Tag: Youth Court

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of June 13, 2024

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. Three of the opinions are direct criminal appeals, and one of those involved a reverse Batson challenge. The fourth opinion was a dec/injunction action against MDCPS.

Morris v. State, 2023-KA-00546-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction for statutory rape, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(9-0)

Turner v. State, 2023-KA-00074-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of kidnapping after the defendant failed to return her daughter to the child’s lawful custodian, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
(9-0)

Smith v. State, 2021-CT-01003-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder having granted cert on the issue of whether the case should be remanded for another Batson hearing, holding that the trial court did not err in disallowing two of the defendant’s strikes after reverse Batson challenges.
(6-3: King dissented, joined by Kitchens and joined in part by Ishee)

Jones v. Miss. Dept. of Child Protective Services, 2022-SA-01234-SCT (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions granting MDCPS a judgment on the pleadings in an injunctive and declaratory action against MDCPS’s policy not to investigate allegations of abuse at school, holding that Mississippi law (Mississippi Code Section 43-21-353 (Rev. 2023), specifically) does not require the MDCPS to investigate a report that a child has been abused at school.
(6-1-2: Randolph concurred in the result only without writing; Kitchens dissented, joined by King)

Other Orders

  • Rules for Court Reporters, 89-R-99021-SCT (appointing Leslie D. King, Candace O’Barr Jones, Kati Vogt, and Latanya Allen as members of the Board of Certified Court Reporters for two-year terms from July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026)
  • Haverscome v. State, 2022-CT-00391-SCT (denying cert)
  • Brown v. State, 2022-CT-00446-SCT (denying cert)
  • Gilmer v. Biegel, 2022-CP-00528-SCT (one order denying cert; granting motion for fees)
  • Moore v. Miss. Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co., 2022-CT-00555-SCT (denying cert)
  • Gregory Meridian Acquisition, LLC v. McFarland, 2022-CT-00580-SCT (denying cert)
  • Wiggins v. Southern Securities Group, LLC, 2024-TS-00251 (accepting request for interlocutory appeal as notice of appeal)
  • Mi Pueblo Mexican Restaurant, LLC v. Breakfast Cove, LLC, 2024-CA-00271 (granting leave to proceed in the trial court with Miss. R. Civ. P. 60 motion but denying stay request)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of June 1, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down seven opinions today, and covered a lot of territory in doing so. There is a breach of contract/attorney’s fees case, a fraudulent joinder venue case, a youth court venue case, a money dispute between a school board and school district, a direct criminal appeal, a death penalty PCR case, and an election contest. [There was a lot to get through today and I got a late start. I am sure there is a typo or two below that I will get around to catching and correcting.]

Healy v. AT&T Services, Inc., 2021-CP-01411-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancellor’s decision in a breach of contract claim filed by a lawyer/law firm due to reassignment of a 1-800 number, holding that the chancellor did not err in awarding nominal damages of $500 where there was inadequate proof of actual damages but reversing the chancellor’s exclusion of attorney’s fees in the award of sanctions for discovery violations and remanded for determination of the appropriate amount.
(9-0)

Practice Point – Footnote 3 of this opinion is a cautionary tale for those submitted evidence in the record at the trial court level and those reviewing the clerk’s record during the appeal:

The plaintiff in this case was seeking lost profits, but was only awarded nominal damages because there was insufficient evidence to show decreased earnings. To support the damages claim on appeal, the plaintiff submitted the plaintiff’s trial testimony, the firm’s QuickBooks reports for 2017-2018, and the plaintiff’s 2019 tax return. I don’t know if the QuickBooks reports would have moved the needle in this case, but that’s a question one generally does not want lingering after an appeal.

Another Practice Point – This opinion has a thorough discussion of the law on the measure of damages for breach of contract and lost profits claims. It is worth bookmarking for that purpose.

Doe v. Adams County Dept. of Child Protection Services, 2022-CA-00240-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming youth court’s denial of motion to transfer venue in an action to terminate parental rights for lack of jurisdiction and motion for recusal, holding that venue was proper because both the natural mother and the child resided in the venue county and that the trial court did not commit a manifest abuse of discretion in denying a motion for recusal.
(9-0)

Alpha Management Corp. v. Harris, 2022-IA-00354-SCT (Civil – Wrongful Death)
consolidated with
Community Park Apartments, Inc. v. Harris, 2022-IA-0355-SCT (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Reversing the trial court’s denial of motions to transfer venue, holding that the defendant that purportedly established venue in Hinds County was not a material and proper party and setting aside a default judgment against the fraudulently-joined defendant.
(7-1-1: Coleman concurred in part, joined in part by Griffis; Griffis concurred in part and dissented in part, joined in part by Coleman.)

