IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA TODD KUHN and ANGELA T. KUHN BRIEF OF APPELLANT

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA TODD KUHN and ANGELA T. KUHN BRIEF OF APPELLANT"

Transcription

1 E-Filed Document Jun :12: CA Pages: 20 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA CHERYL L. HIGH APPELLANT v. TODD KUHN and ANGELA T. KUHN APPELLEES Appeal from the Harrison County Special Court of Eminent Domain, First Judicial District, Case No. D BRIEF OF APPELLANT Steven N. Newton Miss. Bar Richard D. Hobbs & Associates 101 Devant Street, Ste. 403 Fayetteville, Georgia Attorney for Appellant, Cheryl L. High

2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS Cheryl L. High v. Todd and Angela Kuhn, No CA The undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following listed persons have an interest in the outcome of this case. These representations are made in order that the Justices of the Supreme Court may evaluate possible disqualification or recusal: The Honorable Judge Michael H. Ward, Presiding Judge Harrison County, First Judicial Circuit rd Avenue Gulfport, Mississippi Cheryl L. High, Defendant/Appellant South Swan Road Gulfport, Mississippi Todd and Angela Kuhn, Plaintiffs/Appellees South Swan Road Gulfport, Mississippi Virgil Gillespie, Esq., Counsel for Appellees Gillespie Law Firm P.O. Box 850 Gulfport, Mississippi Respectfully submitted, /s/steven N. Newton Steven N. Newton Attorney for Appellant, Cheryl L. High 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Certificate of Interested Persons...2 Table of Contents...3 Table of Authorities...4 Statement of the Issues...5 Statement of the Case...5 Summary of the Argument...7 Argument The trial court erred in overruling Ms. High s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest in compliance with Miss. Code Ann The trial court erred as a matter of law in its interpretation and reliance upon , , of the Miss. Code Ann. to find and hold that Ms. High is not entitled to attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest Whether the Mississippi Legislature authorized an award of attorneys fees under the facts of this case...16 Conclusion

4 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Bank of Miss. v. S. Mem l Park, Inc., 677 So.2d 186 (Miss. 1996)...8, 16 Barber v. Barber, 234 Miss. 89, 105 So.2d 630 (1958)...8 Bivens v. Mobley, 724 So.2d 458 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998)...7 Century 21 Deep South Prop. v. Corson, 612 So.2d 359, City of Gulfport v. Anderson, 554 So.2d 873 (Miss. 1989)...8 City of Gulfport, Miss. v. Dedeaux Utility Company, Inc., 187 So.3d 139 (Miss. 2016)...8 City of Jackson v. Lee, 234 Miss. 502, 106 So.2d 892 (1958)...15 Coleman & Coleman Enterprises, Inc. v. Waller Funeral Home, 106 So.3d 309 (Miss. 2012)...9 Cox v. Warren County, Mississippi, 600 So. 2d 935 (Miss. 1992)... passim Derr Plantation, Inc. v. Swarek, 14 So.3d 711 (Miss. 2009)...11 Ferguson v. Bd. of Supervisors of Wilkinson Co., 149 Miss. 623, 115 So. 779 (1928)...16 Harrison Cty. Util. Auth. v. Helen Peterson Walker, 143 So.3d 608 (Miss. 2014)...15 High v. Kuhn, 191 So.3d 113 (Miss. 2016)...5, 7 Jackson Redevelopment Authority v. King, Inc., 364 So.2d 1104, Jones v. Harris, 460 So.2d 120 (Miss. 1984)...15 Key Constructors, Inc. v. H&M Gas Co., 537 So.2d 1318 (Miss. 1989)...9 Lawson v. Honeywell Intern., Inc., 75 So.3d 1024 (Miss. 2011)...17 Mauck v. Columbus Hotel Co., 741 So.2d 259 (Miss. 1999)...9 McDonald s Corporation v. Robinson Industries, Inc. and Miss. State Highway Comm n, 592 So.2d 927 (Miss. 1992)...9 McLain v. West Side Bone & Joint Ctr., 656 So.2d Miss. Transp. Comm n v. Fires, 69 So.2d 917 (Miss. 1997)...12 Quinn v. Holly, 244 Miss. 808, 146 So.2d 357 (Miss. 1962)...16 Sanford v. Jackson Mall Shopping Ctr. Co., 516 So.2d 1346 (Miss. 1987)...9 State Highway Comm n v. Hayes, 541 So.2d 1023 (Miss. 1989)...8 State Highway Comm n v. Mason, 192 Miss. 576, 4 So.2d 345 (Miss. 1941)...8 State v. Murphy, 202 So.3d 1243 (Miss. 2016)...8, 16, 17 Wise v. Yazoo City, 96 Miss. 507, 51 So. 453 (1910)...16 STATUTES Article 4, Section 110 of the Mississippi Constitution of Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated...10 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)... passim Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)...13 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)...17 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)...14, 15 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)...5, 18 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)... passim Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)...8, 17 Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)... passim Section of the Mississippi Code Annotated (2013)

5 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES 1. The Special Court of Eminent Domain, Harrison County, Mississippi, First Judicial District erred in overruling Ms. High s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest in compliance with the Miss. Code Ann The Special Court of Eminent Domain, Harrison County, Mississippi, First Judicial District erred as a matter of law in its interpretation and reliance upon , , and of the Miss. Code Ann. to find and hold that Ms. High is not entitled to attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest. 3. Whether the Mississippi Legislature authorized an award of attorneys fees under the facts of this case, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann STATEMENT OF THE ASSIGNMENT Article six, section 146 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890 holds that this Honorable Court shall have such jurisdiction as properly belongs to a court of appeals and shall exercise no jurisdiction on matters other than those specifically provided by the Constitution or by general law. Mississippi Code Annotated (1) authorizes an appeal from a judgment of a special court of eminent domain to the Mississippi Supreme Court upon giving notice within ten (10) days from the date of the judgment or final order entered by the court Miss. Code. Ann (1). The instant matter is a major question of first impression, concerns fundamental issues of broad public importance, and involves the application and validity of statutes for the award of attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest in eminent domain actions by private persons, pursuant to , , and of the Mississippi Code Annotated. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On March 17, 2016, in the first appeal of this matter, this Honorable Court reversed the trial court, rendered judgment in favor of Appellant, Cheryl L. High, ( Ms. High ), and taxed costs for the first appeal against Appellees, Todd Kuhn and Angela Kuhns, (collectively, the Kuhns ). High v. Kuhn, 191 So.3d 113 (Miss. 2016); [R. 16.] In the first appeal, the trial court awarded relief 5

6 on January 8, 2015, and an interlocutory appeal was filed on January 16, [R. 127.] This Honorable Court granted the interlocutory appeal and a motion to stay trial court proceedings on March 18, [Id.] On March 17, 2016, this Honorable Court reversed the trial court and rendered judgment in favor of Ms. High [R. 16.] This second appeal concerns Ms. High s entitlement to an award of attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest, pursuant to , for successfully defeating the eminent domain action instituted by the Kuhns. On May 11, 2016, Ms. High filed her first Motion for Attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest. [R ] On May 26, 2016, the Kuhns Motion for Rehearing was denied. [R. 68.] On June 2, 2016, this Honorable Court issued a Mandate directing the trial court to execute further proceedings consistent with the judgment rendered. [R. 120.] On June 6, 2016, Ms. High filed a Renewed Motion for Costs, Attorneys Fees, Expenses and Interests. [R ] On June 14, 2016, Ms. High filed an Amended and Renewed Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest. [R ] On June 27, 2016, this Honorable Court reappointed the Honorable Judge Michael H. Ward to hear Ms. High s motion. [R ] On September 14, 2016, a hearing on Ms. High s motion was held by the trial court. [RE 3; Hearing Transcript, pp ] At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court requested briefing on the admissibility of two attorney invoices, [R ], submitted at the hearing. [RE 3; Hearing Transcript, p. 11, ll , p. 14, ll , and pp ] Ms. High briefed the issues and submitted same on October 13, [R ] On January 10, 2017, the trial court overruled Ms. High s Amended and Renewed Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest. [RE 2; R ] Ms. High respectfully submits this brief in support of reversal of the trial court s order for the reasons and grounds set forth herein. 6

