The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions yesterday. The most interesting is technically an adoption case, but it involves jurisdictional issues, unwritten local chancery court rules, appellate procedure, and appellate remedies. Both the majority opinion and the partial concurrence/partial dissent are worth your time.
Wiggins v. Southern Securities Group, LLC, 2024-CA-00251-SCT (Civil – Contract) Affirming the trial court’s decision in a contract/business dispute, holding that the trial court did not err in granting one side’s motion for preliminary injunction or in denying the other side’s motion to compel mediation and/or arbitration. (8-1: Griffis for the Court; Coleman dissented)
In the Matter of L.L.T.: Prince v. Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services, 2024-IA-00824-SCT (Civil – Adoption) Affirming the youth court’s ruling that it lacked jurisdiction to finalize an adoption against a backdrop of the chancery court refusing set a hearing on adoption petitions, holding that the youth court did not err in finding that it lacked jurisdiction since chancery courts have exclusive jurisdiction. (5-4: Coleman for the Court; Randolph dissented, joined by Ishee, Griffis, and Branning)
Note – The procedural posture of this one is strange as a result of the chancery court refusing to set a hearing on adoption petitions. The petitioner got creative and initiated the youth court action to create a record for an appeal so that they could seek relief from the appellate courts. The youth court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction and the petitioner was able to appeal. On appeal, the majority of the Supreme Court agreed that the youth court lacked jurisdiction but held that they could not provide any relief other than to affirm the youth court because no other relief was specifically sought. The Supreme Court made it clear that the chancery court should act, but found that it lacked a mechanism based on the issue presented on appeal to compel the chancery court to act. Here is how the majority opinion concluded:
The partial concurrence/partial dissent agreed that the youth court lacked jurisdiction, but was less diplomatic about the chancery court’s conduct and disagreed that Supreme Court’s hands are tied on this appeal:
Other Orders
McGee v. State, 2023-CT-00083-SCT (denying cert)
Childs v. State, 2023-CT-00126-SCT (denying cert)
In the Matter of Estate of Johnson: Manners v. Estate of Johnson, 2023-CT-00823-SCT (denying rehearing)
McNaughton v. State, 2023-CT-01099-SCT (denying cert)
Caffey v. Forrest Health, 2023-CT-01232-SCT (denying cert)
Carr v. State, 2024-CT-00185-SCT (denying cert)
Horne v. Dolgencorp LLC, 2024-CT-00376-SCT (denying cert)
Strong v. Acara Solutions, Inc., 2024-CT-00455-SCT (granting cert)
Rogers v. State, 2025-M-00257 (granting application for leave to proceed in the trial court)
The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a statute of frauds case and the other is an estate case involving real property. The latter includes a six-vote special concurrence.
Palmer’s Grocery Inc. v. Chandler’s JKE, Inc., 2024-IA-00194-SCT (Civil – Contract) Reversing the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment on seven of ten claims stemming from the sale of a grocery store that fell through, holding that the plaintiffs complaint plausibly invoked the merchants’ exception and the part-performance exception to the Statute of Frauds. (9-0: Ishee for the Court)
Practice Point – This one provides a good opportunity to brush up on the Statute of Frauds.
In the Matter of the Estate of Johnson: Manners v. Estate of Johnson, 2023-CT-00823-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates) Reversing the Court of Appeals and reinstating the judgment of the chancery court in an estate matter, holding that an Article of Agreement signed by the decedent did not operate as a deed was not a foundation for the basis of a claim against the estate. (5-6*-3: Branning for the Court; Randolph specially concurred, joined by Maxwell, Ishee, Griffis, Sullivan, and Branning; Coleman dissented, joined by King and Chamberlin)
Practice Point – Chief Justice Randolph’s special concurrence garnered votes form five other justices, giving it precedential effect, however limited its reach may be. The special concurrence stated that Justice Branning’s “opinion is unassailably correct and consistent with the Court’s precedent” and took issue with the dissent.
Other Orders
In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (amending Appendix A to the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure to add the attached form subpoenas as follows: Exhibit A as Form 6, Exhibit B as Form 7, and Exhibit C as Form 8.)
In Re: Commission on Continuing Legal Education, 89-R-99011-SCT (granting Expedited Petition to Amend the Rules and Regulations for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education and the Amended Expedited Petition to Amend the Rules and Regulations for Mandatory Continuing Legal Education filed by the Mississippi Commission on Continuing Legal Education as set forth in Exhibit A.)
