Tag: Bad Faith

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 5, 2024

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down six opinions today covering personal jurisdiction, waiver of defenses, venue, bad faith, death penalty PRC, and direct criminal appeal. There are also orders amending Rule 10 and Rule 12 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure.

Palmer v. McRae, 2023-CP-01026-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s order enforcing sureties’ liability, holding that the appellant’s arguments on appeal were waived and procedurally barred on appeal because he failed to appear or otherwise defend in the circuit court.
(8-1-0: King concurred in result only without writing)

Mississippi Department of Human Services v. Johnson, 2022-CT-00605-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing the chancery court’s and Court of Appeals’ decisions related to a motion to set aside a 2002 paternity order, holding that while the chancery court lacked personal jurisdiction due to insufficient service of process under Rule 81(d), the defendant waived that challenged by stipulating to the validity of the 2002 order in 2003.
(6-3-0: Randolph concurred in part and in result without writing; Griffis concurred in part and in result, joined by Maxwell and joined in part by Randolph)

Boyett v. Cain, 2022-CT-00978-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing the circuit court and the Court of Appeals, holding that they erred in finding that the proper venue for a prisoner to challenge an MDOC decision is the county in which the prisoner is located and clarifying that Section 11-11-3 controls and venue is proper in a county in which a defendant resides or in a county where a substantial act or even caused the alleged injury.
(9-0)

United Services Automobile Association v. Estate of Minor, 2023-CA-00049-SCT (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming a jury award of punitive damages in a bad faith claim on direct appeal but reversing the trial court’s denial of a post-trial motion for attorney’s fees, holding (1) that the trial court did not err in submitting the issue of punitive damages to the jury, (2) that the trial court did not err in submitting what he deemed to be a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees (the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ contingency fee), (3) that the $10M punitive damages award was within the Campbell guideline, (4) that trial court did not err in instructing the jury that adjusters were charged with knowledge of all records at all times, in denying the carrier’s request to depose the insured, or in excluding the insured’s bribery convictions, (5) and rendering a judgment awarding attorney’s fees of $4.5M plus post-judgment interest based on a 45% contingency fee on the punitive damages award.
(5-3: Maxwell concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Chamberlin and joined in part by Griffis; Griffis dissented, joined in part by Maxwell; Coleman did not participate)

Corrothers v. State, 2023-CA-00401-SCT (Civil – Death Penalty – Post Conviction)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the petitioner failed to prove improper juror communication.
(7-2-0: Kitchens and King concurred in result only without writing)

Mitchell v. State, 2023-KA-00859-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury and dismissing the ineffective assistance of counsel claims without prejudice.
(8-1-0: Ishee concurred, joined in part by Randolph and Beam)

Other Orders

  • In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (amending Rule 10 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure) (deleting subsection (d) that required a copy of an account or written instrument to be attached to the pleading asserting a claim founded on such)
  • In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (amending Rule 12 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure) (Advisory Committee Historical Notes states that was done to consistently refer to an “answer” to a counterclaim rather than a “reply”)
  • Landrum v. Livingston Holdings, LLC, 2022-CA-00498-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • Clemmons v. State, 2022-CT-00700-SCT (denying cert)
  • Brown v. Black, 2022-CT-00869 (denying cert)
  • Boyett v. Cain, 2022-CT-00978-SCT (denying motion for reconsideration)
  • Johnson v. State, 2023-CA-00117-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • Wells v. State, 2023-KA-00670-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • In Re: Andrew McGraw, 2024-M-00654 (denying application to proceed in the trial court, finding that the application is frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing further PCR applications in forma pauperis)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 25, 2024

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions on Thursday. One is an appeal seeking to set aside a foreclosure sale. The other is an appeal of summary judgment dismissing a workers’ comp bad faith claim that addresses whether an employer’s duties under the MWCA can be delegated to a third-party administrator.