7 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT On March 28, 2013, under and et seq., Todd and Angela Kuhn petitioned for a special court of eminent domain and initiated eminent domain proceedings to condemn Ms. High s private property located within the limits of Gulfport, Mississippi. [R. 2, 125.] The trial court was presented with two opportunities to dismiss the case based upon article 4, section 110 of the Mississippi. [R , 9-11.] On March 17, 2016, in the first appeal of this matter, this Honorable Court reversed the trial court and rendered judgment in favor of Ms. High and taxed costs for the first appeal against the Kuhns. High v. Kuhn, 191 So.3d 113 (Miss. 2016); [R. 16.] Following the remand and reversal, on June 14, 2016, Ms. High filed an Amended and Renewed Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest. [R ] On June 27, 2016, this Honorable Court reappointed the Honorable Judge Michael H. Ward to hear Ms. High s motion. [R ] On January 10, 2017, the trial court overruled Ms. High s Amended and Renewed Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest. [RE 2; R ] The trial court abused its discretion in overruling Ms. High s motion on January 10, [RE 2; R ] The trial court committed reversible error to find and hold that the Kuhns were not pursuing eminent domain, and subsequently that Ms. High was not entitled to recover attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest for succeeding on the merits. [Id.] The trial court never provided an explanation as to why an award of attorneys fees, costs, and expenses under is not allowed in a private condemnation action under In fact, in the lone case cited by the trial court in its order, Bivens v. Mobley, the defendant was awarded attorneys fees in a property dispute. 724 So.2d 458, 465 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998). After review of the statute and binding case law, it is clear that the trial court s interpretation is a misstatement of law. The Mississippi Legislature clearly provided a remedy for defendants that successfully challenge and defeat a private condemnation action, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. 7

8 In light of these errors, this Honorable Court should reverse the trial court s January 10, 2017 order, tax all costs of this appeal to the Kuhns, and award $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest 1 to Ms. High for the costs of defense which totals an award of $31,405.28, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann ARGUMENT Mississippi follows the American rule regarding attorneys fees. Century 21 Deep South Prop. v. Corson, 612 So.2d 359, 375 (Miss. 1992). [U]nless a statute or contract provides for imposition of attorneys fees, they are not recoverable. Id. A trial court s decision on attorneys fees is subject to the abuse of discretion standard of review. Bank of Miss. v. S. Mem l Park, Inc., 677 So.2d 186, 191 (Miss. 1996) (citing Barber v. Barber, 234 Miss. 89, 105 So.2d 630 (1958)). However, a party is not entitled to attorney s fees unless a statute or other authority so authorizes. McLain v. West Side Bone & Joint Ctr., 656 So.2d 119, 123 (Miss. 1995). Costs and fees are not recoverable in eminent domain cases as a matter of constitutional right, but are a matter of Legislative grace. City of Gulfport v. Anderson, 554 So.2d 873, 878 (Miss. 1989) (citing State Highway Comm n v. Hayes, 541 So.2d 1023, 1026 (Miss. 1989)). Here, Mississippi law and mandatory authority support Ms. High s right to recover attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest for prevailing against the Kuhns in this private condemnation matter. 1. The trial court erred in overruling Ms. High s Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, Expenses, and Interest in compliance with Miss. Code Ann In the Order reversing and rendering the judgment in favor of the Ms. High, this Honorable Court cited and quoted Cox v. Warren County 2 and explained a defendant s right to recover against 1 In City of Gulfport, Miss. v. Dedeaux Utility Company, Inc., 187 So.3d 139, 148 (Miss. 2016), this Honorable Court awarded interest to the prevailing party. See also State v. Murphy, 202 So.3d 1243, 1263 (Miss. 2016) (awarding attorneys fees, costs, and interest under ) 2 This case was provided to the trial court in Ms. High s brief on October 13, [R ] 8

9 a petitioner, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann [R ] If the judgment entered is that the petitioner had no right to condemn the property, then the defendant has a separate and distinct cause of action arising from to bring an action to recover all expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred in defending the eminent domain suit. [Id.] This Honorable Court further noted that a defendant property owner may file a post-trial motion in the eminent domain court to assess the damages in event of either of the three contingencies, but there is no requirement to do so. Id. at 938 (citing McDonald s Corporation v. Robinson Industries, Inc. and Mississippi State Highway Commission, 592 So.2d 927 (Miss. 1992)). Without question, since Ms. High was successful in defeating the Kuhns private condemnation action, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann , Ms. High is entitled to all attorneys fees, costs, and expenses incurred in defense of same. This Honorable Court has repeatedly held that the fixing of reasonable attorneys fees is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court. Coleman & Coleman Enterprises, Inc. v. Waller Funeral Home, 106 So.3d 309 (Miss. 2012) (citing Mauck v. Columbus Hotel Co., 741 So.2d 259, 269 (Miss. 1999)). However, [t]he [trial] court may not judicially note what is a reasonable fee and it certainly may not merely pull a figure out of thin air. Rather, the party entitled to recover a reasonable fee must furnish an evidentiary predicate therefor. Key Constructors, Inc., v. H&M Gas Co., 537 So.2d 1318, 1325 (Miss. 1989) (citing Sanford v. Jackson Mall Shopping Ctr. Co., 516 So.2d 1346, 1354 (Miss. 1987)). In support of a post-trial motion for attorney s fees, a party need only submit a detailed, itemized statement of fees incurred and affidavits from the party s attorneys. Coleman & Coleman Enterprises, Inc., 106 So. 3d at 319. This Honorable Court 3 Although not challenged here, this Honorable Court has upheld the constitutionality of See Jackson Redevelopment Authority v. King, Inc., 364 So.2d 1104, 1112 (Miss. 1978). 9

10 has held same is sufficient and found that an opposing party s evidentiary objection regarding sufficiency of evidence to be without merit. Id. At the September 14, 2016 hearing, Ms. High testified to the amounts of attorneys fees incurred and paid in defense of this matter. [RE 3; Hearing Transcript, pp ] She identified the nineteen pages of invoices submitted by Mr. Robert Schwartz, Esq. from May 29, 2013 until August 25, 2014 and that she paid the invoices in defense of the instant matter. [Id. at p. 6, l. 21.] She identified the invoice and costs submitted by undersigned counsel and that she paid same in defense of this action. [Id. at p. 10, ll ] Further, she identified the costs of appellate record and testified that she paid same to appeal the trial court s order to overturn the ruling and obtain judgment in her favor. [Id at p ] The trial court was presented with sufficient documentary evidence to award the requested amount as attorneys fees and costs in defense of this matter. As admitted by Kuhns counsel, Rule 3.7 of the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct allows a lawyer to provide testimony relating to the nature and value of legal services rendered in the case. [RE 3; Hearing Transcript, pp ] Undersigned counsel testified that he received the invoices submitted by Mr. Robert Schwartz, Esq. in defense of this matter. [Id. at p. 26] Undersigned counsel further testified regarding his time spent, reasonableness of the fee charged, education, legal experience, and associated costs. [Id. at pp ] To be sure, undersigned counsel s testimony regarding the fees incurred throughout this entire matter is sufficient evidence to award the requested amounts of attorneys fees, costs, and expenses incurred by Ms. High in defense of this matter. [Id. at pp ] The Kuhns counsel thereafter objected on reasonableness grounds. [RE 3; Hearing Transcript, pp. 22, 25, 27.] Such objections are contrary to law, meritless, and made for the sole purpose of harassment, delay, and to unnecessarily extend the proceedings which the Kuhns have 10

