Tag: Medical Malpractice

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of October 23 and October 30, 2025

My summaries of last week’s and today’s action from the Mississippi Supreme Court are below.

I will blame my tardiness in part on the fact that last week I had the privilege of presenting a civil case law update at the 2025 Law Clerk and Judicial Staff In-Person and Virtual CLE presented by The Bench-Bar Liaison Committee of the Mississippi Bar. It was a great time of catching-up with friends and presenting on something I am passionate about.

October 23, 2025

  • No Opinions

Other Orders

  • Harris v. Casino Vicksburg, LLC, 2023-CT-00959-SCT (denying cert)
  • Deer v. State, 2024-CT-00019-SCT (denying cert)
  • Hatchett v. State, 2024-CT-00100-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

October 30, 2025

Lakeland Premier Women’s Clinic, PLLC v. Jackson, 2024-IA-00445-SCT (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Reversing the trial court’s denial of a clinic and doctor’s motion for summary judgment in a med mal case on interlocutory appeal, holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and granting the plaintiff additional time to obtain an expert affidavit where the plaintiff filed a response to the motion for summary judgment on the day of the hearing without supporting medical affidavit or testimony.
(9-0: Branning for the Court)

Practice Point – The Court drew a distinction between the rule 56(c) which allows affidavits opposing an MSJ to be served as late as the day before the hearing and the uniform rule requiring a response to be filed within 10 days.

Jones v. State, 2024-KA-01356-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted aggravated-assault, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence where evidence showed that the defendant pointed a gun at his neighbor before firing it.
(9-0: Maxwell for the Court)

Elliott Land Developments, LLC v. Board of Supervisors of Jackson County, Mississippi, 2024-CA-01249-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the circuit court’s affirmance the board of supervisors’ denial of a rezoning application, holding that the board had jurisdiction, that whether the developer met its burden was a fairly debatable issue based on substantial evidence presented by each side, and that the board’s denial was not arbitrary or capricious.
(9-0: Coleman for the Court)

Chung v. State, 2023-CT-00362-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing the Court of Appeals and reinstating the trial court’s judgment, holding that sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s decision finding that the State met its burden of proof required in civil-forfeiture proceedings.
(5-4: Branning for the Court; Sullivan dissented, joined by King, Coleman, and Ishee)

Note – A 5-4 Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and a 5-4 Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals.

Other Orders

  • 1st Step Sober Living LLC v. Cleveland, 2023-CT-00665-SCT (denying cert)
  • In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2025-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $189,619.03, in civil legal assistance funds among the MS Center for Legal Services, MS Volunteer Lawyers Project, and North MS Rural Legal Services)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 30, 2025

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions yesterday. We closed out the month with a med mal/MTCA decision, a workers’ comp borrowed employee case, a felony conviction, a PCR case, and an MDOC administrative remedy case.

University of Mississippi Medical Center v. Giddens, 2024-CA-00842-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming judgment in favor of the plaintiff in a wrongful death med mal case brought under the MTCA, holding that the trial court’s decision that the decedent had not given informed consent for a procedure that constituted a breach of the standard of care and that the decision to perform that procedure during another procedure was a breach of the standard of care was supported by substantial credible evidence.
(10-0: St. Pe’ for the Court)

Walker v. State, 2024-CP-01032-COA (Civil – PCR)
Vacating and rendering judgment dismissing a PCR petition because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the merits where the petition failed to first obtain permission from the Mississippi Supreme Court.
(10-0: McCarty for the Court)

Adams v. Hinds County School District, 2024-CA-00756-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision granting summary judgment in a personal injury case, holding that the trial court did not err in determining that the plaintiff (an employee of a staffing service) was a borrowed employee of the school district and that workers’ compensation was therefore her exclusive remedy.
(10-0: Wilson for the Court)

Walton v. State, 2024-KA-00818-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of felony possession of stolen property, holding that the evidence was sufficient, that the trial could did not err in denying the motion for directed verdict or in refusing a peremptory instruction asserting that the State failed to prove the element of guilty knowledge, and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0: Carlton for the Court)

Carroll v. State, 2024-CP-00875-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s dismissal of the petition for clarification of a sentencing order, holding that the circuit court reached the right result but for the wrong reason and explaining that the petition was untimely.
(7-3-0: Wilson, Westbrooks, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Other Orders

  • Shipley v. Shipley, 2023-CA-00814-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Stephney v. State, 2023-KA-00936-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Mortera v. Kona Villa Owners Association, Inc., 2023-CA-01297-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 October 22 and October 29, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions last week and seven this week. You can read summaries of the lot below.

