Tag: Expert Witnesses

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 13, 2025

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions yesterday. There was also an order dismissing an appeal as untimely based on a defect in a motion for reconsideration filed with the trial court that is worth a quick read.

Mohiuddin v. Jackson County, 2024-CA-00759-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s judgment upholding the Board of Supervisor’s approval of a special exception to a zoning ordinance, holding that the Board’s interpretation of its zoning ordinance was correct and that is decision granting a special exception was not arbitrary and capricious and was supported by substantial evidence.
(9-0: Branning for the Court)

Miller v. State, 2024-KA-00804-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault, holding the indictment was not defective and that the defense was not prejudiced by the State’s amendment of the indictment.
(7-1-0: Griffis for the Court; King concurred in result only without writing)

Thompson v. Estate of Lee, 2025-CA-00286-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Reversing the chancellor’s decision in a claim brought against an estate by the former clients of the decedent regarding misappropriated client funds, holding that the chancellor erred in dismissing the clients’ claims where the court had previously ruled that MDL funds at issue belonged to the clients and erred in finding that the former clients were required to maintain a judgment against the decedent or his estate to recover their funds that he held in trust.
(8-1: Chamberlin for the Court; Randolph concurred in result only without writing)

Busby v. State, 2024-KA-00482-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sale of a Schedule II substance, holding that there was no Confrontation Clause violation where the trial court admitted testimony from a drug-analyst expert to testify that the substance sold was methamphetamine and admitted the law report through that expert where the expert was the technical reviewer and not the initial analyst.
(5-4: Maxwell for the Court; Coleman concurred in result only, joined by King, Ishee, and Sullivan.)

Other Orders

  • P.K. Loyacono, PLLC v. Raymond James Financial Services, Inc., 2024-CA-00791-SCT (granting motion to dismiss appeal from final judgment for lack of jurisdiction)

Practice Point – This Order is a cautionary tale. A “motion for reconsideration” that does not state grounds for relief does not toll the appeal deadline:

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (reappointing the following persons for three-year terms (1/1/26 to 12/31/28) as members of the Advisory Committee on Rules: Hon. Crystal Wise Martin, Hon. Celeste Embrey Wilson, David P. Pitre, Esq., Corey Clayton Cranford, Esq., Lance L. Stevens, Esq., and Katherine S. Kerby, Esq.)

  • Jones v. State, 2022-CT-01124-SCT (denying cert)
  • Davis v. State, 2023-CT-00811-SCT (denying cert)
  • Lee v. Doolittle, 2023-CT-00969-SCT (granting cert)
  • Phinizee v. State, 2023-CT-01090-SCT (denying cert)
  • Fortner v. IMS Engineers, Inc., 2023-CT-01170-SCT (denying cert)
  • Smith v. State, 2024-CT-00162-SCT (denying cert)
  • Underwood v. State, 2024-CT-00423-SCT (dismissing cert petition as untimely)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of September 11 and September 18, 2025

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions on September 11 and two more on September 18. I think the most significant of the bunch is Pilot Travel Centers, LLC v. Womack where the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and granted a new trial in a premises liability case because improper expert testimony was admitted.

September 11, 2025

Patterson v. State, 2024-CA-00788-SCT (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing an MTCA wrongful death claim, holding that the immunity requirements of Section 11-46-9(1)(l) were met and that the statute passed constitutional muster.
(9-0: Sullivan for the Court)

Watkins Construction v. Miss. Dept. of Revenue, 2024-SA-00662-SCT (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s decision denying a taxpayer’s motion for summary judgment “for reconsideration, clarification, and alternative relief,” finding that the chancellor properly denied the company’s post-judgment request and declining to “give advisory opinions about unraised legal questions.”
(9-0: Maxwell for the Court)

