Tag: Contempt

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 16, 2025

As the year draws the a close, the Mississippi Court of Appeals is finishing strong with seven opinions handed down today. There were three domestic relations cases, two felony appeals, one misdemeanor appeal, and an undue influence case.

Rasbeery v. State, 2024-KA-01005-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth with a firearm enhancement, holding that the conviction of constructive possession was supported by sufficient evidence, that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and that the trial court did not err in denying a motion suppress the defendant’s roadside statements.
(10-0: McCarty for the Court)

Lucas v. Estate of Lucas, 2024-CA-01259-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision invalidating a gift and setting aside a deed, holding that the grantee did not provide sufficient evidence overcome the presumption of undue influence.
(10-0: McCarty for the Court)

J.T.S. v. M.L.S., 2024-CA-00023-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part a chancellor’s decision in a divorce case, holding that the Court had appellate jurisdiction, that the chancery court did not in dismissing several counts of the amended complaint, that the chancellor did err in modifying the life insurance provision of the divorce agreement, that the chancellor did not err in enforcing a provision limiting reimbursement of medical expenses, that the chancellor did not err in assessing post-judgment interest, that the chancellor did not err in finding that one party had no obligation to contribute to condo or allowance expenses, that the chancery court did not abuse its discretion in crediting payments as child support, that the chancellor did err in awarding attorney’s fees without specific findings, and that there was no merit to the claim that the chancellor was impartial.
(7-1-0: McDonald for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Lawrence and St. Pe’ did not participate)

Turner v. State, 2024-KM-01020-COA, consolidated with 2024-KM-01028-COA (Criminal – Misdemeanor)
Affirming convictions of speeding and careless driving on appeal from justice court, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction which was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that the trial court did not impermissibly place the burden of proof on the defendant.
(10-0: McDonald for the Court)

Odom v. State, 2023-KA-01165-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder and armed robbery, holding that the jury was not so improperly instructed on self-defense as to warrant reversal and that the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction.
(9-1-0: Wilson for the Court; Barnes concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Bradshaw v. Bradshaw, 2024-CA-00882-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming judgment of contempt, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding the ex-husband in willful contempt for failing to pay court-ordered alimony or in reducing his monthly periodic alimony payment.
(10-0: Barnes for the Court)

Thornton v. Thornton, 2024-CA-00320-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s judgment in a divorce case, holding that the chancery court did not abuse its discretion awarding joint legal and physical custody, that the chancellor did not err in distribution of marital property or in personal property.
(7-1-2: Barnes for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Carlton concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by McCarty)

Other Orders

  • Parra v. Rapid-American Corporation, 2023-CA-01196-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Buck v. State, 2024-KA-00025-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Tauzin v. Tauzin, 2024-CA-00141-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 Court of Appeals Decisions of May 13 and May 20, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions last week and a hearty eleven today. There are some interesting cases in the mix and a summary of each is below.

May 13, 2025

May v. May, 2023-CA-01022-COA, consolidated with 2023-M-01401-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Vacating the chancellor’s order of contempt for failure to pay child support but affirming his denial of the motion to recuse, holding that the chancery court did not have personal jurisdiction for purposes of a contempt ruling for want of service under Rule 81, but that although the chancellor erred in finding that the motion for recusal was untimely it was nevertheless within his discretion to deny it.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in result only without writing)

Fortner v. IMS Engineers, Inc., 2023-CA-01170-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a company that had been engaged to oversee and manage road improvement projects until about ten months before a fatal accident occurred, holding that there was no evidence that the company owed a duty of care once its involvement ended and the City took over the management role.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Carlton did not participate)

Horne v. Dolgencorp LLC, 2024-CA-00376-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in a trip-and-fall case after a customer tripped on merchandise in an aisle, holding that there was no evidence that the store had actual or constructive knowledge of the presence of the dangerous condition.
(8-2: Westbrooks and McDonald dissented without writing)

Shipley v. Shipley, 2023-CA-00814-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming judgment modifying the custody arrangement by giving the mother sole physical and legal custody, holding that the chancellor did not err in modifying physical and legal custody based the mother’s relocation to Oregon, that the chancellor’s did not err by failing to consider the totality of the circumstances, that the chancellor did not give undue weight to one Albright factor, and that the argument that the chancellor erred by not sua sponte appointing a GAL to investigate allegations of abuse was procedurally barred, and declining to address child support in after ruling that the chancellor did not err in its custody decision.
(7-3: Wilson dissented, joined by Carlton and Emfinger)

