Tag: Personal Injury

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 23, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions on Tuesday. There is a workers’ comp case, a homeowner v. HOA dispute with a robust discussion of Robert’s Rules of Order, a personal injury appeal after an underwhelming verdict for the plaintiff with some significant discovery/evidentiary rulings, a tortious interference case stemming from a grocery wholesaler’s default on financial obligations, three direct criminal appeals, and a couple of PCR cases.

Kirby v. State, 2022-KA-00320-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder and two counts of possession of a weapon by a felon, holding that the defendant failed to show that his trial counsel was ineffective, that the court did not abuse its discretion by limiting cross-examination of a rebuttal witness for the State, and that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
(10-0)

Harris v. State, 2022-KA-00647-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of touching a child for lustful purposes as an authority figure, holding that the circuit court did not commit reversible error by admitting a video recording of the defendant’s police interview after the detective had already testified about the interview, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and declining to address the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal.
(10-0)

Buena Vista Lakes Maintenance Ass’n, Inc. v. Jones, 2022-CA-01153-COA (Civil – HOA)
Reversing the chancery court’s decision in a homeowner v. HOA dispute over the interpretation of bylaws, holding that the bylaws were not ambiguous and that a two-thirds majority of eligible votes cast at the meeting was required as opposed to two-third majority of those eligible to vote and holding that the chancellor erred in finding that the HOA’s bad on rental properties was against public policy.
(10-0)

NOTE – Robert’s Rules of Order had a moment here.

Divinity v. Hinds Cty Sch. Dist., 2022-WC-01282-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s decision after a hearing on the merits, holding that there was substantial evidence to support the Commission’s finding that the claimant’s upper extremity complaints were not among the injuries she sustained in her work-related accident and that the Employer/Carrier was not required to pay for a spinal cord stimulator and certain prescriptions.
(9-0: Carlton did not participate)

NOTE – This was a pro se appeal and the procedural history was convoluted.

Boyett v. State, 2022-CP-01239-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a motion for PCR, holding that the motion was time-barred.
(10-0)

Duncan v. State, 2023-CP-00406-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of motion for PCR, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding the PCR motion moot because the petitioner had been released on parole.
(10-0)

Harris v. Ratcliff, 2022-CA-00596-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for new trial or additur after the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in an amount significantly less than the plaintiff’s claimed medical expenses, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the defendant’s additional time to designate experts, in striking one of the plaintiff’s experts at trial after the expert began testifying based on notes that had not been disclosed (to the surprise of both sides), in denying the plaintiff’s request to substitute an expert for another expert who was in a coma where the plaintiff was prepared to use the expert’s video testimony at trial, or in excluding a DTI brain scan.
(7-2: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part; McCarty did not participate)

Edwards v. State, 2022-KA-00719-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted capital murder of a chancery court judge, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing testimony from two law enforcement officers regarding information they received during their investigation because it was offered for purposes other than to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Silver Dollar Sales, Inc. v. Battah, 2022-CA-00476-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the trial court’s grant of a directed verdict in favor of one defendant in a case stemming from a grocery wholesaler’s default on its debts to a financing company, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove that one defendant (another grocery wholesaler) committed tortious interference with business relations or that anything that defendant did proximately caused actual damages to the plaintiff.
(8-2: McDonald dissented, joined by Westbrooks)

Other Orders

In the Matter of the Guardianship of B.P.: Michael P. v. Patrick Thomas and Jennifer Thomas, 2021-CA-01288-COA (denying rehearing)

Tubwell v. FV-1, Inc., 2021-CP-01345-COA (denying rehearing)

Washington v. State, 2021-KA-01384-COA (denying rehearing)

Ramsey v. State, 2022-CP-00103-COA (denying rehearing)

Prophet v. State, 2022-CA-00933-COA (denying rehearing)

Hall v. State, 2022-CP-01097-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 9, 2024

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

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

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

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

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

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

Other Orders

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

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

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

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

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

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 12, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight decisions on Tuesday that cover a lot of territory. There is something for just about everybody.

Read on down for a case that underscores the importance of keeping up with the weekly hand downs from the Mississippi Supreme Court and Mississippi Court of Appeals. (Subscribing to this blog probably doesn’t hurt you in that endeavor.)