Other Orders

  • The Mississippi Bar v. Valley, 2008-BD-01884-SCT (granting motion to reopen case and file amended formal complaint)
  • Shelton v. State, 2010-M-01801 (denying petition to review issues re: possible judicial and/or criminal misconduct for possible impeachment and/or prosecution directed at the trial judge, finding that the filing was frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing in forma pauperis)
  • In Re: Judicial Election Oversight Committee, 2021-M-01306-SCT (appointing Spence Flatgard, James H. Heidelberg, and David F. Delgado to four-year terms as members of the judicial election oversight committee)
  • Carr v. State, 2023-DR-00503-SCT (granting motion to vacate stay and granting open time motions and giving 30 days to file post-conviction application)

Hand Down Page

September 18, 2025

In Re Estate of Ivision: Malouf & Malouf, PLLC v. Estate of Ivison, 2024-CA-00421-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancery court’s denial of a motion for payment of past due interest, holding that this second probated claim for compound interest was a new claim and was untimely filed.
(9-0: Griffis for the Court)

Pilot Travel Centers, LLC v. Womack, 2023-CT-00035-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the Court of Appeals’ decision that held that the trial court’s error admitting expert testimony was harmless, holding that the expert was unqualified and his testimony was unhelpful where he read the defendant’s policies and identified alleged violations of them.
(9-0: Chamberlin for the Court)

Practice Point – This is a big Daubert case (though the opinion did not cite Daubert). The Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeals that admitting the expert testimony was error, but the Supremes held it was not harmless. The Court adopted the rationale from Judge Wilson’s Court of Appeals dissent:

Other Orders

  • Crawford v. State, 2024-DR-01386-SCT (granting the State’s motion to dismiss a petition for post-conviction relief)
  • Galloway v. State, 2025-DR-00129-SCT (granting the State’s motion to dismiss successive motion for leave to proceed)
  • In Re: Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi Bar, 89-R-99010-SCT (appointing Robert R. Morris III as member of the Complaint Tribunal)
  • Crawford v. State, 24-DP-01016-SCT (granting renewed motion to set execution date)

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 6, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. There are several felonies, a wrongful death summary judgment case, a workers’ compensation intoxication case, a wills and estate case, and a few PCR cases. Interestingly enough, the last two PCR cases resulted in voting-line-soup pluralities.

Carr v. State, 2024-KA-00185-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of fondling and sexual battery, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying funding for a defense expert, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing testimony about other alleged prior bad acts, that one conviction of fondling did not merge with the conviction of sexual battery, and that the indictment was not insufficient for the defendant to prepare an adequate defense.
(9-1-0: St. Pe’ opinion; McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Smith v. State, 2024-KA-00162-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of ten counts of possession of child pornography but reversing convictions of two counts of sexual battery, holding that the evidence was not sufficient to support the sexual battery convictions, but that the doctrine of retroactive misjoinder did not require reversal of the other convictions and remanded to reconsider sentencing.
(10-0: Weddle opinion)

Good v. Sanders, 2023-CA-00669-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in a wrongful death case where a pedestrian was struck and killed by a driver, holding that there was no evidence that the defendant breached any duty owed to the pedestrian and that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in not recusing herself.
(7-3*-0: Lawrence opinion; Westbrooks specially concurred, joined by Weddle and St. Pe’ and joined in part by McCarty; McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Ruffin v. State, 2024-CA-00867-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion where the petitioner failed to include a supporting affidavit with her PCR motion and acknowledged at her plea hearing that she was freely and voluntarily admitting her guilt.
(9-1-0: McDonald opinion; Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Estate of Anderson: Brown v. Fitzgerald, 2023-CA-01131-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision setting aside a deed and ordering conveyance pursuant to the will, holding that substantial evidence supports the chancellor’s findings that the testator suffered from a weakness of intellect and the consideration for the deed was grossly inadequate.
(10-0: Wilson opinion)

Nicolaou v. State, 2023-CP-01007-COA (Civil – PCR)
Vacating the circuit court’s denial of a PCR motion as successive because the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate it.
(10-0: Carlton opinion)

Ladner v. Hinton Homes LLC, 2024-WC-00941-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s decision that a claim was not compensable under the intoxication provision, holding that substantial evidence supported the MWCC’s finding that the claimant failed to prove that intoxication was not a contributing cause of the accident.
(8-2-0: Carlton opinion; Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Taylor v. State, 2023-CA-00738-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of a PCR motion, holding that although the sentence exceeded the maximum the PCR motion was barred by the statute of limitations.
(3-2-5: Wilson principal opinion; Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; Lawrence concurred in part and in the result, joined by Emfinger, Weddle, and Set. Pe’, and joined in part by Westbrooks and McCarty; McDonald dissented without writing; McCarty dissented, joined by Barnes, Carlton, Westbrooks, and McDonald.)

