Tag: Wrongful Termination

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of August 15, 2024

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. There is one direct criminal appeal, one wrongful termination case, an adoption, and a pro se PCR win.

Bradford v. State, 2023-KA-00595-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of armed robbery, finding no error after reviewing counsel’s Lindsey brief and the record.
(9-0)

Public Service Commission of Yazoo City v. Wright, 2023-IA-00020-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Prisons)
Reversing the trial court’s denial of the PSC’s motion for summary judgment in a suit alleging wrongful termination in retaliation for refusing to participate in an illegal activity, holding on interlocutory appeal that the plaintiff failed to identify any act on the part of her supervisor that warranted the imposition of criminal penalties.
(9-0)

In the Matter of the Adoption of D.A.S., a Minor: B.B. v. K.P., 2023-CA-00381-SCT (Civil – Adoption)
Affirming denial of a petition to set aside an adoption based on alleged fraudulent misrepresentations that the adoption would be “open,” holding that the petition was untimely because it was filed more than six months after the entry of the adoption decree.
(9-0)

Practice Point – Though the petition to set aside the adoption was dismissed as untimely, it was interesting that an issue in the case was notary lines that were inconsistent with the body of the adoption petition. The petitioner was seeking to have the adoption set aside based on claims of fraudulent misrepresentations that the adoption would be “open.” The body of the initial and amended petitions for adoption did not reference an “open” adoption, but the notary lines read:


A good reminder to beware of those copy-paste portions of pleadings.

Love v. State, 2021-CT-01101-SCT (Civil – PCR)
Reversing the circuit court for dismissing the petitioner’s voluntariness claim without evidentiary hearing and the Court of Appeals for affirming that dismissal, holding that the circuit court committed plain error during the plea colloquy by incorrectly stating the minimum penalty on each count to which the petitioner was pleading, that the the petitioner was not properly informed he would be sentenced as a habitual offender resulting in a blatant injustice, that the State did not establish a factual basis to support the habitual offender portion of the indictment by failing to mention the prior felony convictions, and that issues related to the petitioner’s request to withdraw his plea and his ineffective assistance claim were procedurally barred.
(9-0)

Other Orders

  • Hills v. Manns, 2022-CT-00774-SCT (denying cert)
  • Boyett v. Cain, 2022-CT-00978-SCT (granting pro se cert petition)
  • Jones v. Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services, 2022-SA-01234-SCT (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 23, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today. There is an arbitration enforcement decision, a legal malpractice settlement enforcement decision, an appeal of a second-degree murder conviction, a wrongful termination decision, and a PCR decision.

Chandler v. State, 2020-CP-01060-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the plaintiff’s PCR motion, holding that most of the claims were procedurally barred and all of them were without merit.
(10-0)

Young v. Freese & Goss PLLC, 2020-CA-01280-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the court court’s order granting in part a motion to compel arbitration, holding (1) that the circuit court did not err in granting arbitration to those plaintiffs whose attorney contracts had an arbitration provision, holding that the defendants did not waive arbitration under the peculiar facts of this case even though the motion to compel arbitration was not heard for more than five years, (2) that the plaintiffs had not specifically and clearly alleged fraudulent inducement, (3) that it was not error to compel arbitration over the plaintiffs’ argument that the attorneys breached their fiduciary duty and that the arbitration provision was procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and (4) that it was not error to apply the arbitration provision to conduct that occurred before it was executed.
(8-1-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McCarty did not participate.)

Turner & Associates P.L.L.C. v. Estate of Watkins, 2021-CA-00258-COA (Civil – Legal Malpractice)
Affirming the circuit court’s order enforcing a settlement release signed by a former client agreeing to release malpractice claims against a law firm for $300,000 and ordering the law firm to pay the $288,000 balance, holding that the settlement release was not barred by the statute of frauds, that the amount bargained was not unreasonable, that facts deemed admitted to requests for admissions that were not answered were conclusively established, that the law firm waived its defenses to the legal malpractice claim by negotiating a release, and that there was no requirement to file a suggestion of death.
(8-1-1: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in result without separate written opinion; Judge McDonald dissented without separate written opinion.)

NOTE – These facts are wild and the opinion is worth you time. A non-lawyer employee lied to the plaintiff about filing suit and a trial date and the plaintiff only found out eight years later. The plaintiff negotiated with the same non-lawyer employee and received $18,000 and later a promise for $288,000 more, but the law firm did not sent a release. Litigation ensued over the agreement. Sadly, the plaintiff died of cancer during the litigation and did not get to see things made right.

