Murphee v. W. W. Transportation
Docket Number: | 2003-CA-00020-COA Linked Case(s): 2003-CA-00020-COA |
|
Oral Argument: | 01-22-2004 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Date: 04-13-2004 Opinion Author: LEE, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Substantial evidence Judge(s) Concurring: McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, MYERS, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: IRVING, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-01-2002 Appealed from: MARSHALL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Henry L. Lackey Disposition: ON REMAND FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS, THE CIRCUIT COURT DETERMINED THAT ITS PRIOR RULING WAS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS. THE CIRCUIT COURT REAFFIRMED AND RATIFIED THAT PRIOR RULING. |
Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
Appellant: | JASON MURPHREE |
B. SEAN AKINS |
||
Appellee: | W. W. TRANSPORTATION, WAYNE COOK AND HELEN COOK | RICHARD JOSEPH BABB |
|
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: | Contract - Substantial evidence |
Summary of the Facts: | Jason Murphree filed a complaint against W.W. Transportation and Wayne Cook for failure to repay a loan allegedly owed by W.W. to Murphree. The judge dismissed Murphree's complaint and found that Murphree was indebted to W.W. and the Cooks. Murphree appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for the trial court to conduct further evidentiary findings regarding the purported underlying debt. On remand, the trial court ruled in favor of W.W. and the Cooks, finding that there was no credible testimony presented to show that a valid loan had occurred between W.W. and Murphree. Murphree appeals. |
Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Murphree argues that the court's finding that there was no credible evidence to determine the existence of loans was not supported by substantial evidence. To support his claim, Murphree relies mostly upon the testimony of Tim Weatherford, who was also the sole shareholder of the company, at the time of the transactions in question, and Debbie Overall, the accountant at W.W. The trial judge found Weatherford's testimony to be inconsistent and Overall's to be unreliable. It cannot be said that the judge's findings were clearly erroneous or not supported by substantial evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court