11 summarily lost. See, e.g., Miss. Code Ann Ms. High s motion was made in good faith, grounded in applicable Mississippi law, and based on competent testimony and admissible documentary evidence. Nonetheless, to overcome the alleged objections, Ms. High submitted her brief in support and attached affidavits from Mr. Robert Schwartz, Esq. and undersigned counsel. [R , R ] Mr. Schwartz identified the invoices produced by his office in furtherance of his representation of Ms. High. [R. 194 at 7.] He states that all charges were reasonably incurred in the defense of the case. [Id. at 8.] The attorneys fees would not have been incurred but for the actions of the Plaintiffs in pursuit of the instant claims. [R. 195 at 9.] Similarly, since the original motion to dismiss was not granted and the trial court wished to take evidence, Ms. High was forced to incur additional fees and expenses. [Id. at 10.] Pursuant to , Ms. High may recover of the [Kuhns] in an action brought therefor all reasonable expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred by [her] in defending the suit. Section The judgment entered by the trial court was reversed and this Honorable Court found that the Kuhns have no right to condemn Ms. High s property. [R. 120, ] Ms. High was entitled to an award from the Kuhns for the following costs, attorneys fees, expenses, and interest, pursuant to Cox v. Warren County, 600 So.2d 935, 937 (Miss. 1992), Miss. Code Ann , and : a. Costs, attorneys fees, and expenses paid and incurred from Schwartz, Orgler, & Jordan, PLLC in the amount of $18, b. Costs, attorneys fees, and expenses paid to Steven N. Newton, Esq., in the amount of $4, Mississippi Code Annotated states that the court shall not require the party seeking such [attorney] fees to put on proof as to the reasonableness of the amount sought. A copy of the statutory text was provided to the trial court. [R. 226.] It appears that the trial court and Kuhns counsel have abandoned these reasonableness contentions once faced with applicable law. 5 For the second appeal, Ms. High has incurred $2,500 in attorneys fees, $ costs of the appellate record, and $200 for the notice of appeal filing fee. If successful on appeal, Ms. High 11

12 c. Costs and expenses paid to this Honorable Court and the Mississippi Supreme Court in the amount of $1, d. Five percent (5%) interest per annum on the total sum incurred and expended by Ms. High from March 27, 2013 to present, $5, [R. 138, 187.] To date, including the instant appeal, Ms. High has incurred $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest. The Kuhns have no defense, evidentiary or otherwise, to Ms. High s motion and should have exercised caution in the institution of the private eminent domain action under Contrary to the plain language of , the trial court erred in overruling Ms. High s Motion. As a result, Ms. High respectfully requests that this Honorable Court reverse the trial court s January 10, 2017 order, tax all costs of this appeal to the Kuhns, and enter judgment for Ms. High for the costs of defense in the amounts of $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest for a total award of $31,405.28, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann The trial court erred as a matter of law in its interpretation and reliance upon , , and to find and hold that Ms. High is not entitled to attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest. The trial court s interpretation of , , and is erroneous as a matter of law. [RE 2; R ] This Honorable Court reviews questions of law de novo and will reverse a trial court if the law has been applied or interpreted erroneously. Miss. Transp. respectfully moves this Honorable Court to afford her an opportunity to recover these costs, $3,438.40, plus interest. 6 Interestingly enough, on February 19, 2017, undersigned counsel sent a reminder that the costs of the first appeal remained outstanding and mandated by this Honorable Court. In response, the Kuhns voluntarily tendered a check for $1, to undersigned counsel, which represented the costs of the appeal, $1,501.00, plus $ for the interlocutory appeal. Ms. High has not included these costs on this appeal for the amount requested. 7 [If] the judgment be that the plaintiff is not entitled to a judgment condemning property, the defendant may recover of the plaintiff in an action brought therefor all reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees, incurred by [her] in defending the suit. Section ; see also Cox v. Warren County, Mississippi, 600 So. 2d 935, 938 (Miss. 1992). 12

13 Comm n v. Fires, 69 So.2d 917, 920 (Miss. 1997). The trial court held that and were inapplicable to private condemnation actions under and overruled Ms. High s motion for attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest. [Id. at 2-3.] In citing this Honorable Court s March 16, 2016 Order, [R ], the trial court overlooked the plain language of and and, at the suggestion of Kuhns counsel, cherry-picked language to find that the Kuhns were not pursuing eminent domain. [RE 2; R. 244, 1.] The trial court s holding is legally and factually erroneous. A proper review of the statutory language and this Honorable Court s ruling is illustrative and demonstrates the trial court s mistaken interpretation and incorrect holding. The Kuhns filed the instant lawsuit to obtain a private road per Mississippi Code Section [R. 122.] Pursuant to this constitutional authority, the Legislature enacted , as follows: When any person shall desire to have a private road laid out through the land of another, when necessary for ingress and egress, he shall apply by petition, stating the facts and reasons, to the special court of eminent domain created under Section of the county where the land or part of it is located, and the case shall proceed as nearly as possible as provided in Title 11, Chapter 27 for the condemnation of private property for public use. The court sitting without a jury shall determine the reasonableness of the application. The owner of the property shall be a necessary party to the proceedings. If the court finds in favor of the petitioner, all damages that the jury determines the landowner should be compensated for shall be assessed against and shall be paid by the person applying for the private road, and he shall pay all the costs and expenses incurred in the proceedings. Section (emphasis added). Section and Section both mandate that any person having the right to condemn private property shall exercise that right as provided in and subject to Title 11, Chapter 27. Moreover, the entire record of this matter indicates that the Kuhns pursued private condemnation under an eminent domain statute. [R. 2.] A review of the civil cover sheet indicated 13

14 that counsel for the Kuhns selected eminent domain upon the filing of the Petition. [Id.] The trial court docket indicates that the nature of the suit is eminent domain. [RE 1, p.1-2.] Only now, after summarily losing and subjected to liability for Ms. High s attorneys fees, the Kuhns have unilaterally decided, and the trial court agreed, that they were not pursuing eminent domain. These arguments are factually false, frivolous, and contrary to the law of the case and legal filings of counsel for the Kuhns 8. Such disingenuous contentions are deserved of extreme reprimand and sanctions. As explained in section one of this brief, Cox v. Warren County, 600 So.2d 935 (Miss. 1992), and Miss. Code Ann control a defendant s right to recover against a petitioner in the event of a defeated petition. [R ] If the judgment entered is that the petitioner had no right to condemn the property, then the defendant has a separate and distinct cause of action arising from to bring an action to recover all expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred in defending the eminent domain suit. 600 So.2d at 937. Without question, Miss. Code Ann gives the defendant landowner a separate cause of action against the petition condemnor, which may be brought via a post-trial motion in the eminent domain court, or in a separate action in any court of competent jurisdiction. Id. at 938. The trial court s holding and confusing explanation to the contrary must be reversed. As to the trial court s reference to the March 16, 2016 Order, this Honorable Court reviewed the plain language of to overrule the trial court s erroneous finding that Ms. High had waived her right to move to dismiss the Kuhns Petition. [R ] In particular, paragraph 21 states: The three ground for dismissal that must be asserted under Section are: (1) that the plaintiff seeking to exercise the right of eminent domain is not, in 8 The Kuhns Complaint filed on March 28, 2013 is titled Petition to Establish Special Court of Eminent Domain against Cheryl L. High. [RE 1, p.2.] 14

