Fitch v. Valentine
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-00239-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-11-2007 Opinion Author: RANDOLPH, J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Motion to cancel judgment - Jurisdiction - Enrolled judgment - Section 11-7-191 - Supersedeas bond - M.R.A.P. 8(a) - Section 11-7-189(2) Judge(s) Concurring: SMITH, C.J., WALLER AND COBB, P.JJ., DIAZ, CARLSON AND DICKINSON, JJ. Dissenting Author : EASLEY, J. Concurs in Result Only: GRAVES, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-25-2006 Appealed from: MARSHALL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Henry L. Lackey Disposition: Appellant appeals a jury verdict and judgment against him. |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | JERRY FITCH, SR. |
DION JEFFERY SHANLEY
S. DUKE GOZA |
||
| Appellee: | JOHNNY VALENTINE | MICHAEL ALFRED JACOB, II RALPH EDWIN CHAPMAN |
|
|
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: | Motion to cancel judgment - Jurisdiction - Enrolled judgment - Section 11-7-191 - Supersedeas bond - M.R.A.P. 8(a) - Section 11-7-189(2) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Johnny Valentine sued Jerry Fitch, Sr., alleging alienation of affection. Following a jury trial, judgment was entered by the circuit court awarding Valentine $642,000 in actual damages and $112,500 in punitive damages. That same day, Fitch filed motions for judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict, new trial, and remittitur. The circuit court denied each of Fitch’s motions. Fitch filed his notice of appeal. Thereafter, Fitch secured a letter of credit from the Bank of Holly Springs for $943,000, which the circuit court approved in lieu of a supersedeas bond, staying execution of the judgment. Fitch subsequently filed a motion to cancel judgment, which Johnny Valentine opposed. The circuit court denied Fitch’s motion based upon lack of jurisdiction. Fitch appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Section 11-7-191 provides that an enrolled judgment shall be a lien upon and bind all the property of the defendant within the county where so enrolled, from the rendition thereof. The judgment was filed by the circuit court and unquestionably became a lien upon Fitch’s property within Marshall County. The Comment to M.R.A.P. 8(a) notes that the purpose of a supersedeas bond is to preserve the status quo while protecting the judgment creditor’s rights pending appeal. Here, the letter of credit was intended to act as security for the judgment and was approved by the circuit court in lieu of a supersedeas bond, without objection by Valentine. The court’s order did not cancel the judgment, which is what Fitch’s subsequent motion requested. Fitch requested to have his judgment removed from the judgment roll of Marshall County so that potential buyers of his property would proceed with their purchase. Fitch admits that section 11-7-189(2) provides Valentine with complete power over removal of a judgment from the judgment roll upon its entry by the clerk, but argues that regardless of the outcome on appeal of this matter, Valentine’s right to recover the full amount of his judgment including interest and costs was and is completely secured. As section 11-7-189(2) authorizes only Valentine to formally remove that judgment lien from the judgment roll of Marshall County, the circuit court would not have been merely executing its prior order had it granted the motion to cancel judgment. Such action would have extended beyond the circuit court’s jurisdiction; and therefore, the circuit court properly denied the motion to cancel judgment. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
