If you are unable to see this message, click here to view it in a web browser.

Justia Daily Opinion Summaries

Supreme Court of Mississippi
November 20, 2020

Table of Contents

Cleveland v. Advance Auto Parts

Civil Procedure, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law, Personal Injury

Ilercil v. Williams

Civil Procedure, Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury

Kelly v. Mississippi

Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Williams v. Mississippi

Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services v. Bynum

Family Law, Government & Administrative Law

COVID-19 Updates: Law & Legal Resources Related to Coronavirus

Click here to remove Verdict from subsequent Justia newsletter(s).

New on Verdict

Legal Analysis and Commentary

Yes, Trump Is (Still) Engaged in an Attempted Coup; and Yes, It Might Lead to a Constitutional Crisis and a Breaking Point

NEIL H. BUCHANAN

verdict post

UF Levin College of Law professor and economist Neil H. Buchanan explains why Donald Trump’s actions reflect an attempted coup and might still lead to a constitutional crisis. In this column, Buchanan first explains what a coup is and describes the ways that Trump has failed in his attempts thus far. Buchanan warns about how all this could still end in a constitutional crisis that Trump creates and exploits to stay in power.

Read More

Supreme Court of Mississippi Opinions

Cleveland v. Advance Auto Parts

Citation: 2018-CT-01659-SCT

Opinion Date: November 19, 2020

Judge: James W. Kitchens

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law, Personal Injury

After suffering two work-related injuries, Sheree Cleveland settled her workers’ compensation claims with Advance Auto Parts and its workers’ compensation insurance carrier, Indemnity Insurance Company of North America. The Workers’ Compensation Commission approved the settlement. Approximately one month later, the Employer/Carrier filed a Form B-31 indicating the last payment had been made. More than a year after that, Cleveland filed a motion asserting that the Employer/Carrier had not paid all compensation due under the settlement and that two medical bills remained outstanding. The Commission found that, because a one-year statute of limitations had expired, it lacked jurisdiction to enforce its order approving the settlement agreement. Cleveland appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed, questioning whether the one-year statute of limitations applied to the claim. But instead of answering that question, the Court of Appeals found that the Employer/Carrier had been estopped from asserting a statute of limitations defense because it had agreed to pay the outstanding bills and had represented to the administrative law judge that it would do so. Further, the Court of Appeals also found Cleveland's contact with the Employer/Carrier within the limitations period tolled the statute of limitations, if, in fact, it applied. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed, but for different reasons than the appellate court. The Supreme Court determined the statute of limitations did not apply to Cleveland's motion for enforcement of the settlement order, therefore, her motion was timely filed.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Ilercil v. Williams

Citation: 2019-CA-00527-SCT

Opinion Date: November 19, 2020

Judge: Ishee

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury

James Williams suffered a severe brain injury from complications following cervical spine surgery. A lawsuit was brought against the hospital and the surgeon for medical malpractice, which included a claim for wrongful death after Williams died. Dr. Orhan Ilercil was ultimately found to be 15 percent responsible for Williams’s injuries and death, which amounted to a judgment against him for $205,800. Dr. Ilercil appealed, contending, among other things, that the trial court erred by refusing to give an intervening/superseding-cause instruction. To this, the Mississippi Supreme Court agreed, reversed judgment and remanded for a new trial.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Kelly v. Mississippi

Citation: 2019-KA-01044-SCT

Opinion Date: November 19, 2020

Judge: James W. Kitchens

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Kasey Boomer Kelly was convicted of possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. Kelly appealed his conviction, claiming that his constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated and that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. After review of the trial court record, the Mississippi Supreme Court found Kelly's constitutional right to a speedy trial was not violated because he failed to assert that right and because he failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by the delay. The Court also found the State presented sufficient evidence to show constructive possession of the weapon. Therefore, the Court affirmed Kelly's conviction and sentence.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Williams v. Mississippi

Citation: 2019-KA-01476-SCT

Opinion Date: November 19, 2020

Judge: Maxwell

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Timothy Williams challenged the sufficiency and weight of the evidence supporting his felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm conviction. Though he argued his conviction should have been reversed, Williams stipulated he was indeed a felon and was prohibited from possessing firearms. And he admitted to a detective, in a recorded interview and then in a signed statement, that he purchased a Colt .45 semi-automatic pistol “off the street.” Williams also described how he loaned the pistol to a woman - a woman who later testified Williams indeed left a gun with her. Williams also insisted the State violated his constitutional and statutory speedy trial rights due to an eighteen-month delay between his arrest and trial. The Mississippi Supreme Court found no merit to Williams' first contention, and determined that even if the delay between arrest and trial was presumptively prejudicial, Williams failed to show any actual prejudice from the delay. Accordingly, the Court affirmed Williams' conviction and the ten-year sentence he received as a habitual offender.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services v. Bynum

Citation: 2019-SA-01568-SCT

Opinion Date: November 19, 2020

Judge: Maxwell

Areas of Law: Family Law, Government & Administrative Law

The Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services (MDCPS) sought to terminate involuntarily the parental rights of Jack Bynum, the putative father of a child in MDCPS' custody. The chancery court determined Bynum was both indigent and entitled to counsel. The chancellor appointed Bynum counsel and ordered MDCPS to pay his attorney's fees. MDCPS appealed. The agency argued Covington County should have paid for Bynum’s representation, just as it would if Bynum were an indigent criminal defendant. But the Mississippi Supreme Court found this was not a criminal case. "And the statutory scheme that directs the initiating county in criminal prosecutions to pay for indigent representation is expressly limited. It only applies to those 'charged with a felony, misdemeanor punishable by confinement for ninety (90) days or more, or commission of an act of delinquency.'” Thus, absent a legislative directive to assess an indigent parent’s attorney’s fees to Covington County, the chancery court did not abuse its legislatively conferred discretion by ordering MDCPS to pay Bynum’s attorney’s fees.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

About Justia Opinion Summaries

Justia Daily Opinion Summaries is a free service, with 68 different newsletters, covering every federal appellate court and the highest courts of all US states.

Justia also provides weekly practice area newsletters in 63 different practice areas.

All daily and weekly Justia newsletters are free. Subscribe or modify your newsletter subscription preferences at daily.justia.com.

You may freely redistribute this email in whole.

About Justia

Justia is an online platform that provides the community with open access to the law, legal information, and lawyers.

Justia

Contact Us| Privacy Policy

Unsubscribe From This Newsletter

or
unsubscribe from all Justia newsletters immediately here.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Justia

Justia | 1380 Pear Ave #2B, Mountain View, CA 94043