October 22, 2024

Hampton v. State, 2023-KA-00068-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of first-degree murder and using a firearm during the commission of a felony, but vacating the consecutive five-year sentence for using a firearm during the commission of a felony where he was also sentenced to life.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

Baur v. Ribelin, 2023-CA-00018-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming on direct and cross appeal in an adverse possession action, holding that the chancellor did not err in denying the claim for adverse possession or in confirming title in the rightful owner.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Johnson v. SW Gaming LLC, 2023-CA-00505-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming the circuit court’s decisions granting the defendants’ motions for summary judgment in an inadequate security case, holding that the evidence was not sufficient to establish an atmosphere of violence or actual or constructive knowledge that the assailant was a violent person and the evidence was not sufficient to establish garden variety negligence.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

In the Interest of A.R.H., a Minor: Malone v. Jackson County Dept. of Child Protection Services, 2023-CA-00420-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the youth court’s custody order, holding that the youth court was in its discretion to find aggravated circumstances warranting bypassing reasonable efforts for reunification and that there were no evidentiary errors.
(5-4: Wilson and Westbrooks dissented without writing; McDonnald dissented, joined by Westbrooks and McCarty)

October 29, 2024

Banks v. Banks, 2023-CA-00515-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Dismissing appeal for want of an appealable judgment.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

Ware v. State, 2023-CP-00909-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming summary denial of PCR motion, holding that the motion was time-barred and successive.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

Morland v. Morland, 2023-CA-00237-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s rulings in a divorce matter, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding that it was in the child’s best interest to be in the mother’s exclusive custody subject to visitation, in calculation and award of child support to the mother, or in awarding the mother attorney’s fees.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

Mallard v. State, 2023-CP-01155-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the petitioner could not duck the successive petitions bar by proving any exceptions.
(7-1-1: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing)

Sessums v. Chicken Nugget, Inc., 2023-CA-00128-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in a premises liability case where the plaintiff tripped over two parking curbs, holding that the plaintiff did not come forward with evidence to prove that two abutting parking curbs created an unreasonably dangerous condition.
(9-0: Weddle did not participate)

Scott v. State, 2023-KA-00559-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of one count of child abuse and conviction of life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for a father who abused his infant child, holding (1) that the admission of the father’s prior conviction for failure to register as a sex offender was not reversible error though it was error to refer to it as “failure to register as a sex offender” instead of “failure to register” which was the actual language in the prior sentencing order, (2) that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence, and (3) the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(4-5-0: Wilson and Smith concur in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks, McDonald, and Lawrence concur in result only without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Tisdale v. South Central Regional Medical Center, 2023-CA-00231-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming dismissal for failure prosecute, holding that the trial court did not err in reviewing the motion under Rule 41(b) instead of Rule 37, did not miscalculate the delay and correctly found clear delay with no activity occurring to advance the case to judgment in over two years, and did not abuse its discretion in determining that anything less than a dismissal would be unjust.
(6-3: McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Lawrence dissented, joined by McCarty, and joined in part by McDonald)

NOTE – The dissent argued that the majority discounted the impact of COVID.

Other Orders

October 22, 2024

  • Weatherly v. Weatherly, 2022-CA-00804-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Signaigo v. Grinstead, 2022-CA-01212-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Jackson v. State, 2023-KA-00201-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Neal v. Cain, 2023-CP-00625-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Washington v. State, 2024-CP-00059-COA (granting pro se motion to recall mandate and accept untimely brief)

October 29, 2024

  • Wilson v. State, 2023-CA-00070-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Shanks v. State, 2023-CP-00271-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Davis v. State, 2023-KA-00636-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Bradley v. State, 2023-CP-0764-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page – October 22, 2024

Hand Down Page – October 29, 2024

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of October 15, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today. Two are direct criminal appeals, one is a divorce case addressing child support and division of property, one is an easement case, and the other is a med mal case dismissed for lack of prosecution. Though he did not participate any of today’s decisions, newly minted Judge John D. Weddle made his debut on the hand downs today.