Clark v. State, 2022-DR-00829-SCT (denying rehearing)
United Services Automobile Association v. Estate of Minor, 2023-CA-000490SCT (denying rehearing by equally divided Court with Coleman not participating)
Chambers v. State, 2023-CT-00626-SCT (denying cert)
Craft v. State, 2023-CT-00915-SCT (denying cert)
Terry v. State, 2023-CT-00979-SCT (denying cert)
Rodriguez v. Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Association Inc., 2024-SCT-00238-SCT (denying cert)
Summers v. Big Black Land & Timber Company, LLC, 2025-M-00366-SCT (denying petition for interlocutory appeal)
Arnold v. Staffney, 2025-IA-00562-SCT (granting interlocutory appeal)
The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today. There is a child support case, a real property case resolved on the doctrine of res judicata, a contract case involving a rent-to-own contract, and three felony conviction appeals.
Brister v. Martin, 2022-CP-00931-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations) Affirming the chancery court’s final judgment of child support, holding that the chancellor did not err by issuing a new child support order following a new trial that was conducted after notice to the parties that prior orders were vacated or likely to be vacated. (9-0: St. Pe’ for the Court)
Okorie v. Citizens Bank, 2024-CP-00462-COA (Civil – Real Property) Affirming the chancellor’s dismissal of a complaint to quiet and confirm title, holding that the claim was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. (10-0: Lawrence for the Court)
Stubbs v. Ramsey, 2024-CA-00289-COA (Civil – Contract) Affirming the chancery court’s judgment granting declaratory and injunctive relief concerning a rent-to-own purchase home, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding that the rent-to-own contract was valid and binding even after the passing of a termination date, in not finding the renter committed a material breach by not completing the purchase by the specified closing date, or in fashioning an equitable remedy to prevent the renter from forfeiting payments made where the failure to close was no one person’s fault. (9-1-0: McDonald for the Court; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)
Walker v. State, 2023-KA-01012-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of manslaughter, holding that the State did not improperly comment on whether the defendant would testify and that the defendant failed to show that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object, and holding that the record was insufficient to address the issue of whether counsel was ineffective for failing to respond to discovery. (7-2-0: Westbrooks for the Court; Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; Weddle did not participate)
Davis v. State, 2023-KA-00884-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of attempted murder for shooting at someone with an AR-15 at close range, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. (10-0: Wilson for the Court)
Quinn v. State, 2023-KA-01143-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err by excluding a defense witness or evidence about the victim’s purportedly violent character. (7-3-0: Carlton for the Court; Wilson, McDonald, and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)
The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions today. One opinion is an appeal from a hybrid MTCA/common law med mal trial that cites a law journal article I wrote several years ago on an unresolved procedural conundrum. There is also a premises liability summary judgment case, a breach of contract/attorney’s fees case, three direct criminal appeals, and two PCR cases.
Brown v. State, 2023-CA-00921-COA (Civil – PCR) Affirming denial of PCR, holding that the trial court did not err in summarily dismissing the PCR petition as time-barred. (10-0)
Foote v. Memorial Hospital at Gulfport, 2023-CA-00504-COA (Civil – Med Mal) Affirming the circuit court’s judgment in a med mal action against a hospital (a public entity) and a surgeon and the surgeon’s clinic (private entities) after a single, bifurcated bench and jury trial in which the trial court dismissed the claims against the hospital, holding that if the trial court relied on counsel’s closing statements as evidence it was error but harmless because there was sufficient evidence on the point, that the trial court did not err in finding that the plaintiff failed to present a prima facie case that the surgeon proximately caused or contributed to the injuries, and that the plaintiff failed to object to the jury’s involvement in the MTCA claim so the trial court did not err in partially bifurcating the trial where the jury decided the claims against the private defendants and gave an advisory verdict as to the public defendant, and that the trial court did not err in allowing the jury to allocate fault to the public defendant and the finding that the allocation was not supported by substantial evidence. (7-2-1: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing, Lawrence dissented)
NOTE – I was excited to see one of my law review articles cited in this opinion. (If you are so inclined, you can read my article here.) There is no clear guidance from the rules or case law as to how trials should proceed when there a public defendant (entitled to a bench trial under the MTCA) and private defendant (entitled to a jury trial under Mississippi’s constitution, et al). I advocated for a specific procedure in the article that was cited in today’s opinion. In today’s case, the public defendant advocated for the procedure I proposed and the plaintiff argued for a different approach that involved the jury rendering an advisory verdict as to the public defendant. The trial court adopted the plaintiff’s approach. The plaintiff complained about the procedure on appeal, but the Court of Appeals held he could not argue that the trial court erred in following his proposal. Here is the Court of Appeals’ recapitulation of the argument following my proposal:
In 2016, the Rules Committee on Civil Procedure solicited input for a “Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure Revision Project.” I submitted a proposed amendment to Rule 38 along with a copy of my article:
I never did hear anything back.
