Sealy v. Goddard


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-IA-02144-SCT
Oral Argument: 12-15-2004
 

 

* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users).

Supreme Court: Opinion Date: 02-10-2005
Opinion Author: Carlson, George C.
Holding: Reversed and Rendered
Additional Case Information: Topic: Wrongful death - Personal jurisdiction - Long-arm statute - Section 13-3-57 - Individual heirs
Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Graves, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ.,
Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WRONGFUL DEATH
Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 07-18-2003
Appealed from: Lamar County Circuit Court
Judge: Michael R. Eubanks
Disposition: Denial the motion to dismiss or in the alternative, to quash summons.
  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: GLORIA POCHE SEALY, DOUGLAS PAUL SEALY, RACHEL SEALY KIMBLE AND PATRICE SEALY TORRES




 LAWRENCE CARY GUNN, JR.



  
Appellee: MICHAEL EDWARD GODDARD, III BY HIS NEXT FRIEND JEANIE DANOS AND JEANIE DANOS, INDIVIDUALLY MORRIS SWEATT JAMES COLEMAN RHODEN  
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: Wrongful death - Personal jurisdiction - Long-arm statute - Section 13-3-57 - Individual heirs
Summary of the Facts: George Sealy, a Louisiana resident, was driving his vehicle on a public road within the confines of Little Black Creek State Park in Lamar County, when he struck a pedestrian, eighteen-month-old Michael Goddard, III. Michael’s mother, Jeanie Danos, an adult resident citizen of Mississippi, filed suit in the Lamar County Circuit Court. In the amended complaint, the named defendants were George Sealy and United Agents Insurance Company, In Receivership, and Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association. The Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association filed a motion to dismiss and a suggestion of death with an attached certified copy of a death certificate revealing that George Sealy, age 79, died of natural causes. The plaintiffs conceded that the insurance carrier and LIGA should be dismissed as party defendants, and incorporated into their motion to dismiss, a motion to substitute party wherein the plaintiffs requested the circuit court to substitute the Estate of George Sealy in the stead of George Sealy. The court dismissed LIGA and directed that an alias summons be issued for service upon the attorney of the Estate of George Sealy. Although already dismissed as a party, LIGA filed an amicus curiae motion to dismiss alleging that the circuit court had not acquired jurisdiction. The court entered an order in response to LIGA’s amicus curiae motion to dismiss, but did not dismiss the lawsuit. The court granted the plaintiffs leave to have alias process issued for Gloria Poche Sealy, Patrice Sealy Torres, Douglas Sealy, and Rachel Sealy Kimble Although these individuals were not parties to the litigation, each summons directed the named heir to file responsive pleadings to the attached amended complaint within thirty days of service of process, failing which the named individual would suffer a judgment by default. LIGA once again appeared amicus curiae, over the plaintiffs’ objection, and filed a motion to dismiss, requesting that the court dismiss with prejudice all claims against the estate, or alternatively, that the court quash process as to the Sealy heirs. The court denied the motion and ordered that since the Sealy heirs had been served with process, they were to file responsive pleadings to the amended complaint within thirty days of the date of the order. The Sealy heirs petitioned the Supreme Court for an interlocutory appeal, which was granted.
Summary of Opinion Analysis: The Sealy heirs argue that, although the court asserted personal jurisdiction over them pursuant to section 13-3-57, the long-arm statute, none of the grounds for exercising jurisdiction enumerated in the statute are met in this case. The allegedly negligent non-resident Sealy died prior to the plaintiffs’ commencement of this action. Sealy was sued individually and then after suit was commenced and the plaintiffs learned that Sealy was deceased, they started a series of actions which attempted to join as defendants insurance companies, Sealy’s estate, and Sealy’s heirs. Under the express language of section 13-3-57, once Sealy died, service of process could only be made upon the nonresident executor, administrator, receiver, trustee or any other selected or appointed representative of Sealy. Clearly, none of these statutory terms apply to the individual Sealy heirs. Therefore, the court erred in finding that the Sealy heirs could be served with process under section 13-3-57 and compelled to respond to the plaintiffs’ complaint under penalty of a default judgment for money damages being entered against them if they failed to so respond.


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