Evans v. MC & J Investments, LLC, 2022-CA-01248-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancery court’s refusal to set aside a foreclosure sale, holding that although the statute of frauds does not bar recovery when promissory estoppel is appropriate there was no evidence of reliance in this case and that the trial court did not err in finding that the foreclosure sale price was not so inadequate as to shock the conscience.
(9-0)

Hardaway v. Howard Industries, Inc., 2022-CA-00787-SCT (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of an employer in a bad faith lawsuit that followed after the plaintiff’s denied comp claim was found to be compensable by the Commission, holding that the self-insured employer’s administrative duty under the MWCA was delegable and the employer had delegated its duties to a third-party administrator and that the employer’s conduct did not rise to the level of gross negligence.
(9-0)

PRACTICE POINT – This is an important paragraph for future litigants addressing the impact of deposition testimony about legal duties:

Other Orders

In Re: Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi Bar, 89-R-99010-SCT (appointing Hon. Dal Williamson, Circuit Judge, as a member of the Complaint Tribunal from the entry of this order through 8/31/26 for the balance of the term of Hon. Claiborne “Buddy” McDonald IV, Circuit Judge, deceased)

Shoemaker v. State, 2019-M-00832 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the application frivolous, and warning that future frivolous filings could result in sanctions)

Manley v. Manley, 2021-CT-00700-SCT (denying cert)

Knight v. State, 2021-CT-01192-SCT (denying cert)

SDBT Archives LLC v. Penn-Star Insurance Company, 2022-CT-00099-SCT (granting cert)

Brandi’s Hope Company Services, LLC v. Walters, 2022-CT-00188-SCT (denying cert)

West v. State, 2022-CT-00432-SCT (denying cert)

Hill v. State, 2022-CT-00524-SCT (denying cert)

Winston v. State, 2022-CT-00747-SCT (dismissing cert petition as untimely)

Francis v. State, 2022-CA-00964-SCT (denying rehearing)

Harris v. State, 2022-KA-01113-SCT (denying rehearing)

Bell v. State, 2022-CT-01141-SCT (denying cert)

Harvey v. State, 2023-CT-00157-SCT (dismissing cert petition as untimely)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of May 9, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine ten opinions today. There are two direct criminal appeals, a divorce case, a bad faith insurance case, an appeal of the suspension of police officers, a construction bid appeal, and two PCR cases.

Durr v. State, 2021-KA-01109-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of conspiracy to commit armed robbery, capital murder, armed robbery, and aggravated assault, holding that ineffective assistance claim based on Defendant’s representation by the same public defender’s office that represented codefendents who testified against Defendant should be dismissed without prejudice and that if there was error in admitting a codefendant’s affidavit as substantive it was harmless.
(8-2: Westbrooks dissented, joined by McDonald; McDonald also dissented without separate written opinion.)

Hughes v. State, 2021-CP-01241-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion to vacate PRS revocation and imposition of suspended sentence, holding that the circuit court did not err in ruling based on absconscion.
(10-0)

Sanders v. State, 2022-KA-00351-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of failing to update sex offender registration, holding based upon review of a Lindsey Brief, review of a pro se brief, and the record that there were no arguable issues that would warrant reversal.
(10-0)

Adams v. City of Jackson, 2021-CC-00454-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision affirming the suspension of two officers for engaging in a pursuit while Jackson had a no-pursuit policy, holding that the clear and substantial evidence showed that there was no “pursuit” where an officer initiated a traffic stop and followed the suspect for just over a mile at between 10-20mph.
(8-1: McDonald dissented without separate written opinion; Westbrooks did not participate.)

Davis v. Davis, 2021-CA-01246-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part a chancellor’s judgment of divorce, holding there was no error in granting divorce on the grounds of adultery but holding that the chancellor did not properly classify and value certain assets and debts and remanded for proper classification and valuations.
(8-2-0: Wilson and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

PRACTICE POINT – Make the trial court’s job easy! It is good advocacy and it is the humane thing to do.

Watkins v. State, 2021-CP-01301-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that all issues were procedurally barred and without merit.
(9-1-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Groves v. State, 2021-KA-00755-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of kidnapping and armed robbery, holding that the circuit court did not err in allowing the use of the word “victim” to describe the victim, that the claim of prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments was procedurally barred and without merit, and that the verdict was supported by substantial evidence and was not against the overwhelming weight of it.
(10-0)/

Gregory Construction Services, Inc. v. Miss. Dept. of Finance and Admin., 2021-SA-00765-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming determination that a contractor’s denied construction bid was non-responsive for failing to include a one-page federal form, holding that there were no due process considerations since the plaintiff had no vested property interest in the denied bid and the agencies’ decisions were supported by substantial evidence and reasoning.
(9-0: McCarty did not participate.)

