Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 21, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions on Tuesday. It was an eclectic mix, including a workers’ comp case, a dysfunctional two-member LLC , a wrongful death case against a sheriff’s deputy, and an inmate’s request for removal of a rule violation report.


Holloway v. King, 2021-CP-01351-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision that affirmed the denial of an inmate’s request for the removal of a rule violation report, holding that the circuit court did not have jurisdiction because the petitioner did not comply with the notice requirements of UCRCCC 5.04.
(6-4: McCarty dissented, joined by Westbrooks, McDonald, and Lawrence.)


Myrick v. UMMC, 2021-WC-01401-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming MWCC order, holding that there was substantial, credible evidence to support the Commission’s finding that the Employer/Carrier overcame the presumption of permanent total disability and that the claimant’s post-injury back surgery was not related to her compensable back injury.
(7-3-0: Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)


Colson v. Warren, 2021-CA-01408-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming on direct and cross appeal the chancery court’s decisions denying a claim to dissolve a two-member LLC, holding that the two members should cooperate in drafting and implementing an operating agreement and opening a bank account to deposit rental revenue checks payable to the LLC that had been piling up.
(9-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)


Renfroe v. Parker, 2021-CA-01048-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the law-enforcement defendants in a wrongful death suit after a suspect was killed by a deputy, holding:
1. Res judicata did not bar the plaintiff’s state law tort claims after the federal district court dismissed her 1983 claims with prejudice and her state law claims without prejudice.
2. The deputy and the sheriff were entitled to immunity on the official-capacity claims
3. Collateral estoppel barred the claims for IIED, assault, and battery because the federal district court found that the deputy’s use of force was “objectively reasonable.”
4. Even if collateral did not bar the IIED, assault, and battery claims, the plaintiff did not come forward with evidence to defeat summary judgment.
(7-2: McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Westbrooks. Judge Emfinger did not participate.)

NOTE – According to testimony, the deputy shot the suspect after the suspect charged at the deputy, withstood a taser (pulling the electrodes out of his chest), had a physical altercation with the deputy, and then charged at the deputy a second time. The fact that the suspect did this while wearing pajama pants did not sway the courts at any level.


Other Orders

Green v. State, 2021-KA-01019-COA (rehearing denied)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of March 16, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down six opinions today. Like the Court of Appeals on Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s decisions were all unanimous but appellants batted .500 at the Supreme Court. Today’s decisions include a med mal expert case, a board of aldermen case, a municipal boundaries case, an “intimately connected doctrine” premises case, an alienation of affection case, and a mortmain laws case.


UMMC v. Kelly, 2022-IA-00034-SCT (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Reversing denial of summary judgment to UMMC, holding that the trial court abused its discretion in finding the plaintiff’s expert physician was qualified in the areas of treating impact injuries and infections where the parties agreed the doctor was a licensed ER doctor but the plaintiff did not produce a CV.
(9-0)


City of Canton, Mississippi Board of Aldermen v. Slaughter, 2021-CA-01210-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s reversal of Board of Aldermen’s decision to remove two members of the Canton Municipal Utilities Commission, holding that the commissioners were deprived of procedural due process when the mayor vetoed the issuance of notice and opportunity to be heard and that veto was not overridden by the BOA.
(9-0)


City of Jackson v. City of Pearl, 2021-AN-01422-SCT (Civil – Municipal Boundaries & Annexation)
Affirming the circuit court’s voidance of the City of Jackson’s ordinance that would incorporate land around JAN, holding that Jackson failed to obtain consent of the Rankin County Board of Supervisors before passing the ordinance.
(9-0)


White v. Targa Downstream, LLC, 2022-CA-00020-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing summary judgment for a premises owner, holding that the intimately connected doctrine does not give immunity to a premises owner when there is a fact issue regarding whether the premises owner created a dangerous condition and whether the independent contractor had actual or constructive notice of the condition.
(9-0)

NOTE – Here is the Court’s Conclusion:


Davis v. Davis, 2020-CA-01304-SCT (Civil – Torts-Other)
Reversing jury award in an alienation of affection case, holding that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and the plaintiff failed to request proper jury instructions on damages.
(7-2-0: Chamberlin specially concurred joined by Griffis)

NOTE – Chamberlin’s special concurrence called for the abolition of the tort of alienation of affection.