Underwood v. State, 2024-CP-00423-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the claims that the petitioner’s plea was involuntary and that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance.
(4-1-4: McCarty principal opinion; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; Lawrence concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Wilson, Emfinger, and St. Pe’; Weddle did not participate.)

Other Orders

  • Nailer v. State, 2023-KA-00627-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of April 8, 15, and 22, 2025

After a few weeks of attending to other matters, I am back on the blogging horse. Fortunately, the appellate courts went relatively light on me in terms of the number of decisions handed down.

Summaries the hand downs from the Mississippi Court of Appeals from the past three weeks are below. There are several divorce cases, three mal cases (two opinions reached different results after the respective plaintiff’s expert testimony was struck), several MTCA cases, personal injury cases, felonies, an arbitration case, and more.

April 8, 2025

McFall v. Osborne, 2023-CA-01234-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in a divorce action denying the ex-husband’s Rule 60(b) motion attacking the court’s subject matter jurisdiction, holding that the chancellor had subject matter jurisdiction, that the ex-husband could not attack the merits of the underlying judgment because it was not appealed in time, and that the chancellor did not err in finding the ex-husband in contempt for failing to pay as ordered in the underlying judgment.
(9-0: Westbrooks did not participate)

Estate of Boleware v. McPhail, 2024-CA-00156-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming with modification the circuit court’s decision staying litigation and compelling arbitration, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the arbitration agreement was valid but modifying the judgment to clarify that the arbitrator must decide whether the claims are within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in the result without writing)

Short v. Polles, 2023-CA-00607-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the circuit court’s dismissal of a farmer’s suit against MDWFP for issuing a permit permitting the farmer to kill deer to protect his soybean field but limiting it to does only, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the agency was immune from suit because permit decisions were within the agency’s power and its actions were not arbitrary and capricious.
(8-2-0: Barnes and Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Other Orders

  • Brooks v. State, 2023-KA-01081-COA (granting pro se motion for time to file motion for rehearing)
  • Bridget v. State, 2025-TS-00100-COA (dismissing appeal for lack of appealable judgment)

Hand Down Page

April 15, 2025

E. Cornell Malone Corp. v. Marshall Cnty. Sch. Dist., 2024-CA-00047-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the circuit court’s dismissal of a complaint against the County related to a construction project, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the tort claims were barred by the MTCA’s one-year statute of limitations or in denying the motion to amend the complaint.
(9-1-0: Carlton dissented without separate written opinion)

Anderson v. State, 2023-KA-00967-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Pinkton v. State, 2024-CP-00655-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the claims were time-barred, waived, and without merit.
(6-4-0: McCarty concurred, joined by Wilson, Emfinger, and Weddle)

Goodson v. State, 2023-KA-00729-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress, in granting the State’s motion in limine preventing the defendant from raising the defense of bias against by the sheriff’s department, or in denying his motion for JNOV or for new trial.
(10-0)

Jordan v. State, 2023-KA-00965-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of shooting into a dwelling after reviewing the record and counsel’s Lindsey brief, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and no issues warranting reversal.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Holifield v. Highland Community Hospital, 2023-CA-01342-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming dismissal of MTCA claims against a community hospital, holding that the trial court did not err in determining that the community hospital was a division of a governmental entity and not a separate entity that could be sued or in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend to substitute the correct governmental entity because the claim would be time-barred.
(7-3-0: Wilson, McDonald, and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Lee v. Doolittle, 2023-CA-00969-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a med mal case, holding that the circuit court abused its discretion in striking the plaintiff’s expert and then in granting summary judgment for lack of expert testimony.
(5-1-4: Wilson concurred in part and in the judgment without writing; Carlton dissented, joined by Barnes, Emfinger, and St. Pe’)

