Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries
Mississippi v. Walgreen Co.
This matter stemmed from a lawsuit filed by the State of Mississippi against the defendant pharmacies. The State alleged deceptive trade practices and fraudulent reporting of inflated “usual and customary” prices in the defendant’s reimbursement requests to the Mississippi Department of Medicaid. The State argued that Walgreens, CVS, and Fred’s pharmacies purposefully misrepresented these prices to obtain higher prescription drug reimbursements from the State. Finding that the circuit court was better equipped to preside over this action, the DeSoto County Chancery Court transferred the matter to the DeSoto County Circuit Court in response to the defendants’ request. Aggrieved, the State timely filed an interlocutory appeal disputing the chancellor’s decision to transfer the case. After a thorough review of the parties’ positions, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that though the chancery court properly could have retained the action, the chancellor correctly used his discretion to transfer the case, allowing the issues to proceed in front of a circuit-court jury. As a result, the Supreme Court affirmed the chancellor’s decision. View "Mississippi v. Walgreen Co." on Justia Law
Richard Chapman v. State of Mississippi
This appeal arose from the Hinds County, Mississippi Circuit Court’s order granting in part Richard Chapman’s motion for post-conviction relief (PCR), following the Mississippi Supreme Court’s mandate in Chapman v. Mississippi, 167 So. 3d 1170 (Miss. 2015) (Chapman IV). In a five-to-four decision, a majority of the Court found that no direct appeal was taken from Chapman’s 1982 conviction for rape and life sentence, and ordered the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine if the record and transcript from the jury trial still existed, and if not, whether something equivalent could be reconstructed. The parties reconstructed much of the record on remand, and the trial court granted Chapman leave to file an out-of-time appeal from his 1982 rape conviction and life sentence. Chapman appealed that ruling, claiming: (1) the record was less than adequate to allow an acceptable appeal to be prepared. Chapman maintains his trial counsel was constitutionally deficient for failing to file an appeal, or even a notice of appeal, even though Chapman claimed he paid counsel to do so; and (2) a life sentence imposed on a sixteen-year-old for a crime that was not a homicide constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Chapman argued his 1982 rape conviction should be reversed and the case dismissed or, in the alternative, remanded for a new trial. Having reviewed the reconstructed record, the Supreme Court found Chapman was not entitled to an out-of-time appeal. The Court confirmed: (1) Chapman’s trial record was not destroyed, as Chapman claimed throughout his multiple PCR petitions; and (2) Chapman had three years from April 17, 1984, when Mississippi’s Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act (UPCCRA) went into effect, to petition for an out-of-time appeal but failed to do so. View "Richard Chapman v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Smith v. Mississippi
Rickie Omar Smith was indicted on one count of armed robbery and one count of burglary of a dwelling. The jury found Smith guilty on both counts, and the circuit court sentenced Smith to thirty years for armed robbery and twenty-five years for burglary of a dwelling, with the sentences to run concurrently. Following the denial of Smith’s post trial motions, he appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict for armed robbery. Because the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict for armed robbery, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed. View "Smith v. Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Smith v. Church Mutual Insurance Company
In 2013, Tarinika Smith and twelve minor children (collectively Plaintiffs) were involved in an automobile accident with a vehicle driven by Adlai Johnson. Smith was operating a passenger van owned by Mount Vernon Missionary Baptist Church (Mt. Vernon), located in Rossville, Tennessee, which was transporting the children. The accident occurred in Marshall County, Mississippi. At the time of the collision, Smith was pregnant. Plaintiffs and Johnson were all Tennessee residents. The Marshall County Circuit Court entered an order dismissing Johnson from the suit for Plaintiffs’ failure to timely serve him. Church Mutual Insurance Company (“Church Mutual”), Mt. Vernon's insurer, moved to have the trial court declare that Tennessee substantive law controlled the case. After the trial court so declared, Church Mutual moved for summary judgment based on Tennessee law prohibiting direct actions against insurers for uninsured motorist (“UM”) claims. The trial court then entered summary judgment in favor of Church Mutual. Plaintiffs sought interlocutory review of all three rulings. The Mississippi Supreme Court found no error in the dismissal of Johnson for Plaintiffs’ failure to serve. Furthermore, the Supreme Court found no error with the trial court applying Tennessee law to determine whether the contract provided UM coverage to Plaintiffs. However, the Court determined the trial court erred in applying Tennessee substantive law. Therefore, the Court reversed those judgments of the Marshall County Circuit Court and remand for further proceedings. View "Smith v. Church Mutual Insurance Company" on Justia Law
Hawkins v. Heck Yea Quarter Horses, LLC
On June 19, 2013, George “Leith” Hawkins (Hawkins), suffered a stroke while working at Heck Yea Quarter Horses, LLC (Heck Yea). Hawkins was hired to wash a wooden fence. After lunch he complained of feeling ill, but declined having an ambulance called. Hawkins slowly drove himself home. Connie Hawkins found her husband in bed with the covers pulled over his head. When she went to his truck to retrieve some Tylenol, Hawkins had moved from the bed to the living room couch. He fell off the couch "shaking and jerking." Connie called emergency dispatch, but her husband died at the hospital having suffered a stroke. Connie sued Heck Yea and other defendants for wrongful death, alleging Hawkins had been left alone “to tend to the fence, at which time he, due to the extreme heat, passed out in the field.” The trial court granted summary judgment to Heck Yea, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted Connie's petition for certiorari review to address whether the trial court and the Mississippi Court of Appeals erred in failing to take into account affidavits which created genuine issues of material fact with regard to the care Hawkins received at Heck Yea. Because the Supreme Court found summary judgment to have been proper, and the Mississippi Court of Appeals’ analysis on the matter to have been correct, it affirmed the lower courts' judgments in this case. View "Hawkins v. Heck Yea Quarter Horses, LLC" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Personal Injury
Ambrose v. Mississippi
In 2013, Abdur Ambrose ("Ambrose"), Stevie Ambrose, and Orlander Dedeaux were indicted for capital murder of Robert Trosclair with the underlying felony being kidnapping. Ambrose alleged Trosclair had "stolen stuff our of his car." and confronted him late in the afternoon. Trosclair was later found tied up with a yellow ratchet strap, tightly tied around his wrists and loosely tired around his back, his head as “very dirty, covered in dirt, black and blue, blood,” Trosclair’s ears had blood coming out of them, stab wounds, cuts, and scrapes to his body. Trosclair was heliported to a hospital where he was unresponsive upon arrival, and diagnosed as clinically brain dead. The trial court severed the case for separate trials. A jury found Ambrose guilty of capital murder, for which he received the death sentence. Ambrose appealed, raising following twelve alleged issues with the trial court's proceedings. A divided Mississippi Supreme Court majority concluded after a review of the the record and after considering all of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances presented at trial, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and the death penalty was not disproportionate or excessive. View "Ambrose v. Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law
Elliott v. Amerigas Propane, L.P.
