Baptist Mem'l Hosp.-Desoto Inc., et al. v. Bailey
| Docket Number: | 2004-IA-00526-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-02-2005 Opinion Author: Easley, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Medical malpractice - Venue - Section 11-11-3 - M.R.C.P. 82(c) Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Graves, J. Procedural History: Interlocutory Appeal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-27-2004 Appealed from: Quitman County Circuit Court Judge: Kenneth l. Thomas Disposition: Denied the motion for change of venue. Case Number: 2003-094 |
|
| Note: | Petition for interlocutory appeal granted. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Baptist Memorial Hospital-Desoto Inc. and Dr. Winston Craig Clark |
WALTER ALAN DAVIS, JOHN H. DUNBAR, MACEY LYND EDMONDSON, SHELBY KIRK MILAM, S. DUKE GOZA |
||
| Appellee: | James Bailey | JENNY M. VIRDEN |
|
|
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: | Medical malpractice - Venue - Section 11-11-3 - M.R.C.P. 82(c) |
| Summary of the Facts: | James Bailey filed a medical malpractice case against Baptist Memorial Hospital-DeSoto Inc. and Dr. Winston Clark in the Circuit Court of Quitman County. Prior to trial, the Hospital filed a motion to transfer venue seeking to have venue transferred to DeSoto County. Dr. Clark joined in the motion. James Bailey is a resident citizen of Crowder, Quitman County. The Hospital is a Mississippi corporation with its principal place of business in Southaven, DeSoto County. Dr. Clark is a resident citizen of Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee. The court denied the motion for change of venue. The Supreme Court granted an interlocutory appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | At the time Bailey’s complaint was filed, the general venue statute, section 11-11-3, provided that civil actions shall be commenced in the county where the defendant resides or in the county where the alleged act or omission occurred or where the event that caused the injury occurred and civil actions against a nonresident may also be commenced in the county where the plaintiff resides or is domiciled. The venue statutes were never designed to remove a resident defendant’s right to be sued in his or her own county of residence. Moreover, the Legislature never intended an interpretation of the venue statutes that would allow a resident defendant to be sued in the plaintiff’s county of residence simply because a non-resident defendant, be it an individual or a corporation is joined in the same suit. Bailey also argues that when the lawsuit was filed, M.R.C.P. 82(c) authorized venue in the county of the plaintiff’s residency, Quitman County. In the case of Capital City Ins. Co. v. G.B. “Boots” Smith Corp., 889 So.2d 505 (Miss. 2004), the Court held that Rule 82(c) does not support a plaintiff establishing venue in his own county of residence when a resident defendant is a party to the suit. Bailey was treated at the Hospital in DeSoto County when he received the alleged negligent care and treatment. Therefore, venue is proper in DeSoto County. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