Chapman v. Chapman, 2023-CA-00615-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing findings of the chancellor in a divorce action, holding that the chancellor erred in his calculation of the father’s adjusted gross income and remanding for child support recalculation and holding that the chancellor erred concerning whether a boat was marital or non-marital property.
(5-4-0: Wilson and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Carlton and Westbrooks concurred in result only; Weddle did not participate)

Word v. U.S. Bank, 2023-CA-00160-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Reversing the chancellor’s judgment in an easement case, holding that the chancellor erred in awarding an easement by necessity because the plaintiff was not entitled to an easement by necessity and presented no evidence regarding the costs of using an available alternative access route.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Randall v. State, 2023-KA-00587-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault and first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of one victim’s postmortem toxicology report showing the presence of recreational drugs in his system or in applying the firearm enhancement.
(8-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Eason v. South Central Regional Medical Center, 2023-CA-00261-COA (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Affirming dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute a med mal case against a nursing home, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case pursuant to Rule 41(b) after two years of delay.
(5-1-3: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing; McDonald dissented without writing; Lawrence dissented, joined by McDonald and McCarty; Westbrooks joined in part; Weddle did not particiapte)

N0te – The dissent’s position was that the COVID-10 pandemic was a mitigating factor and that the trial court’s failure to consider it was an abuse of discretion. It concludes:

Cauthen v. State, 2023-KA-00589-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of non-residential burglary, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of trespass.
(8-0: Emfinger and Weddle did not participate)

Other Orders

  • Archer v. Harlow’s Casino Resort & Spa, 2022-CP-01060-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Doss v. State, 2022-KA-01185 (denying rehearing)
  • Black v. State, 2022-KA-01223-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Jiles v. State, 2023-CP-00383-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 19, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions today. There was a med mal case dismissed on statute of limitations grounds, an IIED verdict, an interpleader by a bank to determine the appropriate beneficiary-on-death of a CD, a zoning decision, a felony conviction, and a few PCR cases.

Jordan v. States, 2022-CP-00874-COA, consolidated with 2022-CP-00877-COA and 2023-CP-00072-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denials of three PCR motions, holding that all three motions were barred as subsequent PCR motions and that no exception to the bar was supported.
(10-0)

Jones v. State, 2022-KA-01117-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of child exploitation after the “underage female” the defendant attempted to meet up with turned out to be an undercover officer, holding that the entrapment jury instruction was properly rejected and that the convictions were not against he overwhelming weight of evidence.
(10-0)

Rogers v. NewSouth NeuroSpine LLC, 2022-CP-01036-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations and denying post-judgment motions, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion denying the pro se plaintiff’s Rule 60 motion and also denying the defendants’ motion for sanctions, damages, and fees.
(10-0)

Gray v. Johnson, 2023-CA-00339-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in an interpleader initiated by a bank over the proper “pay-on-death” beneficiary of a CD, holding that the designation was latently ambiguous but that extrinsic evidence supported the chancellor’s decision whcih was not an abuse of discretion and was not wrong or clearly erroneous.
(6-4-0: Wilson, McCarty, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Greenlee concurred in result only without separate written opinion)

Jackson County, Mississippi, v. Marcellus, 2023-CA-00111-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that had reversed the decision of the Board of Supervisors denying a request to reclassify property from residential to commercial, holding that the Board’s decision was not arbitrary and capricious that the owner had not proved a change in character and a public need by clear and convincing evidence.
(9-0: Lawrence did not participate)

Bain v. State, 2023-CP-00206-COA (Civil – PCR)
Reversing dismissal of PCR motion for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the petitioner did not need to obtain permission from the Supreme Court to file his petition.
(9-1-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Green v. State, 2023-CP-00448-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the motion was barred as successive and that none of the exceptions applied, and that they lacked merit.
(8-2-0: McCarty and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Weaver v. Ross, 2022-CA-00426-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming a judgment in favor of a car restorer against a man who initiated litigation by suing for alleged negligent restoration after a jury trial, holding that the trial court did not err in excluding medical records related to the owner’s blood pressure for lack of authentication and an invoice on allegedly comparative restoration, that the verdict on IIED was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the overwhelming weight of it, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees.
(6-4-0: McCarty specially concurred, joined by Greenlee, Westbrooks, McDonald, Lawrence, and Smith; Wilson concurred in part and in the result, joined by Lawrence, McCarty, and Emfinger and joined in part by Greenlee, Westbrooks, McDonald, and Smith.)

NOTE – McCarty’s special concurrence has precedential effect. You should read it for its discussion and clarification of the fact that claims for IIED cannot stem from the distress caused solely by litigation.

Wilson’s concurrence was one full vote short of precedential effect, but was joined in part by four additional judges. Wilson joined Parts I and II of the majority opinion, but parted ways over the analysis of the attorney’s fees issue. Wilson agreed the judgment should be affirmed because the challenge to the award of attorney’s fees was procedurally barred, but would have reversed if it was not barred.

PRACTICE POINT – Wilson’s concurrence contains a good reminder of the importance of reviewing the record on appeal for completeness. Don’t assume the circuit clerk included everything you designated.