Coogan v. Nationwide Prop. and Cas. Ins. Co., 2022-CA-01063-COA (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming partial summary judgment in policy holders’ suit against their auto liability carrier, holding that the carrier had an arguably reasonable basis to support its claims handling the circuit court did not err in finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact on the bad faith punitive damages claim or the Veasley damages claim.
(6-2-1: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing, Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing, McDonald dissented without writing, Lawrence did not participate)

Forrest v. State, 2022-KA-00844-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that the court did not admit inadmissible hearsay or irrelevant evidence, and dismissing the ineffective assistance of counsel claim without prejudice.
(10-0)

Hills v. Manns, 2022-CA-00774-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming modification of visitation schedule, holding that the chancellor did not err in not dismissing the mother’s petition on the basis of res judicata, not awarding him attorney’s fees, or in awarding the mother final decision-making authority.
(10-0)

Strong v. Acara Solutions, Inc., 2022-CA-01240-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the trial court’s dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit on judicial estoppel grounds, holding that the case should be remanded to allow the circuit court to apply the test from a recent Mississippi Supreme Court decision that was handed down after the circuit court’s ruling.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – This case illustrates the importance of keeping up with decisions handed down weekly by Mississippi’s appellate courts. (By extension, this case illustrates why you and all of your friends should subscribe to the Mississippi Appeals Blog – I covered the Saunders decision here when it was handed down.)

PRACTICE POINT (continued): Though the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision in Saunders was handed down after the summary judgment order was entered, the Supreme Court’s decision in Jones, infra, with its special concurrence, was handed down before the summary judgment proceedings. So the precedential special concurrence in Jones that controlled this case was in force during the summary judgment proceedings. This case serves as a good reminder that special concurrences that garner a majority of the court have the force of precedent. (Another shameless plug: I covered the Jones decision here when it was handed down and specifically discussed the precedential value of the special concurrence.)

Barefield v. Barefield, 2022-CA-00834-COA (Civil – Torts-Other)
Affirming the chancellor’s order requiring the former member/owner of an investment company to pay a forensic accountant’s fee for services during litigation among all members/owners, holding that the exert was court-appointed and the chancellor had discretion to order the party whose actions necessitated the lawsuit to pay the fees.
(8-2-0: McCarty concurred in part and in result without writing; Wilson concurred in result only without writing)

Henderson v. State, 2022-KA-00661-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Nichols v. State, 2022-KA-00202-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of first-degree murder and remanding for new trial, holding that the circuit court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the “castle doctrine,” while also holding that the evidence to support the conviction was legally sufficient so the remedy was a new trial.
(10-0)

Miss. Dept. of Human Servs. v. Johnson, 2022-SA-00605-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision voiding a 2002 paternity and child-support order was void for insufficient service of process, holding that in light of MDHS’s admission that failed to effect proper service under Rule 81(d) MDHS’s arguments under the doctrine of laches, judicial estoppel, unjust enrichment, and public policy failed.
(6-4: Greenlee dissented, joined by Wilson, Lawrence, and Emfinger)

Other Orders

Gillen v. Gillen, 2021-CA-00837-COA (granting motion for appellate attorneys’ fees)

Moore v. State, 2022-KA-00327-COA (granting appearance as counsel, but denying motion to substitute and motion to file supplemental brief)

Diming v. State, 2022-KA-00412-COA (recalling mandate and granting motion for time to file motion for rehearing)

Russell v. State, 2022-KA-00447-COA (recalling mandate and granting motion for time to file motion for rehearing)

Greater Hamilton Grove Baptist Church v. Hamilton Grove Missionary Baptist Church, 2022-CA-00518-COA (denying rehearing)

Rehabilitation Centers, Inc. v. Williams, 2023-WC-00453-COA (denying motion for reconsideration)

Mitchell v. State, 2023-TS-00764-COA (granting motion to proceed out-of-time)

Robinson v. State, 2023-TS-00935-COA (dismissing untimely appeal)

Britton v. State, 2023-TS-01060-COA (dismissing untimely appeal)

Rutherford v. State, 2023-TS-01066-COA (dismissing appeal for lack of appealable judgment)

Rutherford v. State, 2023-TS-01069-COA (dismissing appeal for lack of appealable judgment)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 14, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. They cover custody, personal injury, felonies, and PCR. One of the personal injury cases stems from an injury sustained during a “TikTok challenge” in a classroom.

