Tag: Mississippi Supreme Court

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of March 2, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down one decision yesterday but also granted cert in an interesting MTCA case involving police-protection immunity that split the Court of Appeals.

State v. RW Development, LLC, 2021-CA-01134-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancery court’s judgment denying the City’s request for declaratory judgment declaring that it had the sole and exclusive authority to lease Public Trust Tidelands, holding that Mississippi statutory law grants the City the authority to lease the property to a developer for public use and to build a pier without “obtaining a redundant second grant of authority from the Secretary of State in the form of a lease.”
(6-3: King dissented, joined by Kitchens and Griffis.)

Other Orders

Curry v. State, 2018-M-01543 (granting application to file successive motion for PCR)

Towns v. Panola County Bd. of Supervisors, 2020-CT-01364-SCT (denying cert)

Wilson v. Lexington Manor Senior Care, LLC, 2021-CT-00072-SCT (denying cert)

Edwards v. State, 2021-CT-00261-SCT (denying cert)

Phillips v. City of Oxford, 2021-CT-00639-SCT (granting cert)

NOTE – This is an interesting cert grant in a police-protection immunity case that split the Court of Appeals 5-4 with the majority reversing the judgment in favor of the City. Here is my summary of the COA decision:

Phillips v. City of Oxford, 2021-CA-00639-COA (Civil – Personal Injury/MTCA)
Reversing the circuit court’s finding after a bench trial that the City was protected by police-protection immunity after an officer’s vehicle crossed an intersection against a red light and struck the plaintiff’s vehicle while the officer was responding to an emergency, holding that the facts of this case met the “exceptional circumstances” requirement for finding reckless disregard and that the officer acted with conscious indifference to the safety of the public and the certain parts of the police chief’s testimony were not credible.
( 5-4: Judge Lawrence dissented, joined by Judge Wilson, Judge Smith, and Judge Emfinger; Judge Greenlee did not participate.)

NOTE– The Court of Appeals declined the appellant’s invitation to adopt a “reckless disregard per se” rule and maintained the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis.

Jones v. State, 2021-CT-01088-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 23, 2023

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

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

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

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

Other Orders

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

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

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

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

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 16, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down one opinion today, along with several orders including the suspension of a municipal court judge for abuse of power.

Garcia v. State, 2020-DR-01224-SCT (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that even under heightened scrutiny due in capital cases the plaintiff did not present a substantial showing that he was denied the right to effective assistance of counsel for not pursuing and presenting fetal alcohol syndrome disorder as a mitigating factor, for not presenting and explaining all mitigating evidence, or for not developing and presenting evidence that the defendant was under the substantial domination of another person.
(6-3-0: Kitchens concurred in part and in the result, joined by King and Ishee and joined in part by Coleman)

Other Orders

Cooper v. State, 2018-M-01124 (denying PCR motion)

Gilmer v. McRae, 2021-CA-00028-SCT (granting appellees’ motion for fees and costs)

Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Municipal Court Judge Carlos E. Moore, 2022-JP-00504-SCT (suspending respondent from office without pay for sixty days from his position as municipal judge for both Grenada and Clarksdale, ordering public reprimand in each county, and ordering a $1,500 fine)

Yates Services, LLC v. Hill, 2022-M-00879-SCT (denying petition for interlocutory appeal)

Hawkins v. State, 2022-M-01131 (denying application for leave to proceed in trial court, finding the application frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 9, 2023

On Thursday, the Mississippi Supreme Court handed down one opinion, and I was approaching the confluence of a dispositive/Daubert motions deadline in one case and an expert designation deadline in another.

Heritage Hunter Knoll, LLC v. Lamar County, Mississippi, 2021-CA-01325-SCT (Civil – States Boards and Agencies)
Affirming in part and denying in part the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction of a property owner’s appeal of the County Board’s decisions related to a waste ordinance, holding that the appeal of an amendment to the ordinance was time-barred because it was not appealed within the 10-day time limitation in section 11-51-75, but also holding that the appeal of the Board’s denial of a variance request was timely filed and remanding for a full hearing on that issue.
(9-0)

NOTE – The Supreme Court also held that the property owner did not engage in claim splitting when it filed a separate lawsuit in federal court while appealing the Board’s actions:

Other Orders

Wallace v. State, 2020-M-00979 (denying application for leave to file motion for PCR, finding the filing frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

Crossgates United Methodist Church v. Ming, 2020-IA-01358-SCT (dismissing interlocutory appeals)