Mississippi Baptist Foundation v. Fitch, 2022-CA-00065-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to heirs, holding that MBF had a possessory interest over a mineral interest as trustee, that the trustor’s death triggered the 10-year portion of the mortmain laws, and MBF failed to protect its alleged rights during that period and could not assert the forty years later.
(9-0)


Other Orders

Gardner v. Jackson, 2020-CT-01313-SCT (cert denied)

McGillberry v. Ross, 2021-CT-01076-SCT (cert denied)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of March 9, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions today and not one is pedestrian. The first involves whether the loser in an insurance coverage dec action can come back after the mandate in the dec action and after being vindicated in the underlying liability action, to get relief under Rule 60(b) from the no-coverage judgment. In the next case, the Court weighs in on the Jackson mayor’s attempt to veto the city council’s inaction on the garbage collection contract. The third case is an appeal of an order of contempt and order denying recusal after the attorney failed to appear at trial after representing to the circuit court that he had Covid.


Scruggs v. Farmland Mut. Ins. Co., 2021-CA-00877-SCT (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a Rule 60(b) motion, holding that the mandate rule deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction to entertain a Rule 60(b) motion twenty years after the Supreme Court’s opinion and mandate.
(9-0)

CONTEXT – The facts make this ruling a bit more interesting than the holding suggests. Many years go, the plaintiffs (Scruggses) lost an insurance coverage dec action in state court 20 years ago. Coverage had been denied because the Scruggses were accused of committing intentional acts by Monsanto. The Scruggses then prevailed in Monsanto’s federal lawsuit against them. I’ll let the Supremes take it from here:


Lumumba v. City Council of Jackson, 2022-CA-00855-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the special chancellor’s summary judgment in favor of the city council in this episode of Jackson’s garbage-collection saga, holding that the mayor did not have legal authority to veto a non-action or negative vote of the city counsel the city council’s non-ratification of the garbage collection contract presented by the mayor.
(9-0)

NOTE – The Court also held that the trial court did not err in allowing the city council to admit exhibits (public records that had been produced to the mayor) at the MSJ hearing that were not yet filed in the record of that case and that the chancellor did not err in denying the mayor’s motion for additional findings because the mayor could not both object to the court’s consideration of the city council’s exhibits while also asking the court to consider the mayor’s extrinsic evidence.


In Re: Ali M. Shamsiddeen, 2021-CA-01217-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming order of contempt and order denying recusal, holding that the trial court did not err in finding defense counsel in contempt for failing to appear at a pretrial conference (in person or virtually, after being given that opportunity) or at the trial because defense counsel said he had COVID but only provided a vague medical excuse and quarantine order but refused to provide medical documentation of the diagnosis.
(7-2: Kitchens dissented, joined by King)

NOTE – Here is the email the attorney sent to the court on the eve of trial.


Other Orders

In Re: Local Rules, 89-R-99015-SCT (granting motion to amend Tenth Chancery Court District’s local rules)

Shannon v. Shannon, 2020-CT-00847-SCT (dismissing previously-granted cert sua sponte)

Simmons v. Jackson County, 2020-CT-01014-SCT (denying cert)

Young v. Freese & Goss PLLC, 2020-CT-01280-SCT (denying cert)

Boyd v. State, 2021-CT-00066-SCT (denying cert)

Turner & Associates P.L.L.C. v. Estate of Watkins, 2021-CT-00258-SCT (denying cert)


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 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 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 Court of Appeals Decisions of December 6, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals wore me out with nine opinions today. There is something for just about everybody below including crimes, conservatorships, and contracts. One case includes a nightmare scenario where an order of dismissal was entered and the plaintiff’s attorney did not receive notice of it until well after the appeal deadline passed, and there is a special concurrence shining a beacon of hope for litigants who find themselves in this situation.


McLendon v. State, 2022-CP-00057-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming summary denial of a motion for post-conviction collateral relief, holding that a proper factual basis was shown as to each element of the offense during the guilty plea.
(10-0)


Davis v. State, 2021-KA-00759-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of armed robbery and kidnapping, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for mistrial based on inadmissible testimony from the police chief that the defendant had been previously incarcerated for burglary.
(7-3-0: Judge McDonald specially concurred, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Greenlee, and Judge Westbrooks; Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.