Other Orders

  • Miller v. State, 2023-CP-00322-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Estate of Forkner: Berry v. Forkner, 2023-CA-00707-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

April 22, 2025

Nabors v. State, 2024-KA-00006-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault of law enforcement, holding that there was sufficient evidence of the defendant’s intent to commit aggravated assault, that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence, that the trial court did not commit plain error in giving a flight instruction, and that trial counsel was not ineffective.
(10-0)

Crocker v. Daves, 2023-CA-00602-COA (Civil – Custody)
Dismissing appeal in a custody matter, holding that the chancellor’s order holding child support in abeyance due to insufficient information before the court to award child support based on statutory guidelines was not a final, appealable order.
(10-0)

Elmore v. Elmore, 2023-CA-00875-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming a judgment granting divorce and dividing marital property, holding that the chancellor did not err in classifying assets as marital property, in determining what property was marital property or in equitably distributing marital assets, or in denying the motion for new trial or to alter or amend the judgment.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part; St. Pe’ did not participate)

Mallery v. State, 2024-CP-00220-COA (Civil – PCR)
Dismissing appeal of PCR denial, holding that there was no longer an actual controversy since the petitioner had been released from custody.
(9-0: Lawrence did not participate)

Simmons v. City of Picayune, 2024-CA-00092-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment dismissing a premises liability claim stemming from a fall on a handicap ramp, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact that the curb ramp constituted a dangerous condition.
(10-0)

Cox v. Coast 132 LLC, 2023-CA-01290-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a restaurant in a slip-and-fall case, holding that the windowsill that allegedly caused the fall was not a dangerous condition and that even if it was a dangerous condition the plaintiff could not prove that the restaurant created it or had actual or constructive knowledge of it.
(8-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Sandlin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 2023-CP-01347-COA (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming dismissal of a pro se UM claim, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the defendant had not been properly served with process and that the statute of limitations on the claim had run.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Younger v. Southern, 2022-CA-01228-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming part and reversing in part the circuit court’s judgment after a bench trial in a personal injury claim under the MTCA, affirming the award for the loss of the plaintiff’s truck, but reversing the award of damages for past, present, and future pain and suffering and reversing the award of $21,120 in medical damages for lack of expert testimony and rendering an award of $399 for past medical expenses.
(7-3: Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by McDonald and McCarty; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Westbrooks and McCarty)

Calvin-Williams v. The Greenville Clinic, P.A., 2023-CA-01021-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming the circuit court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant, holding that the circuit court did not err in striking portions of the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony and then granting summary judgment based on the lack of expert testimony.
(8-2: McDonald dissented, joined by Westbrooks)

Other Orders

  • Parker v. State, 2023-KA-00550-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Estate of Roberts: Herd v. Stokes, 2023-CA-00713-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Gardner v. State, 2023-KA-00903-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Lawson v. State, 2023-CP-01008-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Jack v. City of Meridian, 2023-CC-01339-COA (denying pro se motion to recall mandate and dismissing motion for rehearing and amended motion for rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 17, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions in what appears to be the last slate of decisions from Mississippi’s appellate courts in 2024. There are two direct criminal appeals, three PCR cases, and a $1M+ personal injury verdict.

Williams v. State, 2023-KA-00346-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not admit inadmissible hearsay by allowing an officer to testify about limited information that guided his investigation and that State did not improperly comment on the defendant’s failure to testify.
(4-4-1: McCarty dissented, joined in part by Barnes, Wilson, McDonald, and Lawrence; Westbrooks did not participate)

Parker v. State, 2023-KA-00550-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of fourth-offense simple domestic violence, holding that the trial court erred in admitting affidavits containing facts about the defendant’s prior offenses but that the error was harmless, that the trial court did not err in admitting the victim’s prior statement through her probation officer, and that because there was just one harmless error the doctrine of cumulative error did not apply.
(8-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Lawson v. State, 2023-CP-01008-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s order denying a PCR motion, holding that there was no clear error or abuse of discretion.
(10-0)