Croom v. State, 2022-KA-00598-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a dwelling and conspiracy to commit burglary of a dwelling, holding that the trial court did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of trespass and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction of conspiracy.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion)

Snyder v. Estate of Cockrell, 2022-CA-00597-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming summary judgment in a negligence case a man filed against his grandfather’s estate after a child caused the grandfather’s golf cart to run into the plaintiff, holding that in the plaintiff could not prove a breach of duty where there was only speculation about the grandfather’s conduct after he finished operating the golf cart.
(8-2-0: McDonald concurred in part and in result without written opinion; Westbrooks concurred in result only with separate written opinion)

Johnson v. State, 2022-CP-01186-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the petitioner failed to present evidence other than his bare assertions that his plea was involuntary and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in not granting the petitioner an evidentiary hearing.
(10-0)

Scott v. Le, 2022-CA-00887-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s custody award, holding that the chancellor’s finding that there was a material change in circumstances and the chancellor’s application of the Albright factors to to deny the mother’s request for sole physical custody and grant the father’s request for sole physical custody was supported by substantial evidence.
(10-0)

Taylor v. State, 2022-KA-01042-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted murder and two counts of possession of a controlled substance, holding that evidence of prior arrests did not constitute evidence of prior bad acts under Rule 404(a) because it was offered as the foundation of a witness’s identification of the defendant and that would have been otherwise admissible under the exception in 404(b), that it passed the 403 balancing and, even if it was not admissible, it would have been harmless error.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Brown v. State, 2022-KA-00446-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder and shooting into a vehicle, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the defendant waived the issue of the judge’s refusal of a second-degree murder instruction when trial counsel did not object and agreed with the judge’s decision, and there was no merit to the claim that a clinical and forensic psychological expert was pressured into proceeding with an independent psychological examination without all of the records he had requested.
(10-0)

Bumpous v. Tishomingo County School District, 2022-CA-01010-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the school district in a negligent supervision after a student was injured in a class room after falling victim to a “TikTok challenge,” holding that that the injury was not reasonable foreseeable and there was no genuine issue of material fact that would warrant reversal of the summary judgment.
(6-2-2: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; McCarty dissented, joined by Carlton, and joined in part by Westbrooks and McDonald)

Other Orders

Smith v. State, 2026-KA-01946-COA (denying pro se motion to recall mandate and allow untimely motion for rehearing)

Hall v. State, 2022-CP-01097-COA (recalling mandate and allowing appellant’s timely pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on the merits)

McGee v. State, 2023-KA-00083-COA (remanding to the circuit court for forty-five days for a hearing consistent with Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 6(c)(2) and an order)

Patton v. State, 2023-TS-00618-COA (allowing timely appeal to proceed on the Court’s own motion)

Crump v. State, 2023-TS-00795-COA (allowing timely appeal to proceed on the Court’s own motion)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 19, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions today. There are two direct criminal appeals (including a reversal on sufficiency-of-the-evidence grounds), an appeal of summary judgment in an MTCA negligence claim, and claim by a constable for wrongful removal.

Love v. State, 2021-KA-01014-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming in part and reversing in part after the defendant was convicted of capital murder, aggravated assault, and armed robbery x3, holding that the trial court did not err in denying motion to sever, in denying motion for mistrial after brief exposure of wrist restraints to the jury venire, or in refusing a Milano instruction; that the indictment for capital murder was legally sufficient and the jury instruction on that count not erroneous; and that the defendant was not placed in double jeopardy, but that the evidence was not legally sufficient to support the armed robbery conviction.
(10-0)

J&A Excavation, Inc. v. City of Ellisville, 2022-CA-00533-COA (Civil – Other) consolidated with J&A Excavation, Inc. v. Jones County, 2022-CA-00547-COA (Civil – Other)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that affirmed the Board of Aldermen and Board of Supervisors, holding that the decisions were not supported by substantial evidence and were arbitrary and capricious where the plaintiff’s low bid on a public construction contract was rejected and the next-lowest bid was accepted with no record evidence regarding qualifications, reputation, or capabilities of the bidder selected.
(10-0)

Bailey v. Jefferson County Board of Supervisors, 2022-CP-00950-COA (Civil – Other)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision affirming the Board of Supervisors’ decision to removal a constable, holding that there was not substantial evidence to support the removal, rendering judgment in favor of the constable, and remanding for a determination of damages.
(8-1: Emfinger dissented without separate written opinion.)