N0te – Here is how the trial court handled the inadmissible testimony:


Owens v. State, 2021-KA-00887-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a business, holding that the conviction was not against the weight of the evidence .
(7-3: Judge McCarty dissented, joined by Judge Westbrooks and Judge McDonald)

Note – The dissent argued that the conviction was against the weight of the evidence and discussed the evidence that was presented. The dissent embedded into the opinion stills from surveillance videos that were shown to the jury was extremely helpful in understanding the evidence that was presented and that was being discussed.


State v. Hudson, 2021-KA-01232-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Dismissing the State’s appeal of a directed verdict of acquittal, holding that the appeal was not authorized by section 99-35-103(b) because the issues on appeal did not present the Court with a pure question of law.
(10-0)


The Banking Group, Inc. v. Southern Bancorp Bank, 2021-CA-01077-COA (Civil – Contract)
Reversing summary judgment in favor of the defendants on a breach of contract and fraud complaint related to fees the defendant allegedly owed the plaintiff for recruitment services, holding that there was a fact dispute over the existence of a contract.
(9-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Atkins v. Moore, 2021-CA-00780-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s final judgment approving a conservator’s final accounting, holding that the conservator had not misspent or converted funds and that the plaintiff was not otherwise entitled to relief.
(9-1-0: Judge Westbrooks specially concurred, joined by Judge McDonald and joined in part by Judge McCarty)

Note – The Court of Appeals took issue with several aspects of the proceedings below, but found none warranted reversal. Here is the Court’s conclusion:

Another Note – This opinion cites a post by Jane Stroble Miller from Judge Larry Primeaux’s The Better Chancery Court Practice Blog, noting that it “provides a very helpful discussion on the need for ‘vouchers’ to support and accounting.” I fail to see a downside in favorably citing law blogs in judicial opinions.


Rhea v. Career General Agency, Inc., 2021-CA-00580-COA (Civil – Contract)
Dismissing the appeal in part and affirming in part, holding that the Court did not have jurisdiction to review the order granting the motion to dismiss where it was not timely filed because counsel did not receive notice of the judgment and dismissing that part of the appeal and affirming the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider.
(8-2-0: Judge McCarty specially concurred, joined by Judge Greenlee, Judge Westbrooks, Judge McDonald, Judge Lawrence, and Judge Smith; Judge Emfinger concurred in the result only without separate written opinion)

Practice Point – Judge McCarty’s special concurrence highlights a lifeline to litigants in the unfortunate situation of not receiving notice of an appealable judgment until after the deadline to file a notice of appeal:

Note – It is a credit to the appellee and appellee’s counsel for not arguing untimeliness under these circumstances at any point in the process.


DeSoto County v. Vinson, 2021-CC-00864-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s reversal of the DeSoto County Board of Supervisors’ approval of a landowner’s application to subdivide a residential lot, holding that the landowner’s failure to accompany the application with names of persons adversely affected or directly interested and their signatures approving the division violated section 17-1-23(4).
(8-1-1: Judge Emfinger concurred in the result only without separate written; Judge Wilson dissented)


Burchett v. State, 2021-KA-00776-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder, holding that there was no evidence to supporting a lesser-included instruction on heat of passion manslaughter.
(8-1-1: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined in part by Judge McDonald)


Other Orders

Young v. Freese & Goss, PLLC, 2020-CA-01280-COA (denying rehearing)

Simpson County School District v. Wigley, 2021-CA-00009-COA (denying rehearing)

Boyd v. State, 2021-KA-00066 (denying rehearing)

Nguyen v. Bui, 2021-CP-00538-COA (denying rehearing)

McGilberry v. Ross, 2021-CP-01076 (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 1, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals kicked off November with eight opinions. There are two domestic cases dealing with custody and divorce, a personal injury case adjacent to a workers’ comp claim with a statute of limitation issue, two reversals in administrative cases (MDES and MDHS), two PCR cases, and one criminal case.


Jarvis v. State, 2021-CP-00930-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the plaintiff’s guilty plea waived his defective-indictment claim based on alleged insufficiency in the State’s evidence and that his ineffective assistance claim lacked merit.
(9-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)


Blagodirova v. Schrock, 2020-CA-01162-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming in part and reversing in part a chancellor’s child-custody modification order, holding that the chancery court manifestly erred by finding an adverse effect on the child, did not err in denying attorney’s fees, and did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to compel completion of a financial disclosure statement.
(4-2-4: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McCarty concurred in the result only without separate written opinion; Judge Carlton concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Chief Judge Barnes, Judge Greenlee, and Judge Smith.)