Magyar v. Shiers, 2023-CA-00682-COA (Torts – Other)
Affirming bench trial decision finding the defendant liable for malicious prosecution and awarding compensatory and punitive damages, holding that there was evidence to support each element of malicious prosecution where the defendant had filed charging affidavits against the plaintiffs alleging that they were intentionally damaging his property by allowing sewage from a leaking septic system to run into his property but the justice court dismissed the charges for lack of evidence.
(10-0)

Mueller Industries, Inc. v. Waits, 2023-WC-00494-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Reversing the Commission’s decision ordering a lump sum payment, holding that the information in the record did not permit the Court to review the Commission’s computations of TPD and remanding for the Commission to determine whether TPD was properly calculated and credited, determine whether the claimant received more than the maximum weekly benefit and whether the Employer/Carrier should receive a credit for overpayment, and ensure that the Employer/Carrier was not charged with penalties or interest after the date the Commission found that no further benefits were owed.
(8-2: Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by McDonald and joined in part by McCarty)

Other Orders

  • Mount v. State, 2023-KA-00807-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Begnaud v. Begnaud, 2023-CA-00822-COA (denying rehearing)
  • In the Matter of Estate of Tate: Garfield v. Tate, 2023-CA-01262-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

May 20, 2025

Mask v. Baggett, 2024-CA-00181-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions denying a motion for contempt and attorney’s fees in a divorce action for lack of proof, holding that the chancellor’s finding that neither party had sufficient proof to support motions for contempt and attorney’s fees was supported by the record and lack of record, that the appellant failed to show that the chancellor abused his discretion by denying the Rule 59 motion due to clear error or manifest injustice.
(10-0)

Bickes v. Swain, 2024-CA-00187-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the mother of the bride and the venue in a premises liability suit filed by a wedding guest who hurt his leg stepping off a porch at the venue, holding that the circuit court did not err in granting summary judgment without conducting a hearing that had been set and that summary judgment was proper because there was no evidence of a dangerous condition that could support liability regardless of whether the plaintiff was classified as a licensee or an invitee.
(7-1-1: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Page v. State, 2024-CP-00613-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s rejection of the plaintiff’s motion for discovery in the circuit court in which he was convicted of attacking a woman with a knife two decades ago, holding that the circuit court did not err in rejecting the claim as a standalone claim separate from a PCR petition though the circuit court incorrectly “denied” the motion instead of “dismissing” the motion for lack of personal jurisdiction.
(10-0)

Jones v. State, 2023-KA-01157-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of armed robbery, holding that the circuit court did not commit plain error in excluding evidence of a witness’s prior convictions because the weight of evidence of guilt was overwhelming, that the Miranda violation arguments were procedurally barred and did not merit reversal under the plain error doctrine.
(9-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Pickett v. State, 2024-KA-00511-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of one count of burglary of a dwelling with intent to commit a larceny, holding that the issue of the circuit court’s denial of the motions for directed verdict was procedurally barred and lacked merit because the evidence was sufficient and the verdict not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and the circuit court did not err in denying the motions without making specific findings of fact.
(10-0)

Mortera v. Kona Villa Owners Association, Inc., 2023-CA-01297-COA (Civil – Property Damage)
Reversing summary judgment that was entered in favor of an HOA that declined to pursue a property damage claim on behalf of a condo unit owner, holding that based on the bylaws and insurance policy terms there was a genuine fact dispute over the HOA’s status of a fiduciary.
(9-0)

Parrott v. Frierson, 2023-SA-01245-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s dismissal of taxpayers’ petition appealing the Board of Tax Appeals’ order, holding that there was substantial evidence to support the chancellor’s finding that “yard sales” where the taxpayers purchased storage units and sold the contents were not isolated, casual, or occasional sales but sales made in the course of business and subject to sales tax, that the chancellor did not err in finding that the MDOR’s income tax assessment was prima facie correct, that the taxpayers did not overcome the presumption of correctness, and that the chancellor properly affirmed assessment of penalties and interest.
(10-0)

Forrest County General Hospital v. Knight, 2023-WC-01277-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the Commission’s order that affirmed the AJ’s order that the claimant suffered an 80% industrial loss of use of the right leg and reducing it to 60% due to apportionment but reversed the AJ’s finding of no loss of wage-earning capacity and awarded 15% LWEC for the low back injury, holding that under the deferential standard of review there was evidence to support the Commission’s decision.
(10-0)