NOTE – When discussing its decision to set aside the default judgment against the fraudulently-joined defendant, the Supreme Court had this to say:

Board of Supervisors of Lowndes County v. Lowndes County School District, 2021-CA-00999-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the school district in a dispute over the board’s decision to exclude more than $3M from the district’s requested ad valorem tax effort, holding that the district’s exclusive remedy was section 11-51-75 which required an appeal of the board’s decision to be filed in the circuit court within 10 days and that the district failed to do so.
(7-2-0: King concurred in the result only, joined by Kitchens.)

Welch v. State, 2022-KA-00457-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of statutory rape, holding that trial counsel’s decision not to collect and test defendant’s relatives’ DNA was reasonable trial strategy and not deficient performance and did not cause prejudice.
(9-0)

Garcia v. State, 2021-CA-01214-SCT (Civil – Death Penalty – Post Conviction)
Affirming denial of PCR motion to set aside a plea of guilty to capital murder and sentence to death, holding that the trial court did not fail to address the petitioner’s expert testimony and did not err by continuing to rely on the petitioner’s own competency expert or in ruling the petitioner was competent to plead guilty, that trial counsel was not constitutionally ineffective for not calling attention to a potential autism diagnosis or in preparing the petitioner to plead guilty, and the petitioner was not deprived of expert assistance under Ake.
(9-0)

Barton v. Adams-Williams, 2023-EC-00586-SCT (Civil – Election Contest)
Affirming denial of petition to disqualify a candidate for county prosecutor, holding that the trial court applied the proper standard in analyzing the candidate’s residency and did not manifestly err in its factual findings.
(9-0)

Other Orders

In Re: Advisory Committee on Rules, 89-R-99016-SCT (appointing Nicholas K. Thompson as member of Supreme Court of Mississippi Advisory Committee on Rules)

Rules for Court Reporters, 89-R-99021-SCT (appointing Theresa Lumley and Hon. David B. Strong, Huey Bang, and Jerry D. Sharp as members of the Board of Certified Court Reporters)

Lowe v. State, 2019-CT-01621-SCT (dismissing cert petition)

Powers v. State,  2017-DR-00696-SCT (denying motion to stay, granting in part a motion to compel disclosure, and granting leave to file reply)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of June 14, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down two opinions today. One addresses a custody award against a backdrop of abuse. The other case involves a remainderman’s claim for damages for timber that was clear cut by the holder of a life estate.

Taylor v. Mississippi Department of Child Protective Services, 2020-CA-01194-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the youth court’s decision awarding durable legal custody of a child to his paternal grandparents, holding that the youth court complied with section 43-21-557(1)(c) and (e) and did not err in bypassing reunification between the mother and her children where there was proof of abuse.
(Judge Westbrooks concurred in the result only without separate written opinion.)

Breeland v. Turnage, 2021-CA-00698-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancery court’s decision awarding the remainderman damages for timer that was cut from the property by the holder of a life estate, holding that the plaintiff had standing because he owned the land at the time of the lawsuit and his subsequent sale of the land did not disturb standing, that the landowner was entitled to collect damages for the profit obtained by devaluing his interested in the property via clear cut, and that the chancellor did not err in refusing to admit testimony about a witness’s prior conviction because the appellant did not argue any of the exceptions to Rule 404 to the trial court.
(Judge Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion. Judge Carlton did not participate.)

Other Orders

Nowell v. Stewart, 2020-CA-00728-COA (denying rehearing)

Kreppner v. Kreppner, 2021-CA-00006-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of June 2, 2022

The Mississippi Supreme Court gave us one opinion today holding that an automobile is not a deadly weapon that is illegal to concealed-carry under section 97-37-1. Read on for context…

Altman v. State, 2021-IA-00419-SCT (Criminal – Felony/Youth Court/Jurisdiction/Concealed Carry?)
Reversing the circuit court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, holding that because an automobile cannot be “carried” or “concealed on or about one’s person,” the youth court has exclusive jurisdiction over a juvenile offender who commits a felony using an automobile.
(All justices concurred).