15 character, such a corporation, association, district or other legal entity as is entitled to the right; (2) that there is no public necessity for the taking of the particular property or a part thereof which it is proposed to condemn; or (3) that the contemplated use alleged to be a public use is not in law a public use for which private property may be taken or damages. Miss. Code Ann Here, the Kuhns were not pursuing eminent domain i.e., a public taking under Section Rather, they requested a private road under Section And Section does not require showing public necessity or public use. So none of the enumerated grounds for dismissal listed in Section apply here. Thus, the special court erred as a matter of law when it applied Section to find waiver. [R. 131, 21.] (internal citations and footnote omitted) (italics in original). In footnote six, this Honorable Court aptly explained, Amended Section directs private condemnations to proceed as nearly as possible as provided in Title 11, Chapter 27[,] Miss. Code Ann And Section is an example of a procedure created for public condemnations that does not translate to private condemnations. [R. 131, fn. 6.] (emphasis added) (italics in original) Contrary to the trial court s order, [RE 2], this Honorable Court did not hold that and were inapplicable to private condemnation actions under Instead, this Honorable Court reviewed the language of and found that [Section] gives the defendant landowner a separate case of action against the petition condemnor, which may be brought via a post-trial motion in the eminent domain court, or in a separate action in any court of competent jurisdiction. [R. 134, 27.] (citing Cox v. Warren Cty., 600 So.2d 935, 938 (Miss. 9 The trial court s reasoning overlooks binding case law to the contrary. If left to stand, the Legislature s statutory mandate to award attorneys fees for a successful defense would be ignored, and Cox v. Warren County along with other eminent domain precedent would be overruled. See, e.g., State Highway v. Mason, , 4 So.2d 345, 6 So.2d 468 (1941) (holding state highway commission liable for costs, interest, and damages just as private corporation would be in such a proceeding); City of Jackson v. Lee, 234 Miss. 502, 512, 106 So.2d 892, 896 (1958) (holding city liable for payment of expenses, including attorneys fees, after dismissal of eminent domain proceeding); Harrison Cty. Util. Auth. v. Helen Peterson Walker, 143 So.3d 608, 614 (Miss. 2014) (finding Section permits award of attorneys fees in eminent domain cases when the judgment be that plaintiff is not entitled to condemn property). 15

16 1992)). Since Ms. High had not brought a separate cause of action or a post-trial motion for expenses, this Honorable Court found the issue not properly before it on interlocutory appeal and denied the request without prejudice. [R. 134, 27.] All in all, the trial court s interpretation is contrary the plain language of , , and [RE 2.] To allow the trial court s interpretation to stand, this Honorable Court would be holding that private litigants whom defeat a private condemnation petition were not entitled to attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interests allowed under Accordingly, Ms. High respectfully submits that this Honorable Court overturn the trial court s January 10, 2017 order, tax all costs of this appeal to the Kuhns, and enter judgment for Ms. High for the costs of defense in the amounts of $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest for a total award of $31,405.28, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann Whether the Mississippi Legislature authorized an award of attorneys fees under the facts of this case, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann [W]hether the Legislature has authorized an award of attorneys fees under the facts of this case is a question of law to be reviewed de novo. State v. Murphy, 202 So.3d 1243, 1263 (Miss. 2016) (citing Bank of Miss., 677 So.2d at 191). In the past, this Honorable Court explained that the Legislature s authority to grant a private road is an exercise of eminent domain. Quinn v. Holly, 244 Miss. 808, 811, 146 So. 2d 357, 358 (quoting 72 C.J.S. Private Roads 4, p. 921) ( [t]he power to grant a private road is an exercise of the right of eminent domain and the power to exercise the right of eminent domain is in the legislature as representing the sovereignty of the state. ) This Honorable Court stated that the power to authorize the laying out of a road exists only where it has clearly been conferred by legislative enactment, conforming to the limitations imposed by the constitution on the lawmaking power and then only under the circumstances and conditions prescribed by the enactment. Id. 16

17 Eminent domain statutes are strictly interpreted and construed because [t]he power of eminent domain is in derogation of common right. Ferguson v. Bd. of Supervisors of Wilkinson Co., 149 Miss. 623, , 115 So. 779, 780 (1928) (citing Wise v. Yazoo City, 96 Miss. 507, 519, 51 So. 453 (1910)). Eminent domain statutes cannot be extended beyond their plain provisions[,] and [t]he right to exercise this power is strictly limited to the purposes expressed in the statutes conferring the power. Id. In State v. Murphy, this Honorable Court was tasked with resolving a similar question of statutory interpretation and award of attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest. 202 So.3d 1243 (Miss. 2016). The plaintiff brought an inverse condemnation action claiming that the State had taken and damaged their property without compensation. Id. at Following a jury verdict in their favor, the plaintiff filed a motion requesting $214, in attorneys fees, $48, in expenses, and interest 10 at the rate of eight percent from the date of the filing of the complaint, pursuant to Miss. Code. Ann Id. at The State responded that the plaintiff was not entitled to attorneys fees or expenses under and was not entitled to interest in the amount requested. Id The trial court granted the motion for attorneys fees, costs, expenses, and interest, and the State appealed to this Honorable Court. Id. This Honorable Court acknowledged the applicable standard of review and reviewed the plain language of Id. at This Honorable Court explained that the State s arguments conflicted with the plain language of Id. at If the words of a statute are clear and unambiguous, the Court applies the plain meaning of the statute and refrains from using principles of statutory construction. Id. (quoting Lawson v. Honeywell Intern., Inc., 75 So.3d 1024, As noted in Murphy, the trial court awarded, and this Honorable Court upheld, the award of interest on the defendant s expenses from the date of the filing of the complaint. Ms. High respectfully requests same at five percent. 17

18 (Miss. 2011)). Accordingly, this Honorable Court held that the unambiguous language of Section authorizes the award of attorneys fees and expenses in the instant case and affirmed the trial court s award. Murphy, 202 So.3d at Here, the result is the same. The words of are clear and unambiguous. In Cox, this Honorable Court explained that it will not construe the provisions of Title 11, Chapter 27 incongruously So.2d 935, 938 (Miss. 1992) (contrasting the time limitations of Miss. Code Ann with ). Titled Defendant s expenses recoverable, Section sets forth three contingencies in which a defendant may bring an action to recover all reasonable expenses, including attorneys fees, incurred in defense of an eminent domain suit. The Mississippi Legislature purposely placed a remedy for prevailing parties, such as Ms. High, to recover against the plaintiff for a failed attempt to condemn private property. Since Ms. High prevailed, she is entitled to recover against the Kuhns. The trial court s reasoning directly conflicts with the Legislature s statutory mandate and protection for private citizens from failed eminent domain lawsuits. As a result, Ms. High respectfully requests that this Honorable Court reverse the trial court s January 10, 2017 order, tax all costs of this appeal to the Kuhns, and enter judgment for Ms. High for the costs of defense in the amounts of $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest for a total award of $31,405.28, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann The Kuhns and trial court seek to construe the provisions of Title 11, Chapter 27 inconsistently. On one hand, the Kuhns filed a petition per and created a special court of eminent domain under for eminent domain purposes to condemn Ms. High s property. The trial docket indicates that the nature of suit is Eminent Domain. [RE 1, p.1.] On the other hand, the Kuhns and trial court seek to invalidate the application of to the judgment entered by this Honorable Court. This appeal is made pursuant to (1). To be congruous, this Honorable Court must find for Ms. High and award the requested relief. 18