Blumer v. Majestic Homes, LLC, 2024-CA-00163-COA (Civil – Contract) Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of a homeowner against a home builder awarding liquidated damages, attoyne’s fees, and expenses, holding that the trial court did not err entering a corrected order granting relief under Rule 60(b) since there had been no judgment expressly adjudicating the remaining claims and that the trial court did not err in dismissing the claims against the home builder in his individual capacity, but that the trial court did err in reducing the award of attorney’s fees. (9-0: Emfinger did not participate)
Dewberry v. State, 2023-KA-01135-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of one count of sexual battery, one count of fondling, and one count of child exploitation, holding that the trial court did not err in seating jurors after a Batson challenge and that a jury instruction did not constitute a constructive substantive amendment of a count in the indictment under the plain-error doctrine. (10-0)
Rodriguez v. Diamondhead Country Club, 2024-CA-00238-COA (Civil – Torts) Affirming summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a premises liability case, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that a one-half-inch height differential between sidewalk slabs was not a dangerous or unreasonably hazardous condition or in finding that there was no evidence to support a negligence per se claim under the ADA where the plaintiff was not disabled. (10-0)
Thomas v. State, 2023-KA-00512-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting a Facebook post, that the trial court did not err denying a directed verdict under Weathersby, that the conviction was support by sufficient evidence, that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, that the trial court did not err in denying a motion to suppress the defendant’s statements to law enforcement, that the trial court did not err in admitting autopsy photos, and that the cumulative error doctrine did not apply. (8-2-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; McDonald concurred in result only without writing)
Rasberry v. State, 2023-KA-01161-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of failing to register as a sex offender, holding that the lack of specificity in the indictment was at most harmless error, that the trial court did not err by granting an unopposed motion to amend the indictment, and that trial counsel was not ineffective. (10-0)
Deer v. State, 2024-CP-00019-COA (Civil – PCR) Affirming the dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that the trial court properly dismissed the motion pursuant to the UPCCRA’s three-year statute of limitations. (9-0: Emfinger did not participate)
The Mississippi Supreme Court waited until I was out of town last week to unleash its largest batch of opinions of the year. Six opinions were handed down on Thursday, including one of my cases which was on interlocutory appeal for a service of process issue. There is also one direct criminal appeal, two breach of contract cases (one trial and one summary judgment), an election contest, and a statute of limitations case.
The Court also adopted a new rule of evidence that is “residual exception” to the rule against hearsay.
Unruh v. Johnson, 2024-IA-00028-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury) Reversing the trial court’s denial of motions to dismiss for insufficient service of process, holding that the trial court erred by granting the plaintiff’s motion for enlargement of time to serve process because the plaintiff could not show “good cause” where both the motion for enlargement of time and the first service attempt came one day after the 120-day service period ended and the plaintiff failed to articulate a legitimate basis for failing to attempt to timely serve process, holding that filing the motion for enlargement of time one day after the 120-day period did not toll the statute of limitations, and rendering judgment in favor of the defendant. (9-0)
Note – I represented the appellant/defendant in this appeal. I jumped in on this one with Bobby Stephenson when I joined Wilkins Patterson last summer right after interlocutory appeal was granted.
