Clanton v. DeSoto County Sheriff's Dep't
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-01453-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-CA-01453-COA ; 2005-CT-01453-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-30-2007 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Termination of employment - Tort Claims Act - Notice of claim - Section 11-46-11(1) - At will employment Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE ROBERTS, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): CARLTON, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-23-2005 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Andrew C. Baker Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO THE DEFENDANTS Case Number: CV2003-0159BD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | RICHARD CLANTON |
T. SWAYZE ALFORD |
||
| Appellee: | DESOTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT AND SHERIFF JAMES A. RILEY | DAVID A. BARFIELD STEVEN LLOYD LACEY |
|
|
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: | Termination of employment - Tort Claims Act - Notice of claim - Section 11-46-11(1) - At will employment |
| Summary of the Facts: | Richard Clanton filed a complaint against the DeSoto County Sheriff’s Department and Sheriff James Riley following his termination from the department. The trial court granted the Sheriff’s Department and Riley’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion for summary judgment. Clanton appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Notice of claim The Sheriff’s Department argues that Clanton failed to timely file his notice of claim prior to filing his complaint, as required by section 11-46-11(1) of the Tort Claims Act. The date of Clanton’s termination for purposes of the commencement of the statute of limitations was September 14, 2002, the day that he received notice of his termination. It is undisputed that Clanton was suspended without pay on March 23, 2001. It is also undisputed that Clanton had no knowledge of his termination prior to September 14, 2002. Thus, the circuit court erred in determining that the statute of limitations on Clanton’s claims began to run on October 1, 2001. However, because Clanton filed his complaint prior to filing his notice of claim with the Sheriff’s Department, his tort claims are barred and were properly dismissed by the trial court. Issue 2: At will employment Clanton argues that the rules and regulations established by the Sheriff’s Department for the discharge of deputy sheriffs create a binding contract, thus rendering the at-will employee doctrine inapplicable. Mississippi follows the common law rule that an employment contract for an indefinite period may be terminated at the will of either party. Clanton signed two documents, both acknowledging his status as an at-will employee. Furthermore, the language of the operations policy and procedures manual clearly provides that, “[s]ince all members of the DeSoto County Sheriff’s Department serve at the will and pleasure of the Sheriff, the Sheriff must be the final decision maker for all complaints against the department or any member or employee of the department.” |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
