In re the Boundaries of the City of Sardis
| Docket Number: | 2004-AN-02437-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-19-2007 Opinion Author: SMITH, C.J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Annexation - Repeal of ordinance - Section 21-1-33 Judge(s) Concurring: WALLER, P.J., DIAZ, EASLEY, CARLSON, GRAVES, DICKINSON, AND RANDOLPH, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): COBB, P.J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES & ANNEXATION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-16-2004 Appealed from: PANOLA COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: Percy L. Lynchard, Jr. Disposition: Partially approved the City's annexation petition granting annexation with respect to satisfactory areas Case Number: S-03-08-193 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Nolan West, et al. |
DION JEFFERY SHANLEY |
||
| Appellee: | The City of Sardis, Mississippi | THOMAS S. SHULER |
|
|
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: | Annexation - Repeal of ordinance - Section 21-1-33 |
| Summary of the Facts: | The City of Sardis passed an ordinance approving the annexation of certain portions of Panola County adjoining the city into the city limits and filed a petition in the Chancery Court of Panola County seeking confirmation of the extension of its boundaries. The chancery court partially approved the City’s petition, issuing a decree granting annexation with respect to the satisfactory areas. The objectors to the annexation along with the City of Sardis subsequently filed a joint Motion to Set Aside Decree. The chancery court denied the motion, and all parties appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The parties argue that the chancery court erred in refusing to recognize the City’s repealer ordinance when the court’s decree was not yet effective and that the City has the sole decision-making power as to whether to institute and proceed with annexation proceedings. The chancery court entered a decree confirming the annexation on November 19, 2004. Both parties appealed in December 2004. While the appeal was pending, on August 2, 2005, the City repealed its initial ordinance seeking annexation on August 2, 2005. The City presented the repealer ordinance to the chancery court on October 10, 2005, within its motion to set aside the decree, and the chancery court denied the motion. Pursuant to section 21-1-33, the decree was not yet effective when the City repealed its initial ordinance. The proposal, and likewise the withdrawal, of annexation is solely legislative. The City presented on remand an ordinance repealing its initial ordinance seeking annexation. Therefore, the chancery court erred in denying the City’s motion to set aside the decree granting annexation, as the court had no authority to force annexation in the face of a repeal ordinance from the municipality. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
