Sweet Valley Missionary Baptist Church v. Alfa Ins. Corp.
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-01807-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CA-01807-COA ; 2010-CT-01807-SCT ; 2010-CT-01807-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-19-2013 Opinion Author: Roberts, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Jurisdiction - Filing of motion for rehearing - M.R.A.P. 40(a) - Issuance of mandate - M.R.A.P. 41(b) - M.R.A.P. 2(c) - Tolling of statute of limitations - M.R.C.P. 59(e) - M.R.C.P. 60(b) Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Carlton, Maxwell and Fair, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): James, J. Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-24-2010 Appealed from: Marion County Circuit Court Judge: R. I. Prichard, III Disposition: GRANTED APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS Case Number: 2010-0042P |
|
| Note: | The motion for rehearing is granted, and our original opinion is withdrawn with this opinion substituted in lieu thereof. The judgment of the Marion County Circuit Court is reversed, and this case is remanded for reinstatement on the circuit court's docket. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Sweet Valley Missionary Baptist Church a/k/a Hub Community Baptist |
MARC L. FRISCHHERTZ
DAVID LEE BREWER |
|
|
| Appellee: | Alfa Insurance Corporation a/k/a Alfa General Insurance Corporation a/k/a Alfa Mutual General Insurance Company a/k/a Alfa Specialty Insurance Corporation | TOBY JUSTIN GAMMILL WHITNEY WARNER GLADDEN | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Insurance - Jurisdiction - Filing of motion for rehearing - M.R.A.P. 40(a) - Issuance of mandate - M.R.A.P. 41(b) - M.R.A.P. 2(c) - Tolling of statute of limitations - M.R.C.P. 59(e) - M.R.C.P. 60(b) |
| Summary of the Facts: | This opinion is substituted for the original opinion. Sweet Valley Missionary Baptist Church a/k/a HUB Community Baptist Church suffered property damage during Hurricane Katrina. Sweet Valley’s insurance carrier, Alfa Insurance Corporation, paid Sweet Valley $9,951.89 on its claim. Sweet Valley filed its first complaint against Alfa, alleging breach of contract. Because of issues in discovery, the circuit court dismissed Sweet Valley’s first complaint without prejudice. Sweet Valley filed a motion to set aside the dismissal which the court denied. The same day its motion was denied, Sweet Valley filed a new complaint against Alfa. Alfa filed a motion to dismiss the second complaint, claiming the three-year statute of limitations had expired. The court dismissed the second complaint as untimely, and Sweet Valley appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Jurisdiction M.R.A.P. 40(a) provides that “[a] motion for rehearing may be filed within 14 days after a decision is handed down on the merits of a case by the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals.” Sweet Valley’s motion for rehearing was filed outside the fourteen-day time period. The mandate was issued on July 10, 2012, as directed by M.R.A.P. 41(b). Although the appellate court ordinarily lacks jurisdiction where the appellant fails to comply with Rule 40(a), the Court may suspend the requirements of the rules under M.R.A.P. 2(c) where justice so requires. In this case, the Court uses its authority under Rule 2(c) to recall the mandate and issue a modified opinion on rehearing. Issue 2: Statute of limitations Sweet Valley argues that the circuit court erred in finding the statute of limitations had expired before the motion to set aside the judgment was decided. Sweet Valley claims its motion was filed pursuant to M.R.C.P. 59(e) and that the statute of limitations was tolled by the filing of that motion on July 8, 2009, and continued to be tolled until January 29, 2010, when it was ruled on by the circuit court. However, Sweet Valley does not cite any authority in support and the Court is unable to find any authority either supporting or against the argument. Rule 59(e) motions stay the thirty-day time period to appeal and the enforceability of judgments. A Rule 59 motion stays the judgment and relates back, for all purposes resetting the appeals clock to the moment that judgment was entered and holding it there pending the motion. This is unlike a motion under M.R.C.P. 60(b) which does not toll the time for appeal or enforceability of a judgment. It stands to reason that if a Rule 59 motion tolls the time for appeal and the enforceability of a judgment, it would also toll the statute of limitations. Since the statute of limitations was tolled until the circuit court ruled on Sweet Valley’s Rule 59(e) motion, the second complaint was timely filed. Thus, the circuit court erred in dismissing Sweet Valley’s complaint. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