Other Orders

DeJohnette v. State, 2022-KA-00249-COA (denying rehearing)

Gilmer v. State, 2022-KM-00257-COA (denying rehearing)

Hutson v. Hutson, 2022-CA-00569-COA (denying rehearing)

Daly v. Raines, 2022-CA-00600-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of July 18, 2023

I am declaring an end to the hiatus caused by the tree falling on my house. That war rages on, but these decisions are not going to summarize themselves. I aspire to go back and summarize the decisions handed down while I was down, but I am going to prioritize summarizing new hand downs going forward.

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeals handed down four opinions. One is an appeal of a verdict in a med mal bench trial. The other three are PCR cases, one of which yielded a 5-1-4 split.

Singing River Health System v. Brand, 2022-CA-00090-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming judgment for the plaintiff in a med mal case against a hospital after a bench trial, holding that the hospital’s vicarious liability argument was procedurally barred because it not raised at the trial court level, that the plaintiff’s experts were qualified to testify about a breach of the standard of care and cause of death and provided sufficient evidence under the “lost chance of recovery” theory, and that there was substantial evidence to support the trial court’s findings.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in result only; Lawrence did not participate.)

Tate v. State, 2021-CP-01237-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err determining that there was no evidence showing that the plea of guilt was involuntary or that counsel was ineffective.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate.)

Havercome v. State, 2022-CA-00391-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of PCR motion, holding that the motion was barred by the UPCCRA.
(10-0)

Love v. State, 2021-CP-01101-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of motion for PCR, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that there was a factual basis for his plea, that the please was voluntary, that the claim to withdraw his plea was time-barred, and that counsel was not ineffective.
(5-1-4: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; Emfinger dissented, joined by Wilson, Westbrooks, and McCarty, and joined in part by McDonald.)

Other Orders

Alford v. State, 2022-KA-00025-COA (denying rehearing)

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

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of April 6, 2023

I am circling back to pick up the rest of the hand downs that I missed last week. The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down six opinions last Thursday with a couple of reversals. There were two skirmishes in med mal cases, one involved an arbitration agreement and the other the substitution of the administrator of an estate. There is a UM case about the right to UM benefits after cutting off the carrier’s subrogation rights. There is also a sixteenth section land case and what should have been an MTCA case. The Supreme Court also denied a petition for reinstatement to the practice of law.

Mississippi Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Peteet, 2021-IA-01420-SCT (Civil – Insurance)
Reversing the denial of a motion to dismiss by a UM carrier, holding that the insured’s execution of a settlement agreement with the at-fault driver unlawfully cut off the UM carrier’s right of subrogation and the UM carrier therefore had no duty to pay the UM claim.
(9-0)

Sill v. State, 2021-KA-00317-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence found in his car because the defendant did not prove that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in a stolen vehicle, that the State met its burden to prove construction possession, and that the jury could reasonable infer that the untested substance was of the same substance as what was tested.
(9-0)

Belhaven Senior Care, LLC v. Smith, 2022-CA-00050-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming denial of a motion to compel arbitration, holding that the facility failed to prove that the signatory of the arbitration agreement was the resident’s healthcare surrogate, that the plaintiff was not barred by direct-benefit estoppel from contesting the validity of the arbitration agreement, and that the decdent was not a third-party beneficiary of the agreement.
(9-0)

North Bolivar Consolidated Sch. Dist. v. Jones, 2021-IA-01235-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Reversing the denial of the school district’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the school district’s past acceptance of late rent payments for sixteenth section land were not authorized and could not form the basis of estoppel that would prevent the school district from assessing statutory late-payment penalties.
(9-0)

Morton v. City of Clarksdale, 2022-CA-00216-SCT (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the dismissal of claims that an arrest violated constitutional rights, holding that most of the plaintiff’s claims fell under the MTCA and were barred by the MTCA’s one-year statute of limitations, that the constitutional claims were barred by the three-year statute of limitations, and that the malicious prosecution claim was barred by the one-year statute of limitations for such claims.
(9-0)

Otuseso v. Estate of Mason, 2021-IA-01099-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts and Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision removing the administratrix of an estate who had filed a wrongful death suit against a doctor on behalf of the estate and substituting two heirs-at-law as coadminstrators, holding that the doctor’s motion to intervene in the chancery court proceedings was moot since the chancellor had properly removed the unqualified administrator and appointed successor administrators.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Stewart v. The Mississippi Bar, 2022-BR-00382-SCT (denying fourth petition for reinstatement to the practice of law)

Virden v. Campbell Delong, LLC, 2021-CT-00478-SCT (granting cert)
I put this on the “cert watch” list when the COA opinion was handed down. It is a lawyer fight over money with a 5-5 COA decision that left the trial court’s ruling in place. (My summary of the COA decision is here.)

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