19 CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing, Ms. High respectfully prays that this Honorable Court will enter an Order overturning the Special Court of Eminent Domain s January 10, 2017 Order, tax all costs of this appeal to the Kuhns, and award $25, in costs, attorneys fees, and expenses plus $5, in interest to Ms. High for a total award of $31,405.28, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann Respectfully submitted, this the 8th day of June By: By: Defendant, Cheryl High /s/steven N. Newton Steven N. Newton (Miss. Bar No ) RICHARD D. HOBBS & ASSOCIATES 101 Devant Street, Suite 403 Fayetteville, Georgia Telephone: (770) snnewtonlaw@gmail.com 19

20 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Steven N. Newton, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served on the following persons by U.S. Mail, properly addressed and postage prepaid, and/or by electronic transmission where indicated: The Honorable Judge Michael H. Ward Harrison County, First Judicial Circuit rd Avenue Gulfport, Mississippi slandry@co.harrison.ms.us Virgil Gillespie, Esq. Gillespie Smith Law Firm P.O. Box 850 Gulfport, Mississippi vgg@gillespiesmithlawfirm.com Respectfully submitted, this the 8th day of June /s/steven N. Newton STEVEN N. NEWTON 20

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CT SCT WILLIAM MICHAEL JORDAN STATE OF MISSISSIPPI SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF APPELLANT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CT SCT WILLIAM MICHAEL JORDAN STATE OF MISSISSIPPI SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF APPELLANT E-Filed Document Jul 29 2016 14:31:24 2014-CT-00615-SCT Pages: 8 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2014-CT-00615-SCT WILLIAM MICHAEL JORDAN APPELLANT VS. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE SUPPLEMENTAL

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI LOWE S HOME CENTER, INC. BRIEF OF APPELLANT ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI LOWE S HOME CENTER, INC. BRIEF OF APPELLANT ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED E-Filed Document Jan 13 2014 16:30:11 2013-CA-01004 Pages: 21 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ARTHUR GERALD HUDSON and LINDA HUDSON VS. LOWE S HOME CENTER, INC. APPELLANT CAUSE NO. 2013-CA-01004

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO IA SCT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO IA SCT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2008-IA-01191-SCT SHANNON HOLMES AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY APPELLANTS VS. LEE MCMILLAN APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF HINDS

More information

IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT CASE NO KA HOSAN M. AZOMANI, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT CASE NO KA HOSAN M. AZOMANI, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI E-Filed Document Dec 12 2016 13:11:01 2015-CT-00050-SCT Pages: 11 IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT CASE NO. 2015-KA-00050 HOSAN M. AZOMANI, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee PETITION FOR WRIT

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO: 2009-CA AMERICA'S HOME PLACE, INC. APPELLEE'S BRIEF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO: 2009-CA AMERICA'S HOME PLACE, INC. APPELLEE'S BRIEF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI PHILVESTER AND JOYCE WILLIAMS VS. AMERICA'S HOME PLACE, INC. APPELLANTS CAUSE NO: 2009-CA-01107 APPELLEE APPELLEE'S BRIEF James D. Bell, MSB #..., BELL & ASSOCIATES,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CA CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI APPELLANT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CA CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI APPELLANT E-Filed Document Dec 2 2016 16:11:11 2016-CA-00678 Pages: 11 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2016-CA-00678 CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI APPELLANT VS BEN ALLEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Feb 27 2017 15:41:09 2016-CA-01033-COA Pages: 12 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MICHAEL ISHEE APPELLANT VS. NO. 2016-CA-01033-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

REPLY BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

REPLY BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Jul 10 2017 16:56:22 2016-KA-01527-COA Pages: 9 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI RODISE JENKINS APPELLANT V. NO. 2016-KA-01527-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE REPLY

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICK DANTRE FLUKER BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICK DANTRE FLUKER BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICK DANTRE FLUKER APPELLANT VS. NO.2008-CP-1182-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPEAL FROM THE CHANCERY COURT OF SIMPSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT MARILYN NEWSOME

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPEAL FROM THE CHANCERY COURT OF SIMPSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT MARILYN NEWSOME E-Filed Document Oct 26 2015 16:36:29 2015-CA-00762 Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSERVATORSHIP OF VICTORIA D. NEWSOME: MARILYN NEWSOME, APPELLANT CA

More information

E-Filed Document Sep :10: CA Pages: 17 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO.

E-Filed Document Sep :10: CA Pages: 17 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. E-Filed Document Sep 24 2015 10:10:03 2015-CA-00526 Pages: 17 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2015-CA-00526 S&M TRUCKING, LLC APPELLANT VERSUS ROGERS OIL COMPANY OF COLUMBIA,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-1376 MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI AND JAKEIDA J.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-1376 MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI AND JAKEIDA J. E-Filed Document Jun 2 2016 14:22:27 2015-CA-01376 Pages: 16 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2015-CA-1376 DANNY P. HICKS, II APPELLANT VERSUS MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,

More information

IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT NO EC ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COAHOMA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT

IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT NO EC ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COAHOMA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT IN THE MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT ANDREW THOMPSON, JR. APPELLANT VS. NO. 2007-EC-01989 CHARLES LEWIS JONES APPELLEE ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COAHOMA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT ORAL

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA Petition for Writ of Certiorari

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA Petition for Writ of Certiorari E-Filed Document Mar 7 2017 10:18:43 2014-CT-01079-SCT Pages: 12 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2014-CA-01079 THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI MEDICAL CENTER APPELLANT VS. KIM HAMPTON, INDIVIDUALLY,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. v. No CA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT PATRICK J. HIGGINS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. v. No CA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT PATRICK J. HIGGINS E-Filed Document Jun 2 2015 00:01:29 2014-CA-00251 Pages: 15 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICK J. HIGGINS APPELLANT v. No. 2014-CA-00251 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLANT

More information

E-Filed Document Dec :19: CA Pages: 17

E-Filed Document Dec :19: CA Pages: 17 E-Filed Document Dec 1 2017 18:19:55 2016-CA-01082 Pages: 17 IN THE MISSISSIPPI, SUPREME COURT CASE NO. 2016-CA-01082 TONY L. AND LINDA SMITH APPELLANTS VS. JOHN HENDON, UNION PLANTERS BANK, NA FIRST AMERICAN

More information

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Feb 2 2018 15:26:36 2017-KA-01455-COA Pages: 12 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI LADALE AIROSTEVE HOLLOWAY APPELLANT v. No. 2017-KA-01455-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.: 08-CR-011-NW-C

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.: 08-CR-011-NW-C SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.: 08-CR-011-NW-C JOHNNY JAMES, JR. APPELLANT VS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NEWTON COUNTY,

More information

CAUSE NO CA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI REBUILD AMERICA, INC. ROBERT McGEE, MATTIE McGee, ET. AL.

