Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Doby v. South Park Village Apartments
Christopher Doby was shot on August 23, 2019, at South Park Village Apartments in Laurel, Mississippi. Christopher and Cheyveon Doby filed a lawsuit against South Park Village Apartments, its management company, Millennia Housing Management, and its owners, South Park MS, LLC, and South Park MS Investment, LLC. The complaint alleged that South Park failed to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition, provide adequate security, repair or maintain fences, gates, and locks, and warn tenants and guests of dangerous conditions. It also claimed that South Park knew or should have known of prior criminal acts on the property and failed to take reasonable measures to prevent future criminal activity.The Jones County Circuit Court dismissed the complaint under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), finding that the complaint alleged only general negligence and did not contain allegations that South Park affirmatively impelled the third party’s conduct. The court also dismissed Cheyveon Doby’s claims, noting that the complaint made no specific allegations concerning him. The Dobys filed a motion for reconsideration, which the trial court denied, leading to the current appeal.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case de novo and held that the allegations in the complaint, taken as true, were sufficient to state a claim for relief under Mississippi’s notice pleading standard. The court found that the complaint provided reasonable notice of the claims against South Park and demonstrated a recognized cause of action upon which Christopher Doby might prevail. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of Cheyveon Doby’s claims due to the lack of specific allegations pertaining to him. Consequently, the Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the case for further proceedings regarding Christopher Doby’s claims. View "Doby v. South Park Village Apartments" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Personal Injury, Real Estate & Property Law
In The Matter of The Estate Tatum
William H. Tatum Jr. was convicted of bank fraud and had a $15,284,348 restitution judgment against him. He owned a 50% membership interest in Tatum Land and Cattle Company, LLC (TLCC). Upon his death in 2018, his estate, including his TLCC interest, was left to his wife, Betsy Gay Roberts-Tatum. Betsy died in 2020, and her son, Zachary I. Haynie, became the executor of her estate. Darrell Tatum, William’s grandson, was appointed executor of William’s estate. The United States, Peoples Bank, and John Deere Financial filed claims against William’s estate.The Tippah County Chancery Court admitted William’s will to probate and appointed Gay as executrix. After Gay’s death, Darrell was appointed as successor executor. Darrell petitioned for the public sale of William’s TLCC interest to satisfy estate debts. Zach opposed, seeking to enforce the TLCC operating agreement’s buyout provision. The chancellor ordered the public sale, which resulted in Joe Tatum purchasing the interest for $675,000. Zach objected, arguing the sale price was inadequate and sought relief, including assignment of the promissory note and deed of trust from Peoples Bank.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case. The court found that any additional funds recovered from the estate would go to the United States due to the restitution judgment, rendering Zach’s claims moot. The court dismissed the appeal as moot, noting that a decision would not benefit Zach practically since the United States would claim any additional funds. The court affirmed the chancellor’s decisions, including the public sale and denial of Zach’s motions. View "In The Matter of The Estate Tatum" on Justia Law
Crabtree v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company
Casey Cotton was involved in a car collision with Caleb and Adriane Crabtree, resulting in severe injuries to Caleb. The Crabtrees filed a lawsuit against Cotton and his insurer, Allstate, alleging that Allstate refused early settlement offers and failed to inform Cotton of these offers. While the claims against Allstate were dismissed, the claims against Cotton proceeded in the Lamar County Circuit Court. During the personal injury suit, Cotton declared bankruptcy, and his bankruptcy estate included a potential bad faith claim against Allstate. The Crabtrees, as unsecured creditors, petitioned the bankruptcy court to allow the personal injury suit to proceed to trial.The bankruptcy court directed that the suit against Cotton be liquidated by jury trial to pursue claims against Allstate for any resulting excess judgment. The Crabtrees sought an assignment of Cotton’s bad faith claim as a settlement of their unsecured claims in Cotton’s bankruptcy estate. Unable to afford the $10,000 up-front cost, they engaged Court Properties, LLC, to assist with financing. Court Properties paid the trustee $10,000 to acquire the bad faith claim, then assigned it to the Crabtrees in exchange for $10,000 plus interest, contingent on successful recovery from Allstate. Cotton was discharged from bankruptcy, and a jury verdict awarded the Crabtrees $4,605,000 in the personal injury suit.The Crabtrees filed an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, which dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding the assignments champertous and void under Mississippi Code Section 97-9-11. The Crabtrees appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which certified a question to the Supreme Court of Mississippi.The Supreme Court of Mississippi held that Mississippi Code Section 97-9-11 prohibits a creditor in bankruptcy from engaging a disinterested third party to purchase a cause of action from a debtor. The court clarified that solicitation of a disinterested third party to prosecute a case in which it has no legitimate interest violates the statute. View "Crabtree v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company" on Justia Law
