Tupelo Auto Sales, Ltd. v. Scott
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01979-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-08-2003 Opinion Author: Pittman, C.J. Holding: Affirmed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Arbitration - Jurisdiction Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb, Easley, Carlson and Graves, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: McRae, P.J. and Diaz, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-20-2001 Appealed from: Lee County Circuit Court Judge: Richard Bowen Disposition: The circuit court denied a motion to compel arbitration. Case Number: CV01-195(B)L |
|
| Note: | motion to compel arbitration | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Tupelo Auto Sales, Ltd. |
SHELBY KIRK MILAM
PAUL NATHAN JENKINS
S. DUKE GOZA
ROGER M. TUBBS |
||
| Appellee: | Gary P. Scott | GREGORY W. HARBISON |
|
|
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: | Contract - Arbitration - Jurisdiction |
| Summary of the Facts: | Gary Scott filed a complaint against Tupelo Auto Sales, Ltd., alleging that it breached various implied and statutory warranties. Tupelo Auto Sales filed a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint with prejudice. The court denied the motion, and Tupelo Auto Sales appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Jurisdiction Scott seeks relief on state law grounds in his complaint, alleging breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness as well as breach of express warranties. The trial court's order leaves the state claims for breach of warranty intact and pending resolution at the trial level. While the case was not granted interlocutory appeal nor is the order denying the motion to compel arbitration certified as final judgment, an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration and therefore, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Issue 2: Arbitration Tupelo Auto Sales argues that the arbitration agreement covers the resolution of the claims Scott asserts against it for the problems he has encountered with his convertible. No transcript of the hearing on the motion to compel arbitration exists in the record. The court's order summarily denies the motion without elaboration. Because Tupelo Auto Sales has failed to demonstrate how the court erred in its arriving at its judgment, the judgment is affirmed and the case is remanded for further proceedings. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
