MS Life Ins. Co. v. Baker
| Docket Number: | 2003-IA-01149-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-13-2005 Opinion Author: Waller, P.J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Joinder - M.R.C.P. 20(a) Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Cobb, P.J., Easley, Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-07-2003 Appealed from: Humphreys County Circuit Court Judge: Jannie M. Lewis Disposition: The trial court denied the motion as well as Mississippi Life's subsequent Motion for Interlocutory Appeal. Case Number: 00-0162 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | MS Life Insurance Company and MS Casualty Insurance Company |
WALTER D. WILLSON
ROY H. LIDDELL
CHARLES E. GRIFFIN |
||
| Appellee: | James Baker, Jr., et al. | CHRISTOPHER WAYNE COFER HARRY MERRITT McCUMBER |
|
|
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: | Insurance - Joinder - M.R.C.P. 20(a) |
| Summary of the Facts: | James Baker, Jr., joined forty-four other plaintiffs in filing suit against Mississippi Life Insurance Company, Mississippi Casualty Company, and fifty John Does. The plaintiffs claim that Mississippi Life illegally required credit insurance as part of an offered loan package and fraudulently inflated the cost of insurance premiums. Mississippi Life moved to sever plaintiffs' claims. The trial court denied the motion as well as Mississippi Life's Motion for Interlocutory Appeal. The Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Under M.R.C.P. 20(a), joinder is only proper if the different plaintiffs' causes of action arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, and some question of law or fact common to all the plaintiffs will arise in the action. Before an alleged transaction or occurrence will pass muster under Rule 20(a), the court must find a distinct litigable event linking the parties. In a case such as the one at issue, plaintiffs must allege that their claims arise from one or more uniform misrepresentations. To do so, they must specifically identify which representations and/or omissions, if any, were made to all plaintiffs. If the representation was written, the writing in which the representation appeared and the date of publication must be set forth. That plaintiffs' claims may be premised on oral misrepresentations does not preclude joinder, provided plaintiffs allege that the substance of the oral representations was standardized. Though the forty-five plaintiffs in this case have lodged multifarious complaints of deception by Mississippi Life in their pleadings, motions, and briefs, they have failed to present any evidence which specifically identifies any common misrepresentation to all plaintiffs by Mississippi Life, either written or oral. At best, four of the plaintiffs consistently testify, without identifying any deception on the part of Mississippi Life, that Mississippi Life explained nothing to them when it convinced them to purchase the insurance policies. Beyond that, the record reveals nothing more than bare allegations devoid of any evidence that each plaintiff has been induced to act by a common misrepresentation. The case is reversed and remanded to the trial court for the purpose of requiring that both the plaintiffs and Mississippi Life present substantive evidence demonstrating the propriety or impropriety of joinder. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