Moore v. Jackson Public School System, 2022-CA-00595-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing summary judgment dismissing a negligence claim under the MTCA, holding that the circuit court erred by granting summary judgment on other grounds where the actual motion was based only on “broad legal arguments” that did not challenge the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence.
(6-3: Carlton dissented, joined by Greenlee, Westbrooks, and McDonald)

Others Orders

Carroll v. State, 2021-CP-00959-COA (denying rehearing)

Ehrhardt v. State, 2021-KA-01143-COA (denying rehearing)

Jordan v. State, 2021-KA-01421-COA (denying rehearing)

In the Matter of the Estate of Roosa v. Roosa, 2022-CA-00128-COA (denying rehearing)

Rhodes v. RL Stratton Properties LLC, 2022-CA-00338-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of July 25, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today covering diverse subject matter. There is a zoning exception case, a custody case, a personal injury case considering a grant of summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case, a marital property division case analyzing whether a PSA was ambiguous, and a PCR case with a concurrence discussing Howell/Rowland I/Rowland II.

Keenum v. City of Moss Point, 2021-CA-01044-COA (Civil – Other/Zoning)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that affirmed the mayor’s decision to approve a special exception to a zoning ordinance, holding that the decision to allow a for-profit development in a residential-zoned area under an exception for “semi-public recreational area” (which was not defined in the ordinance) was reversible error because that reading would render the prohibition against “commercial use” in the ordinance meaningless.
(8-1-0: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Lawrence did not participate.)

D.W.K. v. Youth Court of Lincoln County, 2019-CP-00451-COA; 2020-CP-01307-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the youth court’s denial of motions to consider new evidence two years after adjudication of abuse and neglect and placement of five minor children with their maternal aunt, holding that the youth court had jurisdiction; service of process was proper; that the youth court’s decision was not manifestly wrong or erroneous, was based on substantial evidence, and favored the best interest of the children; and that the record on appeal was sufficient.
(10-0)

Babin v. Wendelta, Inc., 2022-CA-00341-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment for a fast food restaurant in a slip-and-fall case, holding that “the record contained ample proof” of a dangerous condition where multiple witnesses including restaurant employees testified that the mat was slippery on the date of the fall and that the vestibule where the mat was located held condensation.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in result only WOSWO.)

Practice Point – I have noticed ANSI standards appearing more frequently in my practice. I suspect these two sentences will make their way into more than one brief:

Blanchard v. Blanchard, 2022-CA-00356-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancery court’s ruling based on parol evidence after finding that a Property Settlement Agreement was ambiguous, holding that the PSA was unambiguous and that it entitled the ex-husband to half of the net proceeds of the sale of the former marital home even though the ex-wife had refinanced the home.
(10-0)

Roberson v. State, 2021-CA-01182-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming order granting in part and denying in part a PCR motion, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to an exception from the statutory bars and that, in any event, there was no merit to his claim that his plea was involuntary or that his counsel was ineffective.
(6-4-0: Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty concurred in part and in the result WOSWO; Wilson concurred in part and in the result, joined by McDonald and McCarty and joined in part by Westbrooks.)

Note – Judge Wilson’s concurrence discussed the state of the “fundamental-rights exception” in light of the Mississippi Supreme Court in Howell overruling Rowland I and Rowland II, and noted that the Supreme Court had not squarely addressed whether the successive motions bar is substantive or procedural:

Other Orders

Buchanan v. State, 2021-CP-01069-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of June 29, 2023 (catch-up post)

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions on June 29. The first was an estate case addressing claims of undue influence. The other was a personal injury case on interlocutory appeal of the denial of an insurer’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of whether an employer’s CGL policy provided coverage for an employee’s motor vehicle accident using company equipment.