In 2008, an undetected flammable gas ignited and caused an explosion at the Elliotts’ home. Because the Elliotts believed the flammable gas was natural gas from a broken municipal pipeline, they filed suit against the city of Holly Springs, Mississippi, and the chain of vendors that supplied the city with natural gas and related products. A few years into litigation, the defendants began pointing to the propane gas tank in the Elliotts’ yard, insisting propane gas, not natural gas, was the source and cause of the explosion. While the Elliotts and their experts denied that propane gas caused the explosion, the Elliotts amended their complaint, adding claims against the propane gas vendor, "to avoid the risk of fault being apportioned to a nonparty or, as they put it, to cut off an 'empty chair defense.'" The Elliotts negotiated a settlement with the municipality, and summary judgment was previously granted to all of the Natural Gas Defendants. So the Elliotts had no need to assert an empty chair defense. However, they attempted to change course to pursue the propane gas defendant, a defendant they admitted they did not believe caused the explosion. The Mississippi SUpreme Court surmised that the decade the Elliotts spent pursuing only their natural gas claims, they were determined to be bound by their cumulative admissions. Accordingly, the propane gas defendant was granted summary judgment. The Elliotts appealed the latter ruling, arguing that they should have been allowed to take that inconsistent position. But finding no error in the trial court's ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed it. View "Elliott v. Amerigas Propane, L.P." on Justia Law
Posted in:
Civil Procedure, Personal Injury
In the Interest of E.K.
E.K. was adjudicated as a neglected child. Elizabeth A. King and Timothy King were E.K.'s parents; he was born 2001. With a history of ADHD, epilepsy, autism, mental disability and obsessive, compulsive disorder (OCD), E.K. functioned on the level of a two-year-old. Elizabeth and Timothy had been separated for two weeks at the time of the initial investigation in this case. They had been divorced for four years in the past before having remarried. In December 2015, the Mississippi Department of Human Services Division of Family and Children’s Services (“DHS”) was contacted by law enforcement officials about Elizabeth and E.K. Law enforcement officers on the scene were concerned that Elizabeth was high on drugs, due to her repetitive 911 calls. According to an investigative report prepared by DHS, Elizabeth secured a protective order against Timothy and changed the locks to her residence. Last, the report noted that DHS was ordered by the Marion County Youth Court “to open prevention case to monitor to [sic] safety in the home.” DHS ultimately directed a formal petition to adjudicate E.K. as a neglected child be entered. First, E.K. was adjudicated neglected even though her mother was not properly before the youth court and her father received no notice of the adjudication hearing. Second, after review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that the neglect petition was legally insufficient to provide notice to E.K. or her parents of the neglect charges. Third, the evidence offered to support a finding of neglect at the adjudication hearing was legally insufficient. As such, the Supreme Court vacated the youth court’s adjudication order and rendered judgment in favor of E.K. and her parents. View "In the Interest of E.K." on Justia Law
Posted in:
Family Law, Government & Administrative Law
Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Curry
The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance (Commission) filed a formal complaint against Justice Court Judge Mary Curry, alleging she violated Canons 1, 2A, 2B, 3B(1), 3B(2), 3B(5), 3B(7), 3B(8), and 3C(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Judge Curry stipulated she: (1) “has signed warrants based on affidavits sworn by her relatives . . . .” then would not set bond even though the charges were misdemeanors and recuse herself from the case; (2) displayed a pattern of dismissing Petition for Order of Protection From Domestic Abuse without having statutorily mandated hearings; (3) granted a bond reduction for a relative whose initial appearance she presided over; (4) waived an expungement fee and directed the clerks to void the receipts and refund the money; and (5) requested the complainant-clerk be transferred from her position as Justice Court Clerk once the Judge learned a complaint regarding her conduct had been filed. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted the parties’ joint motion for approval of the Commission’s recommendation and ordered Judge Curry be publicly reprimanded. Judge Curry was ordered to appear on the first day of the next term of the Circuit Court of Claiborne County in which a jury venire would be present, after the mandate in this case has issued, to be reprimanded by the presiding judge. View "Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Curry" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics
Miles v. Mississippi
Jason Miles appealed after a jury found him guilty of grand larceny. On appeal, he argued the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict, and the trial court erred in denying a continuance. Finding no error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Miles' conviction. View "Miles v. Mississippi" on Justia Law
Posted in:
Constitutional Law, Criminal Law