Moore v. State, 2023-CP-01147-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR mtoion, holding that the claimant did not prove that his guilty plea was involuntary or that his counsel was ineffective.
(7-1-1: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Pilot Travel Centers, LLC v. Womack, 2023-CA-00035-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming a judgment after plaintiff’s jury verdict in a slip-and-fall case where the plaintiff slipped and fell on a collapsed wet-floor sign, holding that a reasonable jury could find that the collapsed wet-floor sign constituted an unreasonably or unusually dangerous condition and that the defendant had constructive knowledge of the condition, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion denying the motion for new trial that argued that expert testimony should not have been admitted, that the plaintiff’s attorney made improper statements during closing arguments, and that the non-economic damages (that the trial court reduced from $3M to $1M) was still excessive in light of the $393,000 award of compensatory damages.
(6-2-2: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger concurred in result only without writing; Wilson dissented, joined by Barnes and joined in party by Westbrooks)

Practice Point – The majority and the dissent agreed that the plaintiff’s “safety expert” should not have been allowed to testify as such.

Ball v. State, 2023-CP-00890-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of the claim for PCR, holding that the claimant waived his argument that his right to be free from Double Jeopardy.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks specially concurred, joined by Barnes and McDonald)

Other Orders

  • None.

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 12, 2024 (and one from November 7)

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions today: one MTCA personal injury case, one direct criminal appeal, and one claim against the parole board. The Court also handed down one opinion on Thursday of last week in a direct criminal appeal.

Alexander v. State, 2023-KA-00331-COA (Criminal – Felony) (Nov. 7, 2024)
Affirming conviction of six counts of exploitation of a child and sentence to forty-years for each court to run consecutively, holding (Part One) that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to sever the six counts of child exploitation; the trial court did not err in denying a generic motion to exclude prior bad acts or in ruling on subsequent objections to testimony of prior bad acts during trial; the trial court did not err in overruling the defendant’s objections during trial to opening statement comments, to questions during various witness examinations, or to the introduction of a photographs of the defendant and a victims; the trial court did not err in denying a motion for mistrial after a witness mentioned conduct related to one of the severed counts; (Part Two) there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction; the verdicts were not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence; and the sentence was not grossly disproportionate to the crimes.
As to Part One, 8-1: McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Carlton did not participate.
As to Part Two, 6-1-2: Wilson concurred in result only; Emfinger dissented in part, joined by Barnes; Carlton did not participate.

Allred v. Tishomingo County, 2023-CA-00569-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming judgment in favor of the County after an MTCA bench trial in a personal injury action that arose after a limb fell on the roof of the plaintiffs’ vehicle, holding that the County had no statutory duty to inspect or maintain the right-of-way, that the County had no actual or constructive notice that the tree was a dangerous condition, that the County did not proximately cause the damages, that the trial court’s analysis of expert testimony was not mainfestly wrong or clearly erroneous, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion admitting opinions from the County’s expert.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT– The County moved to strike the plaintiffs’ reply brief or portions of it on the grounds that it referenced materials that were not designated as part of the record on appeal. The Court denied the motion to strike as moot because it declined to consider the documents that were not in the record on appeal pursuant to M.R.A.P. 10 and 30(a).

Walker v. State, 2023-KA-00860-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of statutory rape, holding that the trial court did not err in denying a motion to suppress the interrogation video where the defendant argued his statement was improperly obtained after he requested counsel because the defendant did not actually invoke his Sixth Amendment right to counsel with regard to the charged offense, holding that the confession was voluntary, and holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(9-1-0: McCarty concurred in result only without writing)

Siggers v. Mississippi Parole Board, 2023-CP-00900-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the trial court’s dismissal of the petitioner’s “show cause motion” seeking the compel the Parole Board to show case as to why his parole was denied and was not set for hearing until 2025, holding that the trial court correctly determined that it lack authority to review the parole board’s decision to deny parole and set off the parole hearing.
(8-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Other Orders

