly owned commercial building, holding that the chancellor lacked jurisdiction to grant one party’s contempt motion but affirming the chancellor’s decision ordering that party to buy the other party’s interest in the property and denial of the Rule 59 motion.
(10-0)

Jiles v. State, 2023-CP-00383-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the dismissal of several PCR motions, holding that they were time-barred and successive and that and no exceptions applied, and that the remaining arguments were waived because he pleaded or because he did not raise them in the circuit court.
(10-0)

Ware v. Brown, 2023-CA-00663-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming dismissal of a negligence action for want of prosecution, holding that there was a clear record of delay including two granted motions to compel and a two-year effort to obtain one plaintiff’s relevant medical history, that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the complaint with prejudice in lieu of lesser sanctions.
(5-1(2?)-3(2?): Wilson and Smith concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part; joined by McCarty and Smith; Westbrooks did not participate.)

Other Orders

  • Patrick v. Patrick, 2021-CA-00891-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Okorie v. Nat’l Ass’n Wells Fargo Bank, 2022-CP-00043-COA (denying pro se motion for reconsideration)
  • Marshall v. State, 2022-KA-00541-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Roley v. Roley, 2022-CP-01104-COA (denying motions for reconsideration and for recusal of four judges of the Court of Appeals)
  • Hartzog v. State, 2024-TS-00033-COA (denying pro se “motion to show cause” and dismissing appeal)

Hand Down Page

Summaries of the Mississippi Court of Appeals opinions of March 15, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today with a little something for everybody. There are two real-property decisions, two PCR denials, one criminal conviction affirmed, and an MTCA/12(b)(6) decision.

DeSoto County v. Vinson,  2021-CA-00122-COA (Civil – Real Property/Division of Subdivision Lot)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision reversing a DeSoto County Board of Supervisors decision regarding the division of a subdivision lot into two separate residential lots, holding that the circuit court did not err in ruling that the properly owner should resubmit an application to divide property with written approval of “adversely affected” and “directly interested” parties or proceed under section 19-27-31 in chancery court.
(All judges concurred)

Land v. Land, 2021-CA-00402-COA (Civil – Real Property/Partition of Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s denial of complaint for partition, holding that chancellor did not err in ruling that the residential property claimed as homestead property by one party could only be partitioned by written agreement of the parties and could not be involuntarily partitioned by chancery court decree.
(All judges concurred)

Bridges v. State, 2020-CA-00816-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a motion for post-conviction relief, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the second PCR motion satisfied a statutory exemption to procedural bars and that the evidence did not show good cause for failing to provide additional affidavits.
(Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in result, joined by Judge McDonald and Judge Lawrence, and joined in part by Judge McCarty)

Jackson v. State, 2021-KA-00292-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery and filming a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and a sentence to serve consecutive terms of thirty years and forty years, holding that there were no arguable issues for appeal based upon a Lindsey brief and the Court’s independent review of the record.
(All judges concurred)

Horton v. State, 2021-CP-00383-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in ruling that the sentence was not unconstitutional and that his confession was voluntary.
(All judges concurred)

J.D. v. McComb School District, 2020-CA-00022-COA (Civil – Personal injury/Civil Procedure/12(b)(6))
Reversing the circuit court’s ruling granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, holding that the plaintiff’s allegations that a minor was attacked at school and that the school district had knowledge of similar conduct by the attacker and breached its ministerial duty to use ordinary care and to take reasonable steps to minimize foreseeable risk to the plaintiff.
(Judge Smith dissented, joined by Judge Greenlee and Judge Lawrence and joined in part by Judge Emfinger)

Practice Point: In footnote 6, the majority opinion addressed and rejected the dissent’s argument that the plaintiff should have included additional details regarding the alleged prior conduct of the attacker, summarizing the liberal pleading requirements of Rule 8:

Other Orders

None

Hand Down List Page