White v. White, 2021-CT-00333-SCT (denying cert)

Beasley v. State, 2021-CT-00653-SCT (denying cert)

Norwood v. State, 2021-CT-00802-SCT (denying cert)

Bland v. State, 2021-KA-00973-SCT (denying rehearing)

Patterson v. MDES, 2021-CT-01150-SCT (dismissing “notice of appeal” and cert petition)

In re: Debbie Travis Robertson, 2022-M-01032 (denying petition for disqualification of judge)

In re: William C. Spencer, Jr., 2022-M-01041 (denying petition for disqualification of judge)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 2, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a consolidated appeal resolving a “circuit split” where two state circuit courts reached opposite conclusions on the same legal issue involving UM coverage for accidents caused by MTCA-immune tortfeasors. (Come for the holding, stay for the strong words about the Fifth Circuit’s earlier Erie-guess on this issue.) The other opinion involves the rights of a successor in title to a reciprocal easement.

Lee v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2021-CA-00882-SCT consolidated with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Cooper, 2021-IA-01006-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Resolving a “circuit split” by holding that under the UM statutes (as amended in 2009) the UM carrier was required to provide UM coverage to plaintiffs for damages sustained in collisions with entities afforded immunity under MTCA, reversing summary judgment in one case and affirming the denial of summary judgment in the other case.
(7-0: Chief Justice Randolph and Justice Beam did not participate.)

Practice Point – The Supreme Court specifically addressed the limited precedential value of this decisions:

Note – The Supreme Court would like us to remember that the Fifth Circuit’s Erie-guesses are not binding precedent in Mississippi. McGlothin is a Fifth Circuit opinion from 2019 that the Mississippi Supreme Court did not exactly agree with:

So what does the Mississippi Supreme Court do?

You can read that approach (that involves the doctrine of in pari materia) in the opinion.

TransMontaigne Operating Company, L.P. v. Loresco I, LLC, 2021-CA-00980-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s denial of the plaintiff’s request for declaratory and injunctive relief, holding that the express language of a reciprocal easement was specific and clear and allowed the successor in title to the easement to full use of the easement per its terms and did not limit the successor to the scope of actual use by the predecessor in title.
(7-2: Justice Griffis dissented, joined by Justice King.)

Other Orders

In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (granting motion to amend Miss. R. Civ. P. 45 – *An order amending Rule 45 was also on the hand down list last week. The link to the order on the hand down page last week is no longer active, but you can see a copy of the PDF that was handed down last week on my post from last week. I quickly compared the two and didn’t immediately see any differences except the date that the amendment will go into effect based on the date the orders were entered.)

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (appointing County Judge Carol Jones Russell of Forrest Countyas a member of the Supreme Court of Mississippi Advisory Committee on Rules on the nomination by the Mississippi Conference of County Court Judges)

Fannings v. State, 2015-M-01061 (denying petition for application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the petition frivolous, and warning against further frivolous filings)

Cook v. State, 2017-M-00455 (denying motion for PCR, finding the filing frivolous, and restricting the plaintiff from further filings in forma pauperis)

Moffett v. State, 2021-CT-00622-SCT (denying cert)

Billie v. State, 2022-M-00416 (denying petition for application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the petition frivolous, and warning against further frivolous filings)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 26, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down just one opinion today, but it was a significant decision in the PCR arena. Of great interest to civil practitioners, the Supreme Court also amended Rule 37 and Rule 45 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure. The amendments to Rule 45 should make life easier, especially for paralegals and the circuit clerks’ offices.

Howell v. State, 2020-CA-00868-SCT (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of a motion for PCR, overruling Rowland and holding that the plaintiff could not overcome the statute of limitations bar by asserting a fundamental-rights exception and holding that the petition otherwise lacked merit.
(7-3: Justice Kitchens dissented, joined by Justice King and Justice Ishee)

NOTE – Here is the language overruling Rowland:

ANOTHER NOTE – When both the majority and dissent cite Newell v. State you know its a classic, Mississippi separation of powers throw-down.

In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT
Amending Rule 37 and Rule 45 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure. Both amendments will impact civil practice and need to be studied and accounted for once they take effect. The big news from my perspective is that the amended Rule 45 provides a mechanism for attorneys to issue subpoenas in their cases not unlike the federal court rule. See the text of the amended rule and comment below for the details.