  • Scott v. State, 2022-KA-00830-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Morland v. Morland, 2023-CA-00237-COA (granting appellee’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees)
  • Weeks v. Weeks, 2023-CA-00427-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Walker v. Hasty, 2023-CA-00675-COA (denying motion for appellate attorney’s fees)
  • Corr Properties, LLC v. Proctor, 2023-CA-00782-COA (granting motion for appellate attorney’s fees)
  • Miller v. State, 2023-CP-00812-COA (dismissing motion for rehearing as untimely)
  • Thadison v. State, 2024-TS-00389-COA (granting pro se motion to recall mandate and reinstate appeal)
  • Mallett v. State, 2024-TS-01091-COA (allowing appeal to proceed as appellant’s response to show-cause notice was well taken)
  • Rodgers v. State, 2024-TS-01116-COA (suspending deadline to appeal pursuant to M.R.A.P. 2(c) and allowing appeal to proceed)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of October 17, 2024

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-SCT consolidated 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)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 14, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. There was nary a dissent, but a conviction of child exploitation was reversed. The are other felony opinions, two divorce cases, a contract case involving a defunct LLC, and a PCR case.

Nunn v. State, 2021-KA-01371-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of having meth within 1,500 feet of a church, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for mental competency evaluation where the trial court twice held a hearing to determine whether the defendant understood and appreciated the significance of the trial proceedings and had the ability to rationally aid in his defense or in denying the defendant’s entrapment instruction.
(10-0)

Singh v. State, 2022-CP-00273-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding no error in revoking post-release supervision since the plaintiff absconded from supervision.
(10-0)

Williams v. Williams, 2021-CA-00758-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming judgment of divorce, holding that the chancellor’s valuation of the marital residence was based on evidentiary support in the record.
(10-0)

Wakefield v. State, 2021-KA-00187-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of accessory after the fact to murder, to kidnapping, and to auto theft, holding:
1. The circuit court had jurisdiction because it sat in one of the counties where the crimes were committed;
2. That the convictions did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause even though the defendant gave just one car ride because he was an accessory to three distinct felonies so the merger doctrine did not apply;
3. That there was no error based on the weight or sufficiency of the evidence;
4. That the indictment was not defective for failing to include “intent” where it did include “willfully;” and
5. That there was no error in admitting autopsy and crime scene photos.
(8-1-0: McDonald concurred in result only without separate written opinion; Emfinger did not participate)

NOTE – These convictions stemmed from the kidnapping and murder of six-year-old Kingston Frazier in 2017.

Holmes v. Lankford, 2022-CA-00203-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming summary judgment for the defendant in a dispute over a sand and gravel operation agreement, holding that the plaintiff did not have standing to enforce the agreement that was between the defendant and the plaintiff’s administratively dissolved LLC and that the plaintiff did not otherwise show he was entitled to relief.
(10-0)

NOTE – Conducting business through an LLC can cut both ways:

Mason v. State, 2021-KA-00964-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of child exploitation, holding that the trial court erred in denying funds for an independent computer forensics expert because the State’s witness/detective should have been considered an expert and that this error hindered the defendant’s jurisdictional challenge and led to evidentiary errors that contributed to an unfair trial.
(7-3-0: Wilson, Smith, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result)

Moss v. Moss, 2021-CA-00452-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Modified opinion on motion for rehearing affirming the chancellor’s decision granting the wife divorce on the ground of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment, holding that there was substantial evidence to support that finding (read the facts for yourself if you have doubts), that the subject matter of wife’s expert’s opinions was adequately disclosed and was not even a basis for the chancellor’s decision, and the husband’s claim for separate maintenance was moot since the divorce was affirmed.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Hornsby v. Hornsby, 2020-CA-01091-COA (dismissing motion for attorney’s fees)

Blount v. State, 2021-KA-00204-COA (denying rehearing)

Mayberry v. Cottonport Hardwoods, 2021-CA-00246-COA (denying rehearing)

Anderson v. State, 2021-KA-01340-COA (granting pro se motion for extension of time to file motion for rehearing and recalling mandate)

Easterling v. State, 2022-CA-00796-COA (vacating circuit court’s order and rendering judgment dismissing motion for PCR)

Hunter v. State, 2022-TS-01269-COA (dismissing appeal as untimely)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 13, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Other Orders

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hand Down List