CAUSE NO CA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI REBUILD AMERICA, INC. ROBERT McGEE, MATTIE McGee, ET. AL. CAUSE NO. 2009-CA-01188 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI REBUILD AMERICA, INC. Appellant v. ROBERT McGEE, MATTIE McGee, ET. AL. Appellee BRIEF OF APPELLEE Jeffrey D. Rawlings (MSB Jon J. Mims (MSB Rawlings

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. CASE NO. 5D09-547

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. CASE NO. 5D09-547 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2009 CALHOUN, DREGGORS & ASSOCIATES, ET AL., Appellant, v. CASE NO. 5D09-547 VOLUSIA COUNTY, Appellee. / Opinion filed December

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP-0239-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP-0239-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Apr 22 2014 15:58:43 2013-CP-00239-COA Pages: 14 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI SHELBY RAY PARHAM APPELLANT VS. NO. 2013-CP-0239-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA CITY OF WATER VALLEY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA CITY OF WATER VALLEY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Jun 23 2016 20:34:03 2015-CA-01808 Pages: 14 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ARLENE CAROTHERS APPELLANT VS. CITY OF WATER VALLEY, MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA-01808 APPELLEES BRIEF

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2008-CP STEVEN EASON APPELLANT. On Appeal From the Circuit Court of Greene County, Mississippi

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2008-CP STEVEN EASON APPELLANT. On Appeal From the Circuit Court of Greene County, Mississippi IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2008-CP-01499 STEVEN EASON APPELLANT vs. CHRISTOPHER B. EPPS, ALICIA BOX and RONALD KING APPELLEES On Appeal From the Circuit Court of Greene County, Mississippi

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR CERTIORARI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PETITION FOR CERTIORARI E-Filed Document Jun 1 2018 09:30:47 2016-CT-00928-SCT Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2016-TS-00928 CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. APPELLANT VS. ARTHUR E. WOOD, III, AND PAULA WOOD APPELLEES

More information

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA STEVENS AUCTION COMPANY and JOHN D.

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA STEVENS AUCTION COMPANY and JOHN D. E-Filed Document Jan 12 2017 15:26:19 2016-CA-01085 Pages: 15 SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO. 2016-CA-01085 MARLIN BUSINESS BANK APPELLANT V. STEVENS

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS GUARDIAN ANGEL HEALTHCARE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 14, 2013 v No. 307825 Wayne Circuit Court PROGRESSIVE MICHIGAN INSURANCE LC No. 08-120128-NF COMPANY,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA REL:11/16/07marblecityplaza Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,

More information

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI E-Filed Document May 11 2016 11:16:48 2014-CT-00615-SCT Pages: 9 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI WILLIAM MICHAEL JORDAN A/K/A BOOTY VS. APPELLANT NO. 2014-KA-00615-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

More information

NO CA Brenda Franklin v. Cornelius Turner MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

NO CA Brenda Franklin v. Cornelius Turner MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION E-Filed Document Apr 28 2016 19:23:00 2014-CA-01006-COA Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2014 CA-01006-Brenda Franklin v. Cornelius Turner BRENDA FRANKLIN Appellant/Plaintiff

More information

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Eastern Communities Limited : Partnership, : Appellant : : v. : No. 2120 C.D. 2012 : Submitted: June 17, 2013 Pennsylvania Department of : Transportation : BEFORE:

More information

llpage IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CA APPELLANT BENNIE E. BRASWELL, JR.

llpage IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CA APPELLANT BENNIE E. BRASWELL, JR. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CA-02000 BENNIE E. BRASWELL, JR. APPELLANT V. BETH STINNETT, D.D.S., INDIVIDUALLY AND D /B/ A FAMILY DENISTRY APPELLEES

More information

E-Filed Document May :25: CA Pages: 18. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No.: 2013-CA-01006

E-Filed Document May :25: CA Pages: 18. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No.: 2013-CA-01006 E-Filed Document May 12 2014 14:25:52 2013-CA-01006 Pages: 18 2013-CA-01006 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No.: 2013-CA-01006 C.H. MILES APPELLANT V. BRENDA C. MILES APPELLEE APPELLEE

More information

BRIEF OF THE APPELLEE

BRIEF OF THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Feb 17 2015 16:55:41 2014-IA-00674-SCT Pages: 21 CASE NO. 2014-IA-00674-SCT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CALHOUN HEALTH SERVICES, APPELLANT v. MARTHA GLASPIE, APPELLEE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPEAL FROM THE SPECIAL COURT OF EMINENT DOMAIN OF WAYNE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPEAL FROM THE SPECIAL COURT OF EMINENT DOMAIN OF WAYNE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document May 11 2017 09:19:18 2016-CA-00928-COA Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No.2016-CA-00928-COA CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. vs. VS. ARTHUR E. WOOD, III, AND PAULA WOOD APPELLANT

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA-00598

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CA-00598 E-Filed Document Jun 8 2016 13:37:33 2015-CA-00598-SCT Pages: 15 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO. 2015-CA-00598 THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, BY AND THROUGH DELBERT HOSEMANN, IN HIS

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 28, 2015 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 28, 2015 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 28, 2015 Session SHELBY COUNTY v. JAMES CREWS, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT00436904 Karen R. Williams, Judge No.

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI VIJAY PATEL INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR AND WRONGFUL DEATH HEIR OF NATWAREL PATEL

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI VIJAY PATEL INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR AND WRONGFUL DEATH HEIR OF NATWAREL PATEL E-Filed Document Aug 24 2015 15:39:23 2015-CA-00371 Pages: 15 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI VIJAY PATEL INDIVIDUALLY PLAINTIFFS AND AS ADMINISTRATOR AND WRONGFUL DEATH HEIR OF NATWAREL

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document Jan 8 2016 13:04:43 2014-KA-01838-COA Pages: 10 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ROBERT W. TRIPLETT a/k/a ROBERT WARREN TRIPLETT, JR. a/k/a ROBERT TRIPLETT, JR. a/k/a

More information

(oae SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2012-CA-748 VERSUS

(oae SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2012-CA-748 VERSUS SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI (oae RANDOLPH MAY, ET AL. VERSUS ADIRONDACK TIMBER I, LLC APPELLANTS NO.2012-CA-748 APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF PIKE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI SITTING IN THE SPECIAL

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Oct 13 2015 14:04:25 2013-CP-02023-COA Pages: 9 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI COURTNEY ELKINS APPELLANT VS. NO. 2013-CP-02023-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MOTION FOR REHEARING

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MOTION FOR REHEARING E-Filed Document May 3 2017 12:58:02 2015-CA-01650-COA Pages: 8 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2015-CA-01650 DERRICK DORTCH APPELLANT vs. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE MOTION FOR REHEARING

More information

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI 2011-CA-OI040

SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI 2011-CA-OI040 SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI 2011-CA-OI040 SHEILA DANETTE WELLS APPELLANT VS. FRANK PRICE and PHIL PRICE d/b/a PRICE CONSTRUCTIOCOMPANY CANTON SHEET METAL AND ROOFING APPELLEES

More information

PETITION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL BY PERMISSION

PETITION FOR INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL BY PERMISSION ORIGINAL IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, case No. e{o,~ - rn... tdi1 ROBERT PUGH vs. THE CITY OF MADISON; MARY HAWKINS BUTLER, THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MADISON; THE CITY OF MADISON POLICE

More information

E-Filed Document Jun :00: CC Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

E-Filed Document Jun :00: CC Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document Jun 17 2015 16:00:09 2014-CC-01798 Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO. 2014-CC-01798 OVER THE RAINBOW DAYCARE vs. VS. MISSISSIPPI

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V. CAUSE NO CA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V. CAUSE NO CA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document Aug 5 2014 01:08:18 2014-CA-00054-COA Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DENNIS TERRY HUTCHINS APPELLANT V. CAUSE NO. 2014-CA-00054-COA