Holloway v. Nat’l Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 2021-CA-01066-COA (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming summary judgment in a bad faith case alleging that a reservation of rights was in bad faith and caused emotional distress even though the carrier ultimately funded a settlement to secure a release of all claims against the insured, holding that the carrier had a legitimate basis for defending under a reservation of rights.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion.)

Other Orders

Liberty Nat’l Life Ins. Co. v. Hancock, 2021-CA-00605-COA (denying rehearing)

Moreland v. Spears, 2021-CA-00714-COA (denying rehearing)

Lamy v. Lamy, 2021-CA-00770-COA (denying rehearing)

Colburn v. State, 2021-KA-00865-COA (denying rehearing)

Brooks v. Jeffreys, 2021-CA-01113-COA (denying rehearing)

Nunn v. State, 2021-KA-01371-COA (recalling mandate to allow pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on the merits)

MS Concrete and Benchmark Ins. Co. v. Harris, 2022-WC-01095-COA (denying motion for rehearing of dismissal of appeal)

Hunter v. State, 2022-TS-01269-COA (granting motion for reconsideration and denying motion for appointment of counsel)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of August 25, 2022

After a full day of lawyering on the road, here are my summaries of today’s decisions from the Mississippi Supreme Court. There is a decision in a dispute between a report and the Secretary of State over use and development of tidelands, a decision in a reimbursement dispute between the Division of Medicaid and a nursing home, and a decision in a workers’ comp bad faith case analyzing whether a compromise settlement of a comp claim on a denied basis constituted an exhaustion of administrative remedies.

State v. Long Beach Harbor Resort, LLC, 2021-CA-00430-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the resort, holding that the Secretary of State’s lease with the city related to development and use of tidelands had ratified a prior lease between the city and the resort and therefore the State had no right to require the resort to enter into a separate tidelands lease.
(9-0)

Mississippi Division of Medicaid v. Yalobusha County, 2021-SA-00030-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the chancery court’s ruling in a dispute between the DOM and a nursing home over costs the facility submitted for reimbursement on its Medicaid cost report, holding that the DOM correctly interpreted statutes and its decisions denying the costs at issue were supported by substantial evidence.
(7-2: Justice Griffis dissented, joined by Justice Maxwell)

Thornhill v. Walker-Hill Environmental, 2020-CT-01181-SCT (Civil – Torts/Bad Faith)
Affirming the Court of Appeals’ decision reversing the circuit court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s workers’ comp bad faith suit, holding that the plaintiff’s 9(I) settlement of his workers’ comp claim without a finding of compensability constituted an exhaustion of his administrative remedies and the circuit court therefore had jurisdiction to hear the bad faith claim.
(9-0)

ADDENDUM – A point of contention in Thornhill was the Supreme Court’s prior holding in Miss. Power & Light Co. v. Cook, 832 So. 2d 474 (Miss. 2002). In Cook, the Supreme Court held that a 13(j) indemnity-only settlement under Miss. Code Ann. § 71-3-37(10) constituted exhaustion of administrative remedies. The Employer/Carrier in Thornhill argued that Cook did not apply in this case because the plaintiff in Thornhill had settled on a compromise basis and compensability was never admitted or determined by the Commission. But the Court of Appeals dug into the record in Cook and determined that the Supreme Court in Cook mislabeled the settlement in that case. The Cook settlement was actually a 9(i) settlement under § 71-3-29 (i.e. full and final settlement), but the Supreme Court mistakenly labeled it as a 13(j) indemnity settlement. The Supreme Court in Thornhill agreed that it erred when it labeled the settlement in Cook a 13(j) settlement under Miss. Code Ann. § 71-3-37(10) but found that this mislabeling did not disturb the findings in Cook or affect the outcome in this case. Ultimately, the Supreme Court in Thornhill held that a 9(i) compromise settlement constituted an exhaustion of administrative remedies because the parties “had no further business with the Commission.”

Hutto v. State, 2017-DR-01207-SCT (dismissing motion for appointment of counsel for representation for successive petition for PCR)

Lambes v. Lambes, 2020-CT-00095-SCT (denying cert)

Denham v. Denham, 2020-CT-00675-SCT (granting cert)

Tallant v. State, 2020-CT-01077-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List