Here is the En Banc Order with the amended Rule 37 attached:

700_6149651Download

Here is the same for Rule 45:

700_6151791Download

Other Orders

Butler v. State, 2020-CT-00806-SCT (dismissing cert that had previously been granted)

Nelson v. State, 2020-M-01417 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding it frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing further PCR petitions in forma pauperis)

Camphor v. State, 2021-CT-00048-SCT (denying cert)

Fisher v. State, 2021-KA-00828-SCT (denying rehearing)

Anderson v. State, 2022-M-00582 (denying motion for PCR, finding it frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2023-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $148,438.33 in civil legal assistance funds among the MS Center for Legal Services, MS Volunteer Lawyers Project, and North MS Rural Legal Services)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 19, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today and both are reversals. One is an appeal of a property tax valuation and the other is an appeal of a chancellor’s decision disqualifying an attorney under Rule 4.2 of the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct due to the attorney’s prior representation of a partnership in a lawsuit involving one of the partners.

Mississippi Hub, LLC v. Baldwin, 2021-CA-00935-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing summary judgment that found an appeal of a property tax valuation was untimely, holding that the appeal was timely and that there were genuine issues of material fact as to the value of the underground natural gas facility at issue.
(8-1-0: Chief Justice Randolph concurred in result only without separate written opinion)

Pettis v. Simrall, 2021-IA-01253-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Reversing the chancellor’s decision disqualifying counsel under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct because of an alleged conflict of interest, holding that no attorney-client relationship between an attorney and a partner in a general partnership can be implied from an attorney’s representation of the general partnership and that a chancellor may not preemptively disqualify an attorney for practices and proceedings that were not before the court.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Chism v. State, 2018-M-01436 (denying application for leave to file motion for PCR, finding that the filing was frivolous, and warning against future frivolous filings)

Parker v. Ross, 2020-CT-01055-SCT (granting cert)

Roberson v. State, 2022-CT-01208-SCT (denying cert)

Skinner v. State, 2021-CT-00080-SCT (denying cert)

Sel Business Services, LLC v. Lord, 2021-CT-00368-SCT (granting cert)

Terpening v. F.L. Crane & Sons, Inc., 2021-CT-00544-SCT (denying cert)

Longo v. City of Waveland, 2021-CA-00735-SCT (denying rehearing)

Lewis v. State, 2021-CT-00736-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 15, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a criminal case dealing with a Confrontation Clause violation and the other is a judicial estoppel case that reversed the trial court because of an intervening decisions with a special concurrence that garnered a majority of the Court. The Supreme Court also granted cert in a slip-and-fall case that I had not summarized because the decision from the Court of Appeals was handed down back in June on a Thursday instead of Tuesday so it escaped my notice.

Saunders v. NCAA, 2020-CA-01146-SCT (Civil – Torts)
Reversing the trial court’s dismissal of claims based on judicial estoppel, holding that the plaintiff had no duty to disclose claims for declaratory relief during his Chapter 7 bankruptcy and that the dismissal of the money damages claim was in error per an intervening special concurrence that held that judicial estoppel should not be presumed and is, rather, a fact-specific inquiry that must include how the bankruptcy could dealt with the omission.
(7-2: Justice Coleman concurred in part and dissented in part; Justice Griffis concurred in part and dissented in part)

PRACTICE POINT – Regular readers might recall a discussion about the special concurrence referenced in today’s decision. The case is Jones v. Alcorn State University, 337 So. 3d 1062 (Miss. 2022) and Justice Maxwell’s special concurrence in that case was joined by four other justices. I wondered aloud about the precedential effect of a five-justice special concurrence and then later passed along the answer. In Saunders, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the trial court based upon the holding of the special concurrence in Jones.

Willis v. State, 2021-KA-00734-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, holding that the trial court violated the defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause by not allowing cross-examination of the lead investigator about prior inconsistent statements but that the error was harmless, that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s self-defense instruction, and that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence.
(6-3-0: Justice Beam concurred in part and in the result, joined by Chief Justice Randolph and Justice Maxwell)

NOTE – For some reason it jumped out that both Kitchens’s majority opinion and Beam’s concurrence utilized the superior (per Strunk & White) “-s’s” to make Williams’s name possessive.