Baughman v. Baughman, 2021-CA-00074-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part on an appeal and cross-appeal from a divorce proceeding, affirming denial of the ex-husband’s claim for separate maintenance, affirming the denial of divorce on the grounds of adultery, and reversing the denial of divorce on the ground of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment.
(5-4-0: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Wilson, Judge Greenlee, and Judge Lawrence concurred in the result only without separate written opinion; and Judge Carlton did not participate.)


Keys v. Rehabilitation, Inc., 2021-CA-01338-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming dismissal of certain claims as barred by the statute of limitations, holding that the plaintiff’s claims against a third-party (not the Employer, Carrier, or TPA) arising from the utilization review process in the course of his treatment for a workers’ comp injury were barred by the three-year statute of limitations.
(9-0: Judge Emfinger did not participate.)

NOTE – A critical aspect of this decision was that the lawsuit did not arise from the denial of workers’ comp benefits:


Bowman v. State, 2020-KA-01371-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder and tampering with evidence, holding that the trial court did not err in allowing the state medical examiner to testify about the cause and manner of death, in denying motions to suppress evidence seized at the defendant’s Mississippi property and in his vehicle in Utah, in denying a flight-evidence motion in limine and giving a flight-evidence jury instruction, or in refusing the defendant’s request for additional circumstantial evidence instructions, and that the convictions were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and were based on sufficient evidence.
(7-2-0: Judge McCarty and Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Smith did not participate.)


MDHS v. Reaves, 2021-SA-01133-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the chancery court’s order directing MDHS to reimburse the plaintiff for past child-support payments, holding that reimbursement was improper because a noncustodial parent cannot recover the child-support payments he made on behalf of his child.
(7-3: Judge McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge Wilson and Judge Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion.)


Wallace v. State, 2021-CP-01149-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the plaintiff’s second PCR petition, holding that the court did not err when it was not persuaded that the guilty plea lacked a factual basis and was involuntary, that the indictment was defective, or that counsel was ineffective.
(9-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.)


Vector Transportation Co. v. MDES, 2021-CC-00576-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s judgment affirming the MDES Board of Review’s determination that an employee was entitled to unemployment benefits, holding that the employer met its burden of proof to show that the employee’s termination was for misconduct.
(6-3: Judge McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part; Judge Westbrooks dissented, joined by Judge Wilson and joined in part by Judge McDonald; Chief Judge Barnes did not participate.)


Other Orders

Simpson v. State, 2021-KA-00075-COA (denying rehearing)

Terpening v. F.L. Crane & Sons, Inc., 2021-CA-00544-COA (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of October 20, 2022

[For reasons unknown, when I tried to publish this post earlier WordPress would only show the title with none of the content in the body. It seems to be working now. My apologies to those who have gotten multiple emails with no content.]

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four cases today, all civil. Two in particular are of general interest to civil practitioners. One deals with whether an et seq. or “catchall” defense was sufficient to preserve the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense and the other reviews a discovery order from the trial court. Then there are two jurisdiction cases: one deciding whether the circuit court (as opposed to the oil and gas board) has jurisdiction to hear claims against an oil company and the other whether the circuit court has jurisdiction to hear imperfect but timely notices of appeal from local government decisions.


Tiger Production Company, LLC v. Pace, 2021-IA-00315-SCT (Civil – Property Damage)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss on interlocutory appeal, holding that the plaintiff’s claims for compensatory and punitive damages based on allegations that an oil company put a saltwater disposal line across the plaintiff’s property without permission were purely common law claims and could not be remedied by the MS Oil and Gas Board.
(8-0: Justice Beam did not participate)


Lawson v. City of Jackson, 2021-IA-00532-SCT (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming in part and reversing/remanding in part a discovery order from the trial court on interlocutory appeal, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering a protective order providing that a party did not have to respond to written discovery that would not be due until after the discovery deadline but holding that the trial court abused its discretion in restricting the plaintiff’s access to public records and in preventing the plaintiff from introducing any such public records at trial.
(9-0)


Pruitt v. Sargent, 2021-CA-00511-SCT (Civil – Personal injury)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the running of the statute of limitations, holding that the defendants waived the statute of limitations defense by failing to adequately plead it in their answer.
(6-2-0: Justice Coleman concurred in part and in the result, joined by Justice Griffis; Justice Beam concurred in the result only without separate written opinion)

