PERS v. Warner
| Docket Number: | 2007-SA-00101-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-SA-00101-SCT ; 2007-SA-00101-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-04-2008 Opinion Author: ROBERTS, J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Disability benefits - Motion to dismiss appeal - M.R.A.P. 28(a) - M.R.A.P. 2(a)(2) - Substantial evidence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - STATE BOARDS AND AGENCIES |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-01-2006 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: CIRCUIT COURT REVERSED PERS’S DECISION AND CLAIMANT AWARDED BENEFITS. Case Number: 251-04-449CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM |
MARY MARGARET BOWERS |
||
| Appellee: | ARLENE WARNER | WILLIE T. ABSTON, WENDY SCHENIQUE WILSON |
|
|
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: | Disability benefits - Motion to dismiss appeal - M.R.A.P. 28(a) - M.R.A.P. 2(a)(2) - Substantial evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Arlene Warner applied for disability benefits with PERS. The PERS Medical Board found insufficient evidence to support Warner’s claim that carpal tunnel syndrome prevented her from performing her employment duties. Warner appealed to the PERS Disability Appeals Committee which recommended that the Board affirm the Medical Board’s decision to deny benefits. The Board followed the Appeals Committee’s recommendation. Warner then appealed to circuit court which reversed the Board’s decision. PERS appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Motion to dismiss appeal On May 14, 2004, Warner filed her notice of appeal with the circuit court. On October 7, 2004, Warner filed a document titled, “Arlene Warner’s Appeal and Response to the Board of Trustees of the Public Employees’ Retirement System’s Proposed Statement of Facts, Conclusions of Law and Recommendation.” Nineteen days later, PERS filed a motion to dismiss Warner’s appeal, citing URCCC 5.06 and M.R.A.P. 28(a). Warner argued that she substantially complied with Rule 28 in substance if not in form and the circuit court agreed. PERS argues this was error. M.R.A.P. 2(a)(2) states that a reviewing court “may” dismiss an appeal under two circumstances: an obvious failure to prosecute an appeal and a failure to substantially comply with the rules of appellate procedure. The circuit court could have reasonably concluded that Warner did not demonstrate an obvious failure to prosecute an appeal and could also have reasonably concluded that Warner did not fail to substantially comply with the rules of appellate procedure. Issue 2: Substantial evidence PERS argues the circuit court impermissibly re-weighed the evidence when it reversed the Board’s decision to deny Warner’s claim for benefits. Reasonable minds could find that the evidence was adequate to support the Board’s conclusion that Warner was not disabled. While one doctor applied an impairment rating to both of Warner’s hands, absolutely no physician concluded that Warner was functionally disabled. Thus, substantial evidence supported the Board’s decision. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