Roach v. Roach, 2024-CA-00236-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancery court’s denial of the ex-wife’s Rule 60(b) motion after the ex-husband was granted a divorce on the grounds of habitual cruel and inhumane treatment, holding that the chancery court did not err in finding that service of process by certified mail was proper and that the ex-wife failed to show exceptional circumstances related to her claim that her prior attorney was ineffective warranting relief under Rule 60(b).
(10-0)

Allen & Smith Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Merrill, 2023-CA-00468-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming summary judgment granted in favor of a former employee in a breach of contract claim alleging violations of a non-compete agreement, holding that the court had appellate jurisdiction even though the judgment did not include the language “no just reason for delay” and that the circuit court did not err in finding certain provisions ambiguous and striking them from the agreement.
(5-5: Carlton and Emfinger concurred in part and dissented in part; Wilson dissented, joined by Barnes, and McCarty and joined in party by Carlton and Emfinger)

NOTE – I hope this one goes up on cert. My impression is that the holding of the principal opinion would relax the Rule 54(b) standard as it has been enforced. In the meantime, I would not stop putting all of the Rule 54(b) magic language in your judgments.

Strong v. Acara Solutions, Inc., 2024-CA-00455-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of the defendant based on judicial estoppel after the plaintiff failed to disclose this personal injury claim in her bankruptcy proceedings, holding that the “acceptance” element of judicial estoppel was not met where the bankruptcy as dismissed without a discharge.
(8-2: Emfinger dissented, joined by Wilson)

Other Orders

  • Culbertson v. State, 2023-KA-00588-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Boone v. State, 2023-KA-00684-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Gibson v. State, 2023-KA-00704-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Grimes v. State, 2023-KA-01254-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Burnette v. State, 2023-CP-01330-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 14, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. Most are direct criminal appeals. There is also a judgment versus voluntary payment case, a contempt issue in a divorce case, a disinheritance case, and an injunction case.

Seales v. State, 2023-KA-01376-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted first-degree murder, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support to conviction.
(9-0: St. Pe’ did not participate)

Holstein v. Nicholas, 2023-CA-00548-COA consolidated with 2023-CA-00972 (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision ordering repayment of sums paid pursuant to an Ohio judgment enrolled in Mississippi after the Ohio judgment was overturned on appeal, holding that the evidence was not sufficient to determine whether the amount paid was a voluntary payment or a compulsory payment.
(9-0: St. Pe’ did not participate)

Baker v. State, 2023-KA-01111-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s proposed self-defense jury instruction because there was no evidence to support it.
(8-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only; St. Pe’ did not participate.)

In the Matter of the Estate of Tate: Garfield v. Tate, 2023-CA-01262-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision disinheriting a father, holding that the father did not prove he should inherit under Miss. Code Ann. section 91-1-15(3)(d)(i).
(9-0: St. Pe’ did not participate)

Gibson v. State, 2023-KA-00704-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing the defendant’s wife to testify against him and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(8-1-0: Lawrence concurred, joined by Barnes and joined in part by Westbrooks and Weddle; St. Pe’ did not participate)

Davis v. State, 2023-KA-00178-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault with a weapon and felon in possession, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of a witness’s prior convictions for forgery in violation of the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause.
(9-0: St. Pe’ did not participate)

Yarbrough v. Sacred Heart Catholic School of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, 2023-CA-01219-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the chancellor’s rulings granting temporary and permanent injunctive relief in favor of a school, holding that there was a legally cognizable claim based on its right to take precautions necessary to minimize foreseeable risks to protect students, that the chancellor did not err in finding that there was a threat to the school, and that the chancellor did not abuse her discretion in issuing the preliminary and permanent injunction.
(8-1: Wilson dissented; St. Pe’ did not participate)

Powell v. Powell, 2022-CA-01258-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision finding the mother in contempt in a divorce matter for failing to pay her half of children’s medical bills, holding that the chancellor did not violate the judgment of divorce, that the finding of contempt was not manifest error, and the the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in any of the evidentiary rulings.
(7-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Lawrence and St. Pe’ did not participate)

