Sliman v. Nguyen


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2008-CA-00957-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2008-CA-00957-SCT
Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-19-2009
Opinion Author: Chandler, J.
Holding: Vacated and remanded
Additional Case Information: Topic: Personal injury - Appealability of grant of new trial - M.R.C.P. 54(a)
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Graves, P.JJ., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Kitchens and Pierce, JJ.
Procedural History: Bench Trial
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY
Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-01-2008
Appealed from: Jackson County Circuit Court
Judge: Kathy King Jackson
Disposition: The county court granted a new trial to Nguyen and the circuit court affirmed the county court's decision.
Case Number: CI 2005-00,230
  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: OLIVIA M. SLIMAN




 MYLES ETHAN SHARP



  
  • Appellant #1 Brief
    		•
    Appellee: MARY THI NGUYEN EDMUND J. WALKER  
    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: Personal injury - Appealability of grant of new trial - M.R.C.P. 54(a)
    Summary of the Facts: Mary Nguyen filed a complaint in the county court against Olivia Sliman in an attempt to recover compensation for injuries she had received as a result of a car accident. A trial was held, and the jury found that Sliman was not liable for Nguyen’s injuries. Nguyen then filed a motion for a new trial pursuant to M.R.C.P. 59, which was granted by the county court. Sliman appealed to circuit court, which affirmed the county court’s decision. Sliman appeals.
    Summary of Opinion Analysis: M.R.C.P. 54(a) defines a judgment as including a final decree and any order from which an appeal lies. The comments to Rule 54 provide that a judgment is the final determination of an action and thus has the effect of terminating the litigation. A trial court’s grant of a new trial is interlocutory in nature and generally not appealable, since it is not a final disposition or a final judgment of the case. Consequently, Sliman’s initial appeal from the county court to the circuit court on a matter that was interlocutory in nature was impermissible. Since the grant of a new trial was interlocutory in nature and not appealable to the circuit court, the county court retains jurisdiction for a new trial.


    Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court