More information

ORAL ARGUMENT IS NOT REQUESTED

ORAL ARGUMENT IS NOT REQUESTED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIAN ROBISON, et al APPELLANTS VS. NO. 2009-CA-00383 ENTERPRISE RENT -A-CAR COMPANY APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-01079

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-01079 E-Filed Document Oct 25 2016 15:38:12 2014-CA-01079-COA Pages: 12 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2014-CA-01079 THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI MEDICAL CENTER APPELLANT VS. KIM HAMPTON, INDIVIDUALLY,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 13, 2005 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 13, 2005 Session IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE April 13, 2005 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE, ET AL. v. WANDA DEAN WALLACE, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 50200336 Ross Hicks,

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI ALBERT ABRAHAM, JR. APPELLANT VS. NO. 2009-CP-01759 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DESOTO COUNTY BRIEF FOR APPELLANT Oral Argument Requested

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT, MARSHALL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLANT, MARSHALL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MARSHALL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS VS. STEVE LACROIX APPELLANT 2008-CA-01744 APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLANT, MARSHALL COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON APPEAL

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR REHEARING

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No TS CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR REHEARING E-Filed Document Feb 12 2018 10:06:26 2016-CA-00928-COA Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2016-TS-00928 CURTIS RAY MCCARTY, JR. APPELLANT VS. ARTHUR E. WOOD, III, AND PAULA WOOD APPELLEES

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-1699

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-1699 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2006-CA-1699 ISAAC K. BYRD, JR., KATRINA M. GIBBS, AND BYRD, GIBBS & MARTIN, PLLC, f/k/a BYRD & ASSOCIATES, PLLC APPELLANTS WILLIE J. BOWIE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND CHARLES

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010 BILLY HARRIS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 01-02675 Carolyn Wade

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. ARTHUR GERALD HUDSON and LINDA S. HUDSON APPELLANTS. v. Cause No CA LOWE S HOME CENTERS, INC.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. ARTHUR GERALD HUDSON and LINDA S. HUDSON APPELLANTS. v. Cause No CA LOWE S HOME CENTERS, INC. E-Filed Document Feb 21 2014 14:40:09 2013-CA-01004 Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI ARTHUR GERALD HUDSON and LINDA S. HUDSON APPELLANTS v. Cause No. 2013-CA-01004 LOWE S HOME CENTERS, INC.

More information

1- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CC BRIEF OF THE APPELLEE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY

1- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO CC BRIEF OF THE APPELLEE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY 1- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NO. 2008-CC-02142 MARGIE BROWN PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT VS. MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AND W AL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC. DEFENDANT/APPELLEES

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO.: 2013-IA SCT BRIEF OF APPELLANT INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. ERIC C. HAWKINS Post Office Box 862

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO.: 2013-IA SCT BRIEF OF APPELLANT INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL. ERIC C. HAWKINS Post Office Box 862 DOROTHY ANN GLENN IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI 1 NO.: 2013-IA-01112-SCT APPELLANT v. ANDREW POWELL APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLANT INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL ERIC C. HAWKINS Post Office Box 862 Green~ TE~~~

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MOTION FOR REHEARING

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI V KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MOTION FOR REHEARING E-Filed Document Dec 28 2015 17:29:25 2014-KA-00664-COA Pages: 8 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI JAMES JOHNSON APPELLANT V. 2014-KA-00664-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE MOTION FOR

More information

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY STATE OF MISSISSIPPI ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED E-Filed Document Apr 8 2016 14:20:08 2015-CC-01422 Pages: 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY vs. VS. ARDERS

More information

NO KA COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRYN ELLIS APPELLANT, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE.

NO KA COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRYN ELLIS APPELLANT, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE. E-Filed Document May 29 2015 11:28:47 2013-KA-02000-COA Pages: 11 NO. 2013-KA-02000-COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRYN ELLIS APPELLANT, v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE. ON APPEAL

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI VINCENT BAILEY APPELLANT VS. NO. 2010-CP-0699 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT JIM HOOD,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CC-002S8 c;oii-~ TERRY H. LOGAN, SR. AND BEVERLY W. LOGAN CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CC-002S8 c;oii-~ TERRY H. LOGAN, SR. AND BEVERLY W. LOGAN CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2013-CC-002S8 c;oii-~ TERRY H. LOGAN, SR. AND BEVERLY W. LOGAN 1PELLANTS V. MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND MISSISSIPPI TRANSPORT A TION COMMISSION

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-0547 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA-0547 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Nov 2 2015 14:15:34 2013-CT-00547-SCT Pages: 11 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MILTON TROTTER APPELLANT VS. NO. 2013-CA-0547 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE SUPPLEMENTAL

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DONALD GREGORY CHAMBLISS NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DONALD GREGORY CHAMBLISS NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Jul 29 2015 16:09:56 2015-CP-00263-COA Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DONALD GREGORY CHAMBLISS APPELLANT VS. NO. 2015-CP-00263-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CP APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLEE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CP APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLEE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2009-CP-01387 HARRISON LEWIS, JR. APPELLANT VS. AZHARPASHA APELLEE APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BRIEF OF APPELLEE

More information

v. No CA SCT DOROTHY L. BARNETT, et al. ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY NO CIV ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED

v. No CA SCT DOROTHY L. BARNETT, et al. ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF HINDS COUNTY NO CIV ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED E-Filed Document May 30 2017 17:35:20 2013-CT-01296-SCT Pages: 11 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI VALLEY SILICA COMPANY, INC. APPELLANT v. No. 2013-CA-01296-SCT DOROTHY L.

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT CARIBBEAN CONDOMINIUM, ETC., ET AL., Appellants/Cross-Appellees, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION

More information

No. 49,278-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * MICHAEL DAVID COX Plaintiff-Appellee. Versus

No. 49,278-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * MICHAEL DAVID COX Plaintiff-Appellee. Versus No. 49,278-CA Judgment rendered August 13, 2014. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * MICHAEL

More information

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI E-Filed Document Mar 13 2018 10:46:46 2015-CT-01467-SCT Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI KEITH FRISTON PETITIONER v. No. 2015-KA-1467 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE PETITION FOR

More information

E-Filed Document Oct :46: IA SCT Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No M-219

E-Filed Document Oct :46: IA SCT Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. No M-219 E-Filed Document Oct 26 2017 15:46:15 2017-IA-00219-SCT Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No. 2017-M-219 INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

More information

APPELLATE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

APPELLATE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF E-Filed Document Sep 23 2015 13:42:39 2015-CA-00502-COA Pages: 18 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI Trial Court Nos. 2006-109; 2006-157 / No. 2015-CA-00502-C0A NEDRA PITTMAN, Petitioner

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2014-CA-00894

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2014-CA-00894 E-Filed Document Nov 18 2016 14:30:53 2013-CT-02002-SCT Pages: 10 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2014-CA-00894 MELISSA C. PATTERSON, STACY PICKERING, INDIVIDUALLY, DAVID HUGGINS, INDIVIDUALLY,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 5, 2005 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 5, 2005 Session IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 5, 2005 Session TOMMY D. LANIUS v. NASHVILLE ELECTRIC SERVICE Interlocutory appeal from the Chancery Court for Sumner County No. 2004C-96 Hon. Thomas

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2016-TS SCT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2016-TS SCT E-Filed Document Apr 6 2017 10:50:18 2016-CA-00444 Pages: 16 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2016-TS-00444-SCT L. H. MANNING, VIRGINIA WARREN, JOHN HENRY MANNING, EVA MANNING, GEANNIE JONES, AND