TLM Investments, LLC v. Yates
Shanda Yates was bitten by a pit bull named Yurk while visiting her friend Neah Friar, who rented a property from TLM Investments, LLC. Friar's lease had a no-pet provision, which she disregarded by keeping Yurk and concealing his presence from TLM. Yates filed a personal injury claim against both Friar and TLM, alleging negligence on TLM's part for allowing Yurk on the property and claiming protections under the lease.The Prentiss County Circuit Court denied TLM's motion for summary judgment, leading to an interlocutory appeal. TLM argued that it had no knowledge of Yurk's presence or his dangerous propensities, as Friar had intentionally concealed the dog. TLM also contended that Yates failed to establish herself as an intended third-party beneficiary under the lease.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case de novo and found that Yates did not provide evidence that TLM had actual or constructive knowledge of Yurk or his dangerous propensities. The court noted that the no-pet provision in the lease was not an admission that all dogs are dangerous but was intended to prevent property damage. Additionally, the court found that Yates did not have standing to claim protections under the lease as she was not a party to it and was not an intended third-party beneficiary.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reversed the trial court's denial of summary judgment, rendered summary judgment in favor of TLM, and remanded the case to the Prentiss County Circuit Court for any necessary further proceedings. The case against TLM was dismissed with prejudice. View "TLM Investments, LLC v. Yates" on Justia Law
Tubbs v. State of Mississippi
In 2022, Jayme Lynn Tubbs was indicted by a Quitman County Grand Jury along with Keith Coleman Jr. for conspiring to commit murder, first-degree murder, and desecration of a human corpse. They were tried jointly, and after the State rested its case, the trial judge dismissed the conspiracy charges. The jury found both defendants guilty on all other counts. Tubbs moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, which was denied. After Tubbs appealed, the trial court granted Coleman a new trial due to a discovery violation. Tubbs's appeal was stayed for an evidentiary hearing, which found a Brady violation, leading to a new trial for Tubbs.In September 2023, Tubbs and Coleman were retried and found guilty on all counts. Tubbs was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murders and three years for desecration of a human corpse, to run concurrently. Tubbs again moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, which was denied.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case. Tubbs raised two issues: the sufficiency of the evidence for her murder convictions and the admissibility of Chief Deputy Peter Clinton’s testimony regarding her confession. The court found sufficient evidence to support the convictions, noting Tubbs's active participation in the planning, execution, and aftermath of the murders. The court also ruled that Clinton’s testimony was not hearsay under Mississippi Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(A) and that the best evidence rule did not apply to exclude his testimony. The court affirmed Tubbs's convictions and sentences. View "Tubbs v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Criminal Law
Mississippi Department of Revenue v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC (Tennessee Gas) provides natural gas transportation services and purchased tangible personal property for use in Mississippi, paying use tax on these purchases. However, Tennessee Gas later paid freight charges to a third-party carrier to ship these goods to Mississippi and did not include these charges in its tax base for the use tax calculation. The Mississippi Department of Revenue (MDOR) conducted a use-tax audit for the period of November 1, 2016, through November 30, 2019, and assessed use tax on the freight charges.Tennessee Gas appealed the assessment to MDOR’s Board of Review and then to the Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), arguing that the freight charges were not taxable under Mississippi Code Sections 27-67-3 and -5 because they constituted a separate transaction from the purchase of tangible personal property. The BTA agreed with Tennessee Gas. MDOR then appealed to the Hinds County Chancery Court, which granted summary judgment in favor of Tennessee Gas, finding that the freight charges paid to a third-party carrier were not subject to use tax.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case de novo. The court held that MDOR did not meet its burden of proving its statutory power to tax Tennessee Gas for freight charges paid to a third party. The court found that the use tax statutes and sales tax statutes must be read in conjunction, and the purchase of shipping services from an independent third party constituted a separate, closed transaction. Therefore, the freight charges should not be included in the use tax base. The court affirmed the chancery court’s decision. View "Mississippi Department of Revenue v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Tax Law
United Emergency Services of Mississippi, Inc. v. Miller