Stewart v. State, 2023-KA-00461-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of one count of armed carjacking and three counts of armed robbery, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for mistrial based on improper questioning during cross-exam of the defendant’s mother because it was waived and that the improper question was cured by jury instructions and that the defendant’s Confrontation Clause rights were not violated where a police officer testified via closed-circuit TV.
(7-2-0: Barnes and Lawrence concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Other Orders

  • LaFleur v. State, 2022-KA-00500-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Georgen v. Estate of Brown-Barrett, 2023-CA-000344-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Fox v. Allen Automotive, Inc., 2023-CA-00441-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Patton v. State, 2023-CP-00618-COA (recalling mandate and allowing pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on the merits)
  • Mallard v. State, 2023-CP-01155-COA (recalling mandate and allowing pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on the merits)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 3, 2024 and September 10, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions last week and three opinions this week. Since I was out of the office last Tuesday I included last week’s cases in this post. Between the two dates there there are a couple of service-of-process cases, a few personal injury cases, a couple of domestic relations cases, direct criminal appeals, and a two PCR cases. Appellants prevailed in all three of today’s cases.

September 3, 2024

Havard v. Hart, 2023-CA-00260-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming dismissal for insufficient service of process, holding that there was substantial evidence supporting the trial court’s finding that the defendant had not been properly served and that the plaintiff did not have good cause for failing to timely serve process.
(8-1-0: McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Old Hattiesburg High, L.P. v. Harris Construction Services, LLC, 2023-CA-00579-COA (Civil – Other)
Dismissing appeal of order denying a motion to reinstate an order obtaining expunging a contractor’s lien, holding that the initial order expunging the lien was not a final appealable order and that subsequent orders on motions revising the interim order were not final either.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Hyland v. State, 2023-CA-00256-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s dismissal of PCR motion challenging his convictions and seeking an out-of-time appeal, holding that motion was time-barred and successive.
(9-0)

Fortner v. Bratcher, 2023-CP-00664-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s findings related to motions for contempt and custody modification, holding that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion finding the father in contempt, carrying forward the parties’ agreed visitation schedule, or enjoining the parties from contacting CPS with allegations of neglect or abuse without first contacting local law enforcement.
(9-0)

Miller v. State, 2023-CP-00812-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that it was barred by the UPCCRA’s statute of limitations.
(9-0)

Wilkerson v. Allred, 2023-CA-00393-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing claims for emotional distress damage after the defendant shot and killed the plaintiff’s puppy in the head as it sat next to the plaintiff’s twelve-year-old sister, holding that there was a jury question on the issue of whether the plaintiff’s emotional distress injuries were reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.
(4-3-2: Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks concurred in the result only without writing; Carlson dissented, joined by Emfinger and joined in part by McDonald.)

September 10, 2024

Bell v. State, 2023-CA-00951-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Vacating and remanding revocation of a suspended sentence, holding that the trial judge was automatically disqualified because she had previously served as the ADA for the underlying conviction.
(7-2: Barnes dissented, joined by Wilson)

Wells v. Wells, 2023-CA-00674-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancery court’s judgment granting the wife’s petition for divorce and divesting the husband of his interest in real property, holding that there was no evidence that the husband was properly served.
(4-1-4: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; Wilson dissented, joined by Barnes, Lawrence and Smith.)

Deere v. Taylor, 2023-CA-00063-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the trial court’s dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit, holding that the prohibition against claim-splitting was not triggered where the plaintiff filed one lawsuit but was unable to serve the defendants and months later filed a second lawsuit asserting the same causes of action against the same parties while the first lawsuit sat stale.

Other Orders

  • Daly v. Raines, 2022-CT-00600-SCT (denying appellant’s to voluntarily dismiss this appeal)
  • McKenzie v. McKenzie, 2022-CA-01175-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Estate of Staten: Staten v. Pedersen, 2023-CA-00228-COA (denying untimely motion tor additional time to file a motion for rehearing)
  • Stewart v. State, 2024-TS-00606-COA (dismissing appeal as untimely)

September 3, 2024 Hand Down Page

September 10, 2024 Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 9, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions on Tuesday. Notably, not one of the decisions was a clean affirmance. There is a personal injury/MTCA decision, a riparian property damage case, a divorce decision, and an arbitration decision.