Phillips v. State, 2023-KA-01218-SCT (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of aggravated assault, holding that the admission of statements on body-camera footage were not testimonial and statements in search warrant affidavit did not violate the Confrontation Clause, that introducing underlying facts and circumstances of the search warrant containing a comment about the defendant’s post-Miranda silence was error albeit harmless, that the cumulative error doctrine did not apply, and that the defendant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel. (8-0: Randolph did not participate)
Radco Fishing and Rental Tools, Inc. v. Commercial Resources, Inc., 2023-CA-00376-SCT (Civil – Contract) Affirming judgment against the defendant for outstanding principal and interest under an accounts receivable line of credit agreement and award of attorneys’ fees, holding that the trial court did not err by granting a motion for partial summary judgment dismissing affirmative defenses, that the defendants’ motions for summary judgment are not reviewable on appeal after they proceeded to trial and litigated, that the trial court did not err by granting a motion to admit parol evidence, that the trial court did not err in denying the defendants’ motions for directed verdict and granting the plaintiff’s motion for directed verdict, that the trial court did not err in granting the plaintiff’s jury instruction on liability, that the trial court did not err by denying the defendants’ post-trial motions, and that the trial court did not err in altering the judgment due to the jury’s disregard of the peremptory instruction and directed verdict, and that the trial court did not err by granting the plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate and award attorneys’ fees. (6-6*-2: Maxwell specially concurred, joined by five other justices, making it binding precedent; Griffis concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Coleman)
*Precedential Special Concurrence – With a total of six votes, Maxwell’s special concurrence is precedent and provides significant guidance for the bench and bar going forward, so it deserves its own summary. The special concurrence held that the trial court erred in granting a blanket ruling against all of the defendants’ affirmative defenses, specifically holding that Horton does not apply to “all” affirmative defenses, only those that would have terminated litigation if asserted earlier.
The concurrence explained:
Footnote 11 was also noteworthy:
Final Note – The dissent argued for limiting the Horton doctrine to the issue of asserting the right to arbitration.
Housing Authority of the City of Yazoo City, Mississippi v. Billings, 2023-IA-00975-SCT (Civil – Contract) Reversing the trial court’s order denying the Housing Authority’s motion for summary judgment on a breach of contract claim against it, holding that none of the alleged terms of the employment contract were contained in the Housing Authority board’s minutes, and rendering judgment in favor of the Housing Authority. (9-0)
Gavin v. Evers, 2024-EC-00061-SCT (Civil – Election Contest) Affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in an election contest, holding that the trial court did not err in considering the motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment simultaneously, did not err in excluding an affidavit that was not based on the affiant’s personal knowledge, did not err in finding no genuine issue of material fact in the voting irregularities claim, did not err by finding that the prevailing candidate met the two-year residency requirement, and did not err in denying the motion for reconsideration and request for additional findings of fact and conclusions of law. (9-0)
Dollar General Corporation v. Dobbs, 2023-IA-00617-SCT (Civil – Torts) Reversing the county court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, holding that the trial court erred in finding the three-year statute of limitations applied where the complaint stated only a claim of defamation which is subject to a one-year statute of limitations. (5-4)
Other Orders
Johnson v. State, 2022-CT-00665-SCT (denying cert)
Law Will and Testament of Prichard: Martin v. Arceneaux, 2022-CT-01035-SCT (denying cert)
Wilson v. State, 2023-CT-00070-SCT (dismissing pro se cert petition as untimely)
Wallace v. State, 2023-CT-00071-SCT (denying cert)
NCAA v. Farrar, 2023-IA-00282-SCT (denying rehearing)
In Re: Capitol Complex Improvement District Inferior Court, 2025-M-00007-SCT (granting motion to withdraw petition to adopt local rules of CCID Court)
In Re: Mississippi Rules of Evidence, 89-R-99002-SCT (granting motion to adopt Mississippi Rule of Evidence 807) Here is the text of the new rule:
The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down one opinion today addressing the issue of whether a company president’s signature on a commercial lease bound him personally to arbitration under the lease.
R.K. Metals, LLC v. JLA Jome Fabrics, Inc., 2023-CA-00620-SCT (Civil – Contract) Affirming the trial court’s finding that a company president’s signature in his representative capacity on a commercial lease was binding on him personally, holding that the terms of the lease in question specifically named the president as personal guarantor to the lease and, accordingly, that the president could be compelled to participate in arbitration under the terms of the lease and the doctrines of equitable estoppel and agency. (9-0)
Note – Here is the operative language from the lease agreement:
Other Orders
In Re K.H.: Berry v. Lincoln County Youth Court of Mississippi, 2024-IA-01299-SCT (granting petition for interlocutory appeal by permission or, in the alternative, writ of mandamus and rendering an order for the respondent to provide requested copies directly to the petitioner pursuant to and consistent with Mississippi Code section 43-21-261(3))
The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions yesterday and a stray opinion on Thursday of last week. Three are direct criminal appeals, one is a breach of contract/real property case, and the other is a PCR case.