Moffett v. State, 2021-KA-00622-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that (1) the defendant did not prove ineffective assistance of counsel related to the failure to request a culpable-negligence instruction, failure to request an accident or misfortune instruction, or for admitting that there was no evidentiary basis for a heat-of-passion manslaughter jury instruction; (2) the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress her statement on coercion grounds; and (3) the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(8-1-1: Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion.)

Avery v. The University of Mississippi, 2021-CA-00471-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision affirming the University Personnel Action Review Board’s (PARB) decision upholding the plaintiff’s termination, holding that (1) the circuit court had jurisdiction; (2) the plaintiff was afforded due process despite her arguments that she was not given proper notice, not provided with adequate reasons for her termination prior to her hearing, not given the PARB’s findings of fact, and the investigation was inadequate; (3) the termination did not violate the First Amendment; and (4) the termination was supported by substantial evidence including evidence of disrespectful and confrontational behavior towards coworkers.
(8-2-0: Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Judge McDonald concurred in result only without separate written opinion.)

Other Orders

Murray v. State, 2021-KA-00264-COA (denying rehearing)

Keys v. Military Department Gulfport, 2021-WC-00352-COA (denying rehearing)

Pipkin v. State, 2021-CA-00517-COA (denying rehearing)

Unifund CCR Partners v. Estate of Jordan, 2021-CA-00761-COA (denying rehearing)

Siggers v. State, 2021-CP-00985-COA (recalling mandate so appellant’s pro se motion for rehearing can proceed on the merits)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of June 21, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today. Trial courts and appellees ran the table getting affirmed in all six cases. The opinions include resolution of appeals related to adverse possession, easements, custody, wrongful termination, PCR, and child support.

Jackson v. Mullins, 2021-CP-00495-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming summary judgment dismissing a three-ring-circus claims filed by a divorcee against the chancery court master who presided over his divorce case, together with a Mississippi Bar employee and the chairman of the Bar’s Committee on Professional Responsibility who handled a bar complaint the plaintiff filed against the special master, and an MDHS employee, holding that the trial judge who granted summary judgment was not biased and that the special master and the Bar personnel were immune from suit.
(10-0.)

Franco v. Ferrill, 2021-CA-00053-COA (Civil – Real Property/Adverse Possession)
Affirming the chancellor’s rulings in a fact-intensive adverse possession suit, holding that the record supported the chancery court’s findings that (1) the plaintiffs adversely possessed the property, (2) the plaintiffs have proved a prescriptive easement to a lake, (3) the plaintiffs were entitled to $5,000 in damages for trespass and property damage, (4) the defendants must remove a fence of pay for fence removal, and (5) a trespass claim filed by one defendant should be denied.
(Judge McCarty concurred in part and in the result, joined by Judge Lawrence.)

Stuckey v. Stuckey, 2020-CA-00848-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision modifying a custody agreement, holding that the record supported (1) the chancellor’s determination that there has been an adverse, material change in circumstances; (2) the chancellor’s weighing of the Albright factors to conclude that primary physical custody should be changed from the mother to the father; (3) the chancellor’s decision modification of child support; and (4) the chancellor’s order requiring the mother to undergo quarterly drug testing.
(Judge McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion. Judge Wilson concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.)

Leland School District v. Brown, 2021-CA-00157-COA (Civil – Contract/Wrongful Termination)
Affirming on direct appeal and cross-appeal the chancellor’s ruling in a wrongful termination claim, holding (1) that the chancellor properly denied a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, (2) that the chancellor properly found that the school board’s decision upholding the plaintiff’s termination was not supported by substantial evidence and was arbitrary and capricious, and (3) that the chancellor did not err in denying attorney’s fees.
(10-0.)

Brumfield v. State, 2020-CP-01271-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for PCR, holding that the plaintiff did not meet his burden in challenging the timeliness of his probation revocation hearing.
(10-0.)

Kelley v. Zitzelberger, 2021-CA-00119-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations/Child Support/Visitation)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions pertaining to child support and visitation modifications, holding that (1) the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in denying the father’s request for child support reduction or in refusing to enforce the parties’ oral agreement to reduce child support, (2) the chancellor’s decision that the father was not entitled to have voluntary payments for extracurricular activities credited to his child support arrearage was not clearly erroneous, and (3) the chancellor’s decision modifying visitation was not manifestly wrong or clearly erroneous. The Court of Appeals also denied the mother’s motion for fees and damages under Miss. R. App. 38.
(Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Other Orders

Mingo v. McComb School District, 2020-CA-00022-COA (denying rehearing)
Butler v. State, 2020-KA-00806-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List