Mississippi Department of Rehabilitation Services v. Butler, 2022-CA-00176-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming on direct appeal and reversing on cross-appeal in an MTCA car wreck case, holding that the circuit court did err after holding a bench trial and finding that the defendant-driver was in the course and scope of her employment and her negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident, but holding that the circuit court erred in not awarding damages for the loss of a cell phone and repair of a wedding band and that the circuit court erred in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for additur on the loss-of-consortium claim.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate)

Hegman v. Adcock, 2022-CA-00501-COA (Civil – Property Damage)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s judgment affirming the county court in a riparian rights case, holding that the circuit court did not err in affirming the denial of the plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief and damages and the denial of the defendant’s Rule 52 motion, but reversing the circuit court’s decision affirming the court court’s finding the plaintiff liable on a tortious interference with business relations counterclaim and the $95,000 award on that counterclaim.
(8-2-0: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Bolivar v. Bolivar, 2022-CA-00640-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Vacating the chancery court’s judgment on a motion for contempt in “highly contentious divorce proceedings,” holding that the movant was required to have a new Rule 81 summons for her fourth contempt motion “regardless of the status of the litigation.”
(10-0)

Coleman v. Stan King Chevrolet, Inc., 2022-CA-00943-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the circuit court’s dismissal of a motion to compel arbitration on the basis that the statute of limitations had run on the underlying claims, holding that where the defendants initially sought to compel arbitration but later obtained a default judgment on their counterclaim in the circuit court, the defendants’ rejection of the plaintiff’s attempt to proceed with arbitration justified relief under Rule 60(b)(6), holding that the circuit court erred in addressing the statute of limitations issue, and remanded for the matter to be restored to the active docket and stayed pending conclusion of arbitration proceedings.
(5-3-2: Lawrence and Smith concurred in part and in the result without writing; McCarty concurred in result only without writing; Greenlee dissented, joined by Enfinger)

NOTE – The proceedings in the circuit court were convoluted. It necessary to read the opinion to get a handle on what took place and the Court’s ruling.

Other Orders

Roberson v. State, 2021-CA-01182-COA (denying rehearing)

Carpenter v. State, 2022-KA-00398-COA (denying rehearing)

Davis v. State, 2022-KA-00573-COA (denying rehearing)

Boyington v. State, 2022-KA-00601-COA (denying rehearing)

Pickle v. State, 2022-CP-00929-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 2, 2024

Happy New Year! The Mississippi Court of Appeals wasted no time getting back in the game this year and handed down two opinions today. One is a direct appeal of a criminal conviction of multiple counts of video voyeurism and the other is a decision on unusual facts from hearings related to the enforcement of a judgment.

Moore v. State, 2022-KA-00327-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of fifteen counts of video voyeurism and one count of video voyeurism of a child under sixteen, holding that the trial court did not err in declining to suppress all of the State’s evidence because “simple mistakes made in the process of the issuance of the two search warrants” related to identifying which suite the subject restroom was in; that the evidence was sufficient to find that the incidental recording of males was “lewd, licentious, or indecent” and that the evidence was sufficient to prove the necessary element of lack of permission as to the victims who did not testify.
(10-0)

Pierce v. Sorrells, 2022-CP-01290-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the trial court’s decisions on dueling petitions to unseal a judgment (by obligee) and to set the judgment aside (by obligor), holding that the obligor was served with process on the petition to unseal, but holding that the obligor’s due process rights were violated when he was instructed by the court not to open his mouth again before he was able to testify and remanding for full hearing on the merits, and reversing the trial court’s judgment ordering the obligor incarcerated until he purged himself of contempt.
(6-1-3: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing; Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Lawrence and Smith, and joined in part by McCarty.)

NOTE – Here is the potion of the opinion recounting the hearing:

Other Orders

None

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of March 9, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions today and not one is pedestrian. The first involves whether the loser in an insurance coverage dec action can come back after the mandate in the dec action and after being vindicated in the underlying liability action, to get relief under Rule 60(b) from the no-coverage judgment. In the next case, the Court weighs in on the Jackson mayor’s attempt to veto the city council’s inaction on the garbage collection contract. The third case is an appeal of an order of contempt and order denying recusal after the attorney failed to appear at trial after representing to the circuit court that he had Covid.

