Dismiss Holding, Inc. v. Knight
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-00042-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-20-2008 Opinion Author: MYERS, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Trespass - Attorney’s fees - Innocent purchaser Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: IRVING, J. without separate written opinion Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS-OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-12-2006 Appealed from: Jackson County Chancery Court Judge: Pat H. Watts, Jr. Disposition: IN TRESPASS ACTION, CHANCERY COURT AWARDED DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY’S FEES Case Number: 2004-1838-PW |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | DISMISS HOLDING, INC. |
W. HARVEY BARTON |
|
|
| Appellee: | E. HAROLD KNIGHT AND BENNY KNIGHT | MATTHEW G. MESTAYER |
|
|
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: | Trespass - Attorney’s fees - Innocent purchaser |
| Summary of the Facts: | E. Harold Knight and Benny Knight filed a trespass action against Dismiss Holding, Inc., for the wrongful entry upon approximately four acres of commercial property. The chancery court awarded attorney’s fees to E. Harold Knight upon finding that Dismiss Holding was grossly negligent in failing to obtain a title opinion before entering upon the property purchased at a sheriff’s execution sale. Dismiss Holding appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Dismiss Holding argues that the chancellor erred in awarding attorney’s fees to E. Harold Knight because it asserts that it was an innocent purchaser of the property; therefore, it should not be assessed punitive damages. A chancellor may award attorney’s fees as punitive damages in a trespass action if the trespass is proven to be willful, wanton, or grossly negligent. The chancellor reasoned that because Dismiss Holding failed to obtain a title opinion, it could not be characterized as an innocent purchaser and was grossly negligent in its entry on to the property of E. Harold Knight. The chancellor’s finding that Dismiss Holding was grossly negligent in its trespass cannot be said to be manifestly wrong or clearly erroneous. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