CONTEXT – The youth court has exclusive original jurisdiction in all proceedings concerning a delinquent child, subject to some exceptions. One exception applies when a child commits a felony with a deadly weapon that is illegal, under section 97-37-1, to carry in a concealed manner. The defendant was seventeen when he allegedly drove his car intentionally into a car carrying his mother, siblings, and step father. The defendant was indicted for four counts of aggravated assault. He filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the youth court had exclusive jurisdiction. The circuit court denied the motion. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal and reversed the circuit court, reasoning:

Other Orders

Godbolt v. State, 2020-DP-00440-SCT (denying pro se motion for the appointment of new counsel by defendant convicted of multiple counts of capital murder and sentenced to death stemming from a killing rampage in Lincoln County in 2017)

Arrington v. State, 2020-M-00571 (denying pro se application for leave to proceed in the trial court and restricting the petitioner from filing further such applications in forma pauperis)

Varner v. Anderson, 2021-M-01390-SCT (denying motion to reconsider order denying petition for interlocutory appeal and denying motion to dismiss said motion for reconsideration)

Hand Down List

Summaries of the Mississippi Court of Appeals opinions of March 1, 2022

Today’s court of appeals opinions involve a reputed patent troll, alienation of affection, and a bureaucratic nightmare.

International Association of Certified Home Inspectors and Nick Gromicko v. HomeSafe Inspection, Inc., 2020-CA-00520-COA (Civil – Contract/Misrepresentation/Damages Proof)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s judgment on a jury verdict in a suit that included claims for breach of contract, conversion, and negligent misrepresentation filed by a patent troll holder against a trade association after a deal between the two went poorly. This story began when the patent holder filed a patent infringement suit against a member of the trade association, and the trade association sprang into action and made an effort to strike a deal with the patent holder. The parties reached a deal where patent holder would grant a bulk license to the trade association’s membership to use the patented technology and would agree not to sue any trade association member and, in exchange, the trade association would pay the patent holder a portion of the membership dues it collected. A contract was entered and the a dispute arose about how to carry out the contract that centered around how the license was presented on the trade association’s website. The patent holder filed suit and the jury returned a verdict in favor of the patent holder against the trade association and its founder. The court of appeals made three main holdings. First, the court of appeals held that the patent holder, which had been administratively dissolved by the Secretary of State at the time the contract was entered, had standing to sue because the former entity had been reinstated by the time the lawsuit was filed. Second, the court of appeals held that the patent holder did not prove compensatory damages for breach of contract and conversion with “reasonable certainty” because the damages model used at trial was prepared by unidentified individuals who did not use any recognized methodology and who did not testify at trial. Accordingly, the court of appeals reversed and remanded to the circuit court to determine nominal damages for the breach of contract and for conversion. Third, the court of appeals discussed the difference between a “misrepresentation of fact” and a “promise of future conduct” and held that the trade association’s “lofty promises” made during negotiations were not misrepresentations about then-existing facts and therefore reversed the judgment of liability on the negligent misrepresentation claim and entered judgment in favor of the trade association dismissing that claim.
(All participating judges concurred.)

Dew v. Harris, 2020-CA-01261-COA (Civil – Torts/Alienation of Affection)
Reversing the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing ex-husband’s alienation of affection lawsuit, holding that there was a genuine dispute over material facts in the form of opposing affidavits and that the trial court had improperly considered the credibility and the weight of the evidence presented during the summary judgment proceedings. This case was remanded for further proceedings.
(All participating judges concurred.)

In the Interest of L.T., K.T., E.T., and S.T.: Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services v. Youth Court of Warren County, Mississippi, 2021-SA-00069-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations/Youth Court)
Reversing the youth court’s decision ordering CPS to pay attorney fees and travel expenses to a minors’ guardian under Rule 11, holding that Rule 11 cannot be used to award sanctions against a party that has not actually filed anything even when another party has endured a “bureaucratic nightmare.”
(All participating judges concurred.)

Other Decisions

Mississippi Department of Economic and Community Development v. General Reinsurance Corporation, 2020-WC-761-COA (denying motion for rehearing).

Bryant v. Bryant, 2020-CA-883-COA (denying motion for rehearing, Barnes and Wilson would grant).

Complete Hand Down List