Shannon Reed arrived at Baptist Memorial Hospital-Golden Triangle's emergency room with severe chest pain, nausea, shortness of breath, and numbness in his left arm. Dr. Keith McCoy ordered several tests, including EKGs and Troponin measurements. Despite Reed's fluctuating pain levels, he was discharged with a diagnosis of unspecified chest pain and instructions to follow up with a cardiologist. Reed died later that night. Oliver Miller, on behalf of Reed's wrongful-death beneficiaries, filed medical negligence claims against the hospital, United Emergency Services, and Dr. McCoy.The Lowndes County Circuit Court denied the defendants' motions for summary judgment, finding genuine issues of material fact for the jury to determine. The defendants argued that Miller's claims failed due to lack of causation, as affidavits from cardiologists indicated they would not have admitted Reed even if consulted. The court found that Miller's experts provided sufficient evidence of breaches in the standard of care that could have contributed to Reed's death.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and affirmed the circuit court's denial of summary judgment in part, while reversing and rendering in part. The court held that Miller failed to establish causation for the claim that Dr. McCoy should have admitted Reed to the hospital, as the on-call cardiologists would not have admitted him. However, the court found that Miller's other claims, including improper discharge and failure to report pain increase, presented genuine issues of material fact. The case was remanded to the Lowndes County Circuit Court for further proceedings. View "United Emergency Services of Mississippi, Inc. v. Miller" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury
Quinn v. State of Mississippi
Damaris Quinn was convicted in the Clay County Circuit Court of attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The incident occurred on October 18, 2016, when Quinn shot his wife, Basheeba Ward, five times with a .32 caliber revolver. The shooting took place at Quinn's mother's house, where the couple was living. Ward survived the shooting and testified that Quinn shot her after an argument about her not wearing her wedding ring. Quinn's aunt and mother also provided testimony about the events surrounding the shooting.The jury found Quinn guilty of both charges. Quinn appealed his attempted murder conviction, arguing that the trial court erred by denying a jury instruction related to his defense and that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. The trial court had denied a motion for a directed verdict on the attempted murder charge, asserting that the State failed to establish the element of intent for attempted murder.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and found no merit in Quinn's claims. The court held that the jury instruction provided by the trial court properly tracked the attempted-murder statute and that the evidence presented at trial was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find Quinn guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The court noted that intent could be inferred from Quinn's actions, including shooting Ward multiple times and reloading the gun. The court affirmed Quinn's convictions for attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. View "Quinn v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Criminal Law
In Re: Jex
Attorney Zachary Jex was hired to defend Jerrell Davis on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault. After a mistrial in January 2022, a second trial was scheduled for September 12, 2023. During jury selection, the trial was delayed due to a malfunctioning air conditioner. The next day, Jex negotiated a plea deal for Davis, which included dropping the aggravated assault charge and pleading guilty to two counts of manslaughter. The prosecution agreed, but the judge required Jex to pay the jury costs as a condition for accepting the plea.The Claiborne County Circuit Court issued an order requiring Jex to pay $4,141 for the jury costs. Jex contested this order, arguing that he should not be responsible for the costs. The court treated his argument as a motion to reconsider and denied it. Jex then submitted a written motion to reconsider, which was also denied, leading to his appeal.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case. The court found that Jex had voluntarily agreed to pay the jury costs during the plea hearing and that the trial judge had the authority to impose these costs under Rule 3.13 of the Uniform Civil Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice. The court also rejected Jex's arguments that he was under duress, that Rule 3.13 was misapplied, and that the prosecution's actions constituted misconduct.The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the order of the Claiborne County Circuit Court, holding that Jex was required to pay the jury costs as he had agreed during the plea negotiations. View "In Re: Jex" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Criminal Law
Mississippi Apartment Association v. City of Jackson
The case involves the Mississippi Apartment Association (MAA) and other property owners challenging an ordinance adopted by the Jackson City Council. The ordinance imposed registration and inspection requirements on rental housing units in Jackson. MAA appealed the city council's decision in the Hinds County Circuit Court but did not request a stay of the ordinance's implementation. Subsequently, MAA filed a separate action in the Hinds County Chancery Court seeking injunctions against the ordinance's enforcement, arguing that the planning department's interpretation and enforcement of the ordinance were unlawful.The Hinds County Chancery Court dismissed MAA's claims for lack of jurisdiction, stating that the circuit court had exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal of the city council's decision under Mississippi Code Section 11-51-75. The chancery court found that the circuit court also had pendent jurisdiction over MAA's equitable claims regarding the ordinance's enforcement.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and affirmed the chancery court's decision. The court held that the circuit court had exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal of the city council's decision and pendent jurisdiction over related claims regarding the ordinance's enforcement. The court emphasized that allowing a separate action in the chancery court could lead to contradictory rulings and confusion. The court also noted that MAA had an adequate remedy at law in the circuit court and could have requested a stay of the ordinance's implementation under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 62. View "Mississippi Apartment Association v. City of Jackson" on Justia Law