More information

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, MICHAEL PETRAMALA, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, MICHAEL PETRAMALA, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION

More information

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TUNICA COUNTY Cause No BRIEF OF APPELLEE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

ON APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TUNICA COUNTY Cause No BRIEF OF APPELLEE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI STATE OF MISSISSIPPI VS. ONE 1970 MERCURY COUGAR, YIN # OF9111545940 ONE 1992 FORD MUSTANG, YIN #FACP44E4NF173360 ONE FORD MUSTANG $355.00 U.S. CURRENCY AND WILLIE HAMPTON

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI HOYT FORBES AND IDLDA FORBES V. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION APPELLANTS NO.2007-CA-00902-COA APPELLEE CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS The undersigned counsel

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI $104, U.S. CURRENCY ET AL APPELLEE PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI $104, U.S. CURRENCY ET AL APPELLEE PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI E-Filed Document Apr 1 2017 13:06:29 2015-CT-00710-SCT Pages: 8 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CITY OF MERIDIAN VERSUS APPELLANT NO.2015-CA-00710-COA $104,960.00 U.S. CURRENCY ET AL

More information

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Apr 6 2016 16:21:36 2014-KA-01520-COA Pages: 15 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI KENNY STEWART APPELLANT V. NO. 2014-KA-01520-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2015-CA-00903

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2015-CA-00903 E-Filed Document May 23 2016 10:57:29 2015-CA-00903-COA Pages: 13 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2015-CA-00903 MARKWETZEL APPELLANT VERSUS RICHARD SEARS APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CP-00950

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO CP-00950 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI CASE NO. 2009-CP-00950 MARVIN ARTHUR APPELLANT VS. TUNICA COUNTY MISSISSIPPI AND TUNICA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT. APPELLEES 011 Appeal from tile Circllit COllrt of TUl1ic(/

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No.2013 CT SCT 2013-CT SCT. MILTON TROTTER, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No.2013 CT SCT 2013-CT SCT. MILTON TROTTER, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee E-Filed Document Apr 4 2016 16:50:10 2013-CT-00547-SCT Pages: 15 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI No.2013 CT-00547-SCT 2013-CT-00547-SCT MILTON TROTTER, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee BRIEF

More information

PETITION FOR REHEARING

PETITION FOR REHEARING E-Filed Document Mar 6 2018 19:55:11 2016-KA-00932-COA Pages: 6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2016-KA-00932-COA JACARRUS ANTYONE PICKETT APPELLANT V. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Apr 4 2017 16:36:59 2016-CP-01145-COA Pages: 19 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI THOMAS HOLDER APPELLANT VS. NO. 2016-CP-01145 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF FOR

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2007-CP JOHN HENRY ADAMS APPELLANT. vs. GLORIA GIBBS, DIRECTOR OF RECORDS APPELLEE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2007-CP JOHN HENRY ADAMS APPELLANT. vs. GLORIA GIBBS, DIRECTOR OF RECORDS APPELLEE , - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2007-CP-00623 JOHN HENRY ADAMS APPELLANT vs. GLORIA GIBBS, DIRECTOR OF RECORDS APPELLEE On Appeal From the Circuit Court of Sunflower County, Mississippi

More information

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Nov 2 2015 18:30:21 2015-KA-00898-COA Pages: 14 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI GREGORY LORENZO PRITCHETT APPELLANT V. NO. 2015-KA-00898-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Jul 8 2015 13:57:01 2014-CP-00165-COA Pages: 7 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NATHANIEL WALDEN APPELLANT VS. NO. 2014-CP-00165-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT E-Filed Document Jun 27 2018 15:48:34 2017-KA-01632-SCT Pages: 19 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIAN KING APPELLANT VS. NO. 2017-KA-01632 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF FOR THE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA COA WINN-DIXIE MONTGOMERY, LLC

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CA COA WINN-DIXIE MONTGOMERY, LLC E-Filed Document Apr 11 2016 16:07:20 2015-CA-00256-COA Pages: 7 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2015-CA-00256-COA CYNTHIA KULJIS APPELLANT VERSUS WINN-DIXIE MONTGOMERY, LLC APPELLEE

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI & IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2016-CA-188-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI & IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2016-CA-188-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document Nov 16 2016 22:34:38 2016-CA-00188-COA Pages: 9 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI & IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 2016-CA-188-COA LAVERN JEFFREY MORAN APPELLANT

More information

APPELLANT VERSUS CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLEE, CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN

APPELLANT VERSUS CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLEE, CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2012-CA-OI035 CHARLarTEFOSTE~~~ APPELLANT VERSUS CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN APPELLEE BRIEF OF APPELLEE, CITY OF PASS CHRISTIAN On Appeal from the Circuit Court of Harrison

More information

APPELLEE'S RESPONSE TO APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR REHEARING

APPELLEE'S RESPONSE TO APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR REHEARING E-Filed Document Mar 28 2018 16:45:38 2016-CA-00807-SCT Pages: 6 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2016 CA 00807 SCT 2016-CA-00807-SCT PATRICK RIDGEWAY, APPELLANT vs. VS. LOUISE RIDGEWAY

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO CP COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Mar 13 2017 09:59:29 2015-CP-01388-COA Pages: 17 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DANA EASTERLING APPELLANT VS. NO. 2015-CP-01388-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

E-Filed Document Jul :13: EC SCT Pages: 13 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

E-Filed Document Jul :13: EC SCT Pages: 13 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI E-Filed Document Jul 26 2016 13:13:30 2015-EC-01677-SCT Pages: 13 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI TASHA DILLON APPELLANT vs. NO. 2015-CA-01677 DAVID MYERS APPELLEE On Appeal From the Circuit Court

More information

REPLY BRIEF OF THE APPELLANTS

REPLY BRIEF OF THE APPELLANTS E-Filed Document May 31 2018 10:23:48 2016-CA-01057-SCT Pages: 15 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2016-CA-01057 DAVID NEIL HARRIS, SR. AND VECIE MICHELE HARRIS APPELLANTS v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DBA MID-SOUTH FORESTRY; MID-SOUTH FORESTRY, INC.; AUG RICHARD CHISM, INDIVIDUALLY AND

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DBA MID-SOUTH FORESTRY; MID-SOUTH FORESTRY, INC.; AUG RICHARD CHISM, INDIVIDUALLY AND COpy IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI GLEN D. JACKSON APPELLANT v. NO. 2oo8-CA-00376 CHARLES CARTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS A REGISTERED FORESTER AND FILED DBA MID-SOUTH FORESTRY;

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE November 21, 2016 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE November 21, 2016 Session 04/28/2017 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE November 21, 2016 Session PAUL KOCZERA, ET AL. v. CHRISTI LENAY FIELDS STEELE, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Anderson County No.

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS TIMOTHY PAUL KEENAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION April 16, 2002 9:00 a.m. v No. 223731 Ingham Circuit Court DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, LC No. 99-090575-AA Defendant-Appellee.

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Aug 21 2014 17:48:58 2014-KA-00188-COA Pages: 9 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI JEFFREY ALLEN APPELLANT VS. NO. 2014-KA-00188-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. Cause No KA KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. Cause No KA KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee E-Filed Document May 1 2015 11:58:24 2014-KA-00697 Pages: 18 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI Cause No. 2014-KA-00697 KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee APPEAL FROM

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE E-Filed Document Jul 14 2015 11:36:28 2014-KA-01327-COA Pages: 12 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MAURICE TOWNSEND APPELLANT VS. NO. 2014-KA-01327-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

More information