Childs v. State, 2023-CA-00126-COA, consolidated with 2018-CT-00263-COA and 2011-CT-00263-COA (Civil – PCR) Affirming denial of a motion for PCR, holding that it did not have subject matter over the venue claim, that there was no clear error in denying the Brady claim, and that the claimant failed to establish a claim of ineffective assistance. (9-0: McCarty did not participate)
JLS Farm Partnership v. ’27 Break Hunting Club, Inc., 2023-CA-00434-COA (Civil – Contract) Affirming the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of hunting clubs in a suit filed against them by an adjacent farming partnership after the partnership’s deer depredation permit was revoked and the clubs opposed a new permit, holding that the trial court did not err in finding no evidence to support the partnership’s claims of breach of contract, tortious breach of contract, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, and promissory estoppel. (9-0: Lawrence did not participate)
Haynes v. State, 2023-KA-00861-COA (Criminal – Felony) Reversing conviction of manslaughter, holding that the trial court erred by denying a stand-your-ground instruction but also holding that the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction. (9-1-0: Carlton concurred in result only without writing)
Adame v. State, 2023-KA-00758-COA (Criminal – Felony) affirming conviction of fondling, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by giving a jury instruction concerning uncorroborated testimony of a sex-crime victim. (9-0: St. Pe’ did not participate)
Note – Here is the jury instruction that passed muster:
Bonus decision from January 23, 2025
Culbertson v. State, 2023-KA-00588-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of two counts of aggravated domestic violence as a violent habitual offender, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing a lesser-included offense instruction for each count, in denying a motion to exclude evidence of the defendant’s prior bad acts, or in sentencing him as a habitual offender, and that trial counsel was not ineffective for not submitting a lesser-included instruction that was not warranted. (5-5: Barnes concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Wilson, Westbrooks, McDonald, and Emfinger)
Other Orders
Mazie v. Boozier-Mazie, 2023-CA-00470-COA (denying rehearing)
Walker v. State, 2023-CP-00787-COA (denying rehearing)
The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. There is a petition for back pay from reinstated utility commissioners, a reversal of a personal injury verdict in Madison County because the trial court abused its discretion admitting expert testimony, an appeal of the denial of a motion for remittitur/new trial after plaintiff’s verdict in a contract case, and a direct appeal of a drug possession conviction.
Slaughter v. City of Canton, 2023-CA-01102-SCT Civil – Other) Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a petition of former commissioners of the Canton Municipal Utilities Commission seeking back pay, holding that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction after the case became final upon issuance of the mandate affirming the circuit court’s prior reinstatement of the commissioners. (9-0)
Scarborough v. Logan, 2022-CA-00965-SCTconsolidated with 2023-CA-00720-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury) Reversing on cross-appeal a plaintiff’s verdict in a personal injury case, holding that the trial court abuse its discretion by allowing expert testimony from a witness who was never qualified or tendered as an expert witness and dismissing the direct appeal issues as moot. (9-0)
Stribling Equipment, LLC v. Eason Propane, LLC, 2023-CA-00862-SCT (Civil – Contract) Affirming the trial court’s decision denying a new damages trial and/or remittitur, holding that the amount of damages was high but not shocking and was supported by the evidence. (9-0)
Vivian v. State, 2023-KA-00338-SCT (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of felony possession of meth and misdemeanor possession of marijuana, holding that there were no errors wanting reversal based on counsel’s Lindsey brief and the record. (9-0)
Other Orders
Roley v. Roley, 2022-CT-01104-SCT (dismissing petition for cert)
Nettles v. Nettles, 2023-CT-00041-SCT (granting cert)
The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions yesterday. There is just one criminal case and the rest are civil cases that run the gamut of practice areas from the statute of frauds to a hunting club dispute.