Other Orders

In Re: Rules of Discipline for the Mississippi Bar, 89-R-99010-SCT (appointing Hon. Mark A. Maples as a member of the Complaint Tribunal)

In Re: Tavares Reed, 2017-M-01391 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding it frivolous, and restricting the petitioner from filing further applications in forma pauperis)

Moffett v. State, 2018-DR-00276-SCT (denying rehearing and/or reconsideration)

Thomas v. Boyd Biloxi LLC, 2021-CT-00265-SCT (granting cert)
NOTE – I did not recall this case from June. I looked back and realized it escaped my notice because it was an an off-cycle hand-down from the Court of Appeals on Thursday, June 2. The plaintiff slipped and fell on a pool deck after exiting a hot tub. A 5-1-4 Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment dismissing the case, holding that the evidence did not satisfy the standard to defeat summary judgment and that the trial court did not err in denying part of the plaintiff’s 56(f) request.

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 8, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down to five opinions today. One wades into a contingency-fee contract dispute, one is a statutory interpretation case involving the bond for appeals by former public school employees, one addresses the admissibility of a defendant’s lay testimony that he suffers from PTSD, and two are related to Bar disciplinary proceedings.

Gilmer v. McRae, 2021-CA-00028-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the trial court’s dismissal of a complaint stemming from a dispute over a contingency fee arrangement and its award of attorney’s fees, holding that the defendant’s attorneys (who were also defendants) were immune from suit as they were acting in their capacity as attorneys, there was no abuse of discretion in awarding attorney’s fees against the plaintiff, and there was no abuse of discretion in denying the plaintiff’s amended motion to amend.
(9-0)

Greenville Public School District v. Thomas, 2021-IA-00456-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming on interlocutory appeal the chancellor’s decision setting the bond for an appeal by a former public school district employee, holding that section 37-9-113(2) does not require a bond to cover the cost of the transcript and that there was no abuse of discretion in setting the bond at the statutory minimum of $200.
(8-1-0: Justice Ishee concurred in part and and in the result)

Bland v. State, 2021-KA-00973-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err by excluding the defendant’s lay testimony claiming he suffered from PTSD.
(5-4-0: Justice Kitchen concurred in part and in the result, joined by Justice King, Justice Coleman, and Justice Ishee–this concurrence opined that the exclusion was error but that the error was harmless)

Louvier v. The Mississippi Bar, 2022-BR-00205-SCT (Civil – Bar Matters)
Granting reinstatement over the Bar’s opposition.
(9-0)

The Mississippi Bar v. Petty, 2022-BD-00402-SCT (Civil – Bar Matters)
Ordering public reprimand and payment of the Bar’s costs.
(9-0)

Other Orders

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (appointing or reappointing members of the Advisory Committee on Rules)

Daniels v. Family Dollar Stores of Mississippi, Inc., 2021-CT-00781-SCT (denying cert where COA affirmed summary judgment for defendant in slip and fall case as summarized here) [*Corrected link]

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of December 1, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. The first addresses the applicable standards for taking testimony of minors 12 or older in custody disputes. The other is a 5-4 split on whether a minor can be bound by a noncompete that covers intellectual property and provides for liquidated damages under the exception for contracts “affecting personal property.”

Denham v. Denham, 2020-CT-00675-SCT (Civil – Custody)
Affirming and part and reversing in part a chancellor’s rulings in a custody dispute, holding that the chancellor applied the incorrect legal standard in deciding that the children could not testify and erred by failing to record the in-chambers interviews, that a parent does not have an absolute right to call an unemancipated teenager to testify in open court, and that if one parent is permitted to present evidence of adultery the other parent must also have the opportunity to present such evidence.
(9-0)

NOTE – This opinion has an interesting discussion of the tender years exception as it applies to teenagers on page 13:

Watercolor Salon, LLC v. Hixon, 2021-IA-01151-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of a salon’s motion for TRO and preliminary injunction against a former employee who was 20-years-old when she signed a noncompete, holding that it was not fundamentally a contract affecting personal property and that it was unenforceable since the former employee disaffirmed the contract.
(5-4: Chief Justice Randolph concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Justice Chamberlin, Justice Ishee, and Justice Griffis.)

NOTE – Here is the Court’s summary of its rationale for its holding that the employment contract was not a contract “affecting personal property”:

Other Orders

Loden v. State, 2002-DP-00282-SCT (granting motion to set execution date)

Brewer v. Bush, 2020-CT-00214-SCT (denying cert)

Gordon v. Dickerson, 2020-CT-00601-SCT (denying rehearing)

Seals v. Stanton, 2020-CA-00741-SCT (denying rehearing)

Pipkin v. State, 2021-CT-00517-SCT (denying cert)

Pickle v. State, 2021-CT-00972-SCT (denying cert)

Luster v. State, 2022-M-00248 (granting application for leave to proceed on filing petition for post-conviction collateral relief in the trial court)

Hand Down List