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 August 8, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down ten opinions today. There are a bunch of domestic relations cases, several direct criminal appeals (with some jury instruction issues), a workers’ comp decision addressing the compensability of a COVID diagnosis, and a real property case. I learned about the “fugitive dismissal rule” today and you can too.


Covin v. Covin, 2022-CA-00019-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision finding both parties to a divorce in contempt and denying both parties’ request for attorney’s fees, holding that the chancellor did not err in making a sua sponte clarification of final judgment of divorce, in finding one side in contempt for failing to refinance the marital home and remit the other side’s equitable interest within the court-ordered timeline and for not allowing the other side to retrieve personal property, or in not awarding attorney’s fees despite contempt findings.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)


Carpenter v. State, 2022-KA-00398-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction or attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that it was not plain error to not instruct the jury on the elements of murder and that the instruction give adequately described the crime of attempted murder.
(7-3-0: Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Westbrooks concurred in the result only sub silentio.)

NOTE – Here are the instructions at issue. S-1 read:

And S-2 read:


White v. State, 2021-KA-00818-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of jointly-tried defendants for drive-by shooting and shooting into a swelling, holding that the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that the verdicts were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)


Davis v. State, 2022-KA-00573-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction for armed robbery with sentence enhancement based on the victim’s age, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for new trial based on weight of the evidence arguments or in refusing to give a lesser-included-offense instruction for simple assault.
(10-0)


Gardner v. State, 2021-KA-00886-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of first-degree murder and attempted murder, holding that the trial court did not err by not striking a jail minister for cause or by finding a child competent to testify, that the issue of limitations put on on cross-examination were waived for failure to object, and that there was no plain error in accepting the State’s jury instruction that did not contain the word “deliberate.”
(6-4-0: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Greenlee and Lawrence concurred in result only sub silentio.)

NOTE – Here is the jury instruction at issue:


Davidson v. Davidson, 2022-CA-00372-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancellor’s decision related to property and debt division in a divorce proceeding, holding that the chancellor did not err in classification of marital assets or award of equity in the marital home but the order dividing the debt incurred on a credit card was not sufficiently clear regarding the amount to divide and remanding for a proper finding as to the amount.
(9-1-0: Greenlee concurred in result only sub silentio.)


Jones v. State, 2021-KA-01375-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the verdict was not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that the trial court did not err in refusing a jury instruction on the excuse of accident where the defendant never stated he accidentally fired the gun.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)


West v. The Nichols Center, 2021-WC-01403-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the Commission’s finding that a nurse’s COVID diagnosis and resulting blood clot after treating COVID-positive patients was not compensable, holding that there was no lay or medical proof that the claimant contracted COVID at work.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – For those of us who handle workers’ comp claims, this was an interesting footnote regarding the necessity of medical proof. I was anticipating a discussion of whether COVID falls under the statutory definition of an “accidental injury” or an “occupational disease” but this footnote explains why we didn’t get it.


Gillen v. Gillen, 2021-CA-00837-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Dismissing appeal of a contempt order in a divorce proceeding, holding that the party in contempt under the “fugitive dismissal rule” because he had absented himself from the chancery court’s jurisdiction to avoid incarceration for contempt.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – Be sure to add the “fugitive dismissal rule” to your arsenal:


Tubwell v. FV-1, 2021-CP-01345-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision dispossessing the defendant of land he refused to vacate after the property was foreclosed on, holding that the circuit court had jurisdiction, that the circuit court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations and adverse possession, that the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on the issue of the defendant’s failure to vacate the property, and that the circuit court did not err in dismissing the counterclaim without prejudice.
(3-2-5: McCarty concurred in part/in result sub silentio; Carlton concurred in result only sub silentio; Barnes, Westbrooks, McDonald, and Emfinger concurred in part/dissented in part sub silentio; Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Barnes, and Emfinger, and joined in part by Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty.)


Other Orders

Lofton v. Lofton, 2021-CT-00035-COA (granting motion for supplemental attorney’s fees)

Brown v. Brown, 2021-CA-00728-COA (dismissing pro se motions for lack of jurisdiction)

Nunn v. State, 2021-KA-01371-COA (denying rehearing)

Brown v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (recalling mandate and granting additional rehearing time)

Hamilton v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (granting pro se motion for extension of time to file motion for rehearing)

Parker v. MDH, 2022-WC-00552-COA (denying rehearing)

Wells v. State, 2022-KA-00707-COA (granting motion to recall mandate and reinstate appeal)

Fox v. State, 2022-KA-00988-COA (granting motion for leave to file amicus brief)

Pryer v. State, 2023-TS-00568-COA (denying motion for reconsideration)


Hand Down List