Estate of Biddle v. Biddle, 2021-CP-00513-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions in an estate matter, holding that venue and jurisdiction were waived by the testator’s sons because those issues were raised for the first time in response to their stepmother’s motion for summary judgment and that the evidence did not create a genuine issue of material fact concerning the existence of “suspicious circumstances” rising to the level of undue influence of the wife over her husband.
(9-0)

Penn-Star Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 2022-IA-00106-SCT (Civil- Personal Injury)
Reversing the trial court’s denial of an insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a motor vehicle negligence action, holding that there was no coverage under the company’s CGL policy where an employee of a welding company was involved in a collision while operating a forklift owned by the company to tow his personal truck to the company’s premises to self-perform repairs because the collision did not “arise out of or relate to” the welding operations.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Watts v. Watts, 2021-CT-00321-SCT (denying cert)

$41,000 v. State, 2021-CT-00692-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of May 23, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today in five different areas of law: custody, PCR, wills and estates, criminal, and personal injury.

Culver v. Culver, 2021-CA-01108-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s ruling changing physical custody from the mother to the father, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding an impending move out-of-state would constitute a material change in circumstances that would adversely impact the children’s welfare and that the chancellor’s analysis of the Albright factors was not manifestly wrong.
(6-3-0: Wilson, Westbrooks, and McDonald concurred in result only without separate written opinion; Lawrence did not participate.)

Brown v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the ineffective assistance of counsel claims were untimely, barred as successive, and precluded by res judicata; the circuit court was not required to grant the plaintiff’s MSJ or find the State in contempt for not responding to it; and the circuit court was not obligated to conduct an evidentiary hearing.
(10-0)

Roosa v. Roosa, 2022-CA-00128-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s estate orders in a 15-year-long legal saga over the estate of an astronaut, holding that the challenging beneficiary (1) waived the argument that the executor did not have authority to donate property to a foundation and (2) did not secure a ruling from the chancellor on the issue of whether the donation met the requirements of a valid inter vivos gift.
(9-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Practice Point – This decisions is a good reminder that you have to get a ruling from the trial court on an issue before you can appeal the issue:

Trest v. State, 2021-KA-00968-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of molestation, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of prior bad acts (of molestation) or denying a mistrial when the witness to the prior molestation said that the defendant had molested “us” or by admitting evidence under the tender-years exception, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
(8-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Rhodes v. RL Stratton Properties LLC, 2022-CA-00338-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a building owner in a suit filed by a roofer who fell through a framed opening in the attic floor while looking for the source of water leaks, holding that the failure to warn an experienced roofer claim failed as a matter of law and that the fall through the opening was “intimately connected” to the work the plaintiff was hired to do.
(10-0)

Other Orders

Obert v. AABC Property Management, LLC, 2021-CA-00612-COA (denying rehearing)

Colenberg v. State, 2021-CA-00673-COA (denying rehearing)

Smith v. Minier, 2021-CA_01284-COA (denying rehearing)

Mallard v. State, 2022-CA-00152-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of April 27, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. Both decisions are 6-3 reversals. One is an appeal of a summary judgment ruling in a slip-and-fall case and the other is an appeal of a zoning decision.

Thomas v. Boyd Biloxi, LLC, 2021-CT-00265-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the COA’s decision affirming summary judgment in favor of a resort in a slip-and-fall on a pool deck case, holding that two prior falls and evidence that water pooled in the area where the plaintiff fell was sufficient evidence of breach and that there was evidence that a breach of duty proximately caused the fall.
(6-3: Griffis dissented, joined by Coleman and Ishee.)

City of Ocean Springs v. Illanne, 2021-CA-01100-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s reversal of a City’s zoning decisions, holding that remand was necessary for a hearing to determine whether a zoning applicant was a “petitioner” under Section 11-51-75 such that the failure to name him and give him notice deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction.
(6-3: Coleman dissented, joined by Randolph and Griffis)

Other Order

La Casa I, LLC v. Gottfried, 2021-CT-00347-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

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