Scruggs v. Farmland Mut. Ins. Co., 2021-CA-00877-SCT (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a Rule 60(b) motion, holding that the mandate rule deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction to entertain a Rule 60(b) motion twenty years after the Supreme Court’s opinion and mandate.
(9-0)

CONTEXT – The facts make this ruling a bit more interesting than the holding suggests. Many years go, the plaintiffs (Scruggses) lost an insurance coverage dec action in state court 20 years ago. Coverage had been denied because the Scruggses were accused of committing intentional acts by Monsanto. The Scruggses then prevailed in Monsanto’s federal lawsuit against them. I’ll let the Supremes take it from here:

Lumumba v. City Council of Jackson, 2022-CA-00855-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the special chancellor’s summary judgment in favor of the city council in this episode of Jackson’s garbage-collection saga, holding that the mayor did not have legal authority to veto a non-action or negative vote of the city counsel the city council’s non-ratification of the garbage collection contract presented by the mayor.
(9-0)

NOTE – The Court also held that the trial court did not err in allowing the city council to admit exhibits (public records that had been produced to the mayor) at the MSJ hearing that were not yet filed in the record of that case and that the chancellor did not err in denying the mayor’s motion for additional findings because the mayor could not both object to the court’s consideration of the city council’s exhibits while also asking the court to consider the mayor’s extrinsic evidence.

In Re: Ali M. Shamsiddeen, 2021-CA-01217-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming order of contempt and order denying recusal, holding that the trial court did not err in finding defense counsel in contempt for failing to appear at a pretrial conference (in person or virtually, after being given that opportunity) or at the trial because defense counsel said he had COVID but only provided a vague medical excuse and quarantine order but refused to provide medical documentation of the diagnosis.
(7-2: Kitchens dissented, joined by King)

NOTE – Here is the email the attorney sent to the court on the eve of trial.

Other Orders

In Re: Local Rules, 89-R-99015-SCT (granting motion to amend Tenth Chancery Court District’s local rules)

Shannon v. Shannon, 2020-CT-00847-SCT (dismissing previously-granted cert sua sponte)

Simmons v. Jackson County, 2020-CT-01014-SCT (denying cert)

Young v. Freese & Goss PLLC, 2020-CT-01280-SCT (denying cert)

Boyd v. State, 2021-CT-00066-SCT (denying cert)

Turner & Associates P.L.L.C. v. Estate of Watkins, 2021-CT-00258-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of February 28, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions today. Two are domestic relations cases: one dealing with child support and the other primarily dealing with custody. The third decisions is a PCR case.

Everett v. State, 2021-CP-01415-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming summary denial of a motion for PCR alleging an illegal sentence, holding no error because the sentence imposed was the maximum punishment authorized by statute at the time.
(7-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only; Smith did not participate)

If you would like to receive an email with my summaries when they are posted, enter your email address below and click “Subscribe” – You can always unsubscribe later.

White v. White, 2021-CA-01074-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision ordering past-due child support for the period of time from when the parties’ youngest child turned 18 until she turned 21, holding that there was no evidence presented that the child was emancipated before turning 21.
(10-0)

Latham v. Latham, 2022-CA-00363-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming chancellor’s divorce judgment, holding that the chancellor did not err in the application of the Albright factors or in finding that one party did not provide a financial disclosure to the court.
(9-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Other Orders

Tennesen v. City of Hattiesburg, 2021-CA-00137-COA (denying rehearing)

Wallace v. State, 2021-CP-01149-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 23, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is an interesting case involving a term of incarceration for civil contempt approaching five years. The other was taken up on cert to address the defendant being sentenced as a habitual offender.

McPhail v. McPhail, 2020-CA-00739-SCT (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancery court’s order denying the father’s motion to be released from incarceration for contempt stemming from nonpayment of child support, holding that the chancellor did not err in denying release because the father refused to complete a court-ordered psychological evaluation which was the only remaining condition of release to be satisfied.
(5-4: Griffis dissented, joined by Kitchens, King, and Ishee)

Note – The dissent took issue with a nearly five-year incarceration for civil contempt that showed no sign of letting up:

Manuel v. State, 2020-CT-00711-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of second-degree murder and aggravated assault but vacating sentence as a habitual offender and remanding for resentencing, holding that the trial court lacked sufficient evidence to sentence Manuel as a habitual offender and that the Court of Appeals erred when it allowed the State to supplement the record with copies of indictments for prior offenses.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Murry v. State, 2020-CT-01363-SCT (denying cert)

Simpson County School District v. Wigley, 2021-CT-00009-SCT (denying cert)

Simpson v. State, 2021-CT-00075-SCT (denying cert)

James v. Thompson, 2021-CA-00458-SCT (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List