Statham v. Miller
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-00728-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-22-2008 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Assault & battery - Dismissal - M.R.C.P. 41 - URCCC 12.02 - Jurisdiction - M.R.C.P. 1 - Amendment of pleading - M.R.C.P. 15 Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, BARNES, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): CARLTON, J. Concurs in Result Only: IRVING, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS-OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-17-2007 Appealed from: OKTIBBEHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: James T. Kitchens, Jr. Disposition: CIRCUIT COURT DISMISSED APPELLANT’S APPEAL AND REINSTATED THE CASE IN JUSTICE COURT Case Number: 2005-0067-CV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | JAKE STATHAM |
CHARLES T. YOSTE |
|
|
| Appellee: | ERIC MILLER | KEVIN DALE CAMP | ||
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: | Assault & battery - Dismissal - M.R.C.P. 41 - URCCC 12.02 - Jurisdiction - M.R.C.P. 1 - Amendment of pleading - M.R.C.P. 15 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jake Statham filed suit against Eric Miller in the Oktibbeha County Justice Court. Statham’s complaint alleged a claim for assault and battery and demanded damages in the amount of $2,500 and all costs. The justice court entered a judgment against Miller in the amount of $2,500 plus the court costs of $54, for a total judgment in the amount of $2,554. Miller filed a notice of appeal to the circuit court. Statham filed a motion to amend ad damnum clause. The motion to amend asked to increase his damage demand in excess of $10,000 and requested that he be allowed to include claims for punitive damages and attorney’s fees. The circuit court entered an order that dismissed Miller’s appeal and reinstated the case on the justice court’s docket. No motion to dismiss was filed or contained in the record. In addition, there is neither a notice of hearing for the matter to be considered nor a transcript of a hearing or other proceeding where the circuit court heard argument or considered this action. Statham appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Statham argues that the circuit court’s order of dismissal was not in accordance with M.R.C.P. 41; that the circuit court erred in dismissing the appeal under URCCC 12.02, which is limited in its application to criminal proceedings; and that the circuit court should have heard his motion to amend ad damnum clause. The order of dismissal in this case states that the matter came on the “motion of the defendant requesting this Court to dismiss the appeal filed herein.” However, the clerk’s docket entry does not indicate that a written motion to dismiss was filed and There is no transcript of a proceeding that would indicate that an oral motion was presented to the court. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis under M.R.C.P. 41 for the circuit court to have dismissed this action. In addition, URCCC 12.02 has no bearing on a civil appeal. Although the Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply in justice court, when Miller appealed from the justice court to the circuit court, the circuit court gained original jurisdiction, not appellate jurisdiction, and should therefore follow the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure as stated in M.R.C.P. 1. Under M.R.C.P. 15, Statham should have been allowed to amend his pleadings. The case should then be decided based on the jurisdiction of the circuit court and not the jurisdiction of the justice court. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