Smith v. Estate of Watson, 2023-CA-00761-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates) Reversing the chancellor’s judgment ordering the payment of creditor’s claims, disbursement of remaining assets, and closing the estate, holding that the chancellor failed to follow the statutory procedure for administering the insolvent estate. (8-0: Lawrence did not participate)
Lowe v. Wall Doxey State Park, 2023-CA-00828-COA (Civil – Personal Injury) Affirming dismissal of an MTCA personal injury case, holding that the trial court properly found that the State was not properly served with presuit notice because Plaintiff did not sent notice to the correct state entity. (9-0)
Stallworth v. Mississippi Department of Employment Security, 2022-CC-01300-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies) Affirming MDES Board of Review’s decision finding that the claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits, holding that the Board’s decision was substantial evidence and was neither arbitrary nor capricious where evidence showed that the claimant voluntarily left work without good cause. (7-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only without writing)
Mazie v. Boozier-Mazie, 2023-CA-00470-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations) Affirming order granting a motion to enforce a judgment of divorce and finding the ex-husband in contempt and denying a new trial, holding that the chancellor acted within her discretion to find the ex-husband in contempt for not complying with the court’s judgment. (8-0: Westbrooks did not participate)
Walker v. Hasty, 2023-CA-00675-COA (Civil – Custody) Affirming the chancery court’s judgment modifying visitation and increasing child support obligation, holding that arguments that the trial was unfair were waived and without merit, that modifying visitation was not a change in custody, that there was substantial evidence to support the chancery court’s findings, and that the court did not prohibit one party from making a proffer and that party failed to make a proffer. (8-0: Westbrooks did not participate)
Howard v. Nelson, 2023-CA-00947-COA (Civil – Contract) Affirming dismissal of a case seeking specific performance enforcing an oral contract to sell land, holding that the statute of frauds applied. (9-0)
Gandy v. State, 2023-KA-01017-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of two counts of sexual battery and two counts of gratification of lust, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. (9-0)
Short v. The Break Land Company, LLC, 2022-CA-01180-COA (Civil – Torts) Affirming judgment on the pleadings in a dispute between landowners and an LLC that owned adjacent property for a hunting club of which the landowners were members that arose from the landowners wanting to shoot deer that were damaging their crops and the hunting club’s apparent retaliatory rule adoption and ultimate revocation of the landowner’s membership, holding that the landowners failed to state a claim for any causes of action, that the operating agreement barred the landowners’ claims, and that the trial court did not err not allowing the landowners to amend their complaint where they made no request of the trial court. (8-0: Lawrence did not participate)
Long v. State, 2023-KA-00351-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute, holding that the claim trial counsel committed a Batson violation was procedurally barred and without merit, that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for directed verdict, and that the spoliation argument that the State lost photographs of the crime scene was procedurally barred and without merit, and declined to address Plaintiff’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal. (7-2: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing)
Other Orders
Clemmons v. State, 2022-CA-00700-COA (denying rehearing)
Designer Custom Homes, LLC v. U.S. Coating Specialties & Supplies, LLC, 2023-CA-00207 (denying rehearing)
The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions yesterday. There was a wills and estates case that was more of an appellate procedure case, a real property contract for sale case, a direct criminal appeal, and a tort/statute of limitations case.
Brown v. Black, 2022-CA-00869-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates) Dismissing appeal of a chancellor’s decision awarding attorneys fees, holding that the 2021 order on attorney’s fees was final and appealable regardless of 2022 certification and that the appeal was therefore untimely. (9-0: Smith did not participate)
Eaton v. Haney, 2022-CA-00656-COA (Civil – Contract) Affirming the chancellor’s decision requiring specific performance for sale of real property and awarding damages and attorneys fees, holding that there was a valid contract for the sale of the real property and that the fact dispute between the parties was for the chancellor to decide and that the award of attorney’s fees was within the chancellor’s discretion. (9-1: Emfinger dissented)
Hand v. State, 2022-KA-00819-COA (Criminal – Felony) Affirming conviction of kidnapping and child exploitation, holding that the verdicts were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. (10-0)
Pettis v. Northeast Mississippi Electric Power Association, 2022-CA-00688-COA (Civil – Torts) Affirming dismissal of a negligence claim under the doctrine of res judicata and the IIED and loss of consortium claims on statute of limitations grounds, holding that the discovery rule did not apply and that any fraudulent concealment arguments were waived for failure to raise them in the trial court. (7-1-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only without written opinion, Barnes did not participate)
Other Orders
Brown v. State, 2022-KA-00446-COA (denying rehearing)
Russell v. State, 2022-KA-00447-COA (denying rehearing)
Snyder v. Estate of Cockrell, 2022-CA-00597 (denying rehearing)
Galvan v. State, 2022-KA-00655-COA (denying rehearing)
Mississippi Appeals Blog 