Davis v. J.C. Penney Co.


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-CP-00381-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 09-07-2004
Opinion Author: King, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Failure to identify issues in brief - M.R.A.P. 28
Judge(s) Concurring: Bridges and Lee, P.JJ., Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Barnes, J.
Procedural History: Summary Judgment
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS-OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-07-2003
Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court
Judge: Kosta N. Vlahos
Disposition: DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED AND COMPLAINT DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Case Number: A2402-99-00030

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Joseph Davis, Jr.




PRO SE



 

Appellee: J.C. Penney Company, Inc., A Foreign Corporation THOMAS E. VAUGHN  

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: Failure to identify issues in brief - M.R.A.P. 28

Summary of the Facts: Joseph Davis, Jr. was convicted of resisting arrest and trespassing by the Biloxi Municipal Court as a result of an incident occurring when he attempted to return some merchandise to a J. C. Penney store. Davis appealed to the County Court of Harrison County which affirmed his conviction. He then appealed to circuit court which also affirmed. He appealed, and the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. Davis also filed a civil action in circuit court against J.C. Penney and Steve Wright, an employee of J. C. Penney, for damages. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and sanctions against Davis. After a hearing, the court granted the motion. Davis appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Under M.R.A.P. 28, an appellant's brief must contain a certificate of interested persons, tables, a statement of the issues, a statement of the case, a summary of the argument, an argument, and a conclusion. The brief submitted by Davis fails to comply with M.R.A.P. 28 in that he fails to identify any issues. Therefore, the appellate court is not required to consider the appeal.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court