PRACTICE POINT – The Supreme Court laid down some black-letter law today on pleading the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense and its reasoning probably applies to other affirmative defenses. The Court took a look at the defenses that were pleaded and found they fell short of the standard:

Then, the Court said flatly that et seq. didn’t cut it:


Longo v. City of Waveland, 2021-CA-00735-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s dismissal in two consolidated cases where the circuit court dismissed appeals from local governments for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a notice of appeal that is timely filed but that erroneously omits a petitioner’s name has a procedural defect that does not defeat jurisdiction and can be corrected.
(5-4: Justice Chamberlin dissented, joined by Justice Coleman, Justice Maxwell, and Justice Beam.)


Other Orders

Bridges v. State, 2020-CT-00816-SCT (denying cert)
SRHS Ambulatory Services, Inc. v. Pinehaven Group, LLC, 2020-CA-01355-SCT (denying rehearing)


Hand Down List

Mississippi Appellate Decisions of September 6 and September 8, 2022

I was out of the office for an extracurricular conference on Tuesday. (I will issue a full refund for my failure to timely deliver those summaries.) All we got from the Mississippi Supreme Court this week is a rehearing denial and a denial of an application for post-conviction collateral relief. I have written even-shorter-than-normal snapshots of the Court of Appeals decisions below, which turned out to be almost entirely PCR and state boards and agencies decisions.


Supreme Court Orders of September 8, 2022

Chatman v. State, 2016-M-00424 (denying application for post-conviction collateral relief and warning that future filings deemed frivolous may result in sanctions and restrictions on filing in forma pauperis)

Russell v. State, 2019-CT-01670-SCT (denying rehearing)

Supreme Court Hand Down List


Court of Appeals Decisions of September 6, 2022

Burns v. State, 2021-KA-00310-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth and sentencing, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence that the trial court did not err in refusing the defendant’s instruction on possession, and denying the pro se argument that he received ineffective assistance without prejudice.
(10-0)


Caston v. State, 2021-CA-00397-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the plaintiff waived the right to challenge proportionality by pleading guilty and, in any event, failed to prove gross disproportionality.
(10-0)


Nguyen v. Bui, 2021-CP-00538-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancery court’s judgment mandating specific performance of a real estate contract, holding that the appellant’s argument did not raise issues of reversible error, lacked citation to authority, and were beyond the scope of appellate review.
(10-0)


Beasley v. State, 2021-CA-00653-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of the plaintiff’s PCR motion, holding that the plaintiff failed to meet the two-prong Strickland test required to establish ineffective assistance of counsel.
(9-0: Judge Emfinger did not participate)


Norwood v. State, 2021-CA-00802-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of the plaintiff’s PRC motion, holding that the plaintiff did not prove that his due process rights were violated or that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
(10-0)


Roberts v. State, 2021-CA-00998-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for PCR, holding that the plaintiff’s claim as to the voluntariness of his guilty plea was procedurally barred and meritless and that his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was meritless.
(10-0)


Wilson v. City of Greenville, 2021-CA-00316-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s untimely appeal of the Greenville City Council’s decision to accept and enforce his resignation as police chief and in granting the City’s replevin action for city equipment in the plaintiff’s possession and denying the plaintiff’s counterclaim and motions to dismiss/stay, holding that the City’s decision was supported by substantial, credible evidence and that the circuit court committed no error.
(8-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in result only without separate written opinion; Judge Westbrooks did not participate)


Thomas v. PERS, 2021-SA-00375-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s judgment affirming the PERS Board, holding that the Board’s decision that the plaintiff failed to prove she could no longer perform her duties as a bus aid as a result of her workplace accident was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary or capricious.
(10-0)


Laurel School District v. Lanier, 2021-CA-00384-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s decision dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint against the school district stemming from the school district’s failure to conduct a nonrenewal hearing, holding that the chancery court had jurisdiction to consider the complaint seeking relief for due process violations and to dismiss the claim so the plaintiff could obtain the hearing he had been denied.
(7-3: Judge Westbrooks dissented, joined by Chief Judge Barnes and Judge McDonald)

Other Court of Appeals Orders

Brewer v. Kemp, 2020-CA-00214-COA (denying rehearing)

Court of Appeals Hand Down List