In re Dunn
| Docket Number: | 2010-CS-00323-SCT Linked Case(s): 2010-CS-00323-SCT ; 2010-CS-00323-SCT ; 2010-CS-00323-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-30-2010 Opinion Author: Kitchens, J. Holding: Sanctioned. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Omissions by circuit clerk - M.R.C.P. 77(d) Judge(s) Concurring: Carlson and Graves, P.JJ., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Chandler and Pierce, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Waller, C.J. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | IN RE: BARBARA DUNN, HINDS COUNTY
CIRCUIT CLERK |
C. R. McRAE |
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: | Omissions by circuit clerk - M.R.C.P. 77(d) |
| Summary of the Facts: | In February 2010, the Supreme Court granted petitions for interlocutory appeal in docket numbers 2009-IA-01939-SCT and 2009-IA-01940-SCT. In reviewing those petitions, the Court discovered that the Office of the Circuit Clerk of Hinds County had not fully complied with M.R.C.P. 77(d). The omissions by the clerk’s office were quite serious and potentially costly because they jeopardized the ability of several litigants to pursue interlocutory appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Rule 77(d) plainly requires that the circuit clerk serve notice of the entry of the orders upon all parties not in default. The circuit clerk candidly has acknowledged that no such notice was issued, other than to the plaintiff’s lawyer. The notices required by Rule 77(d) are mandatory, and they are indispensable to the right of parties to receive timely information from our state trial courts concerning significant judicial actions in civil matters in litigation. Although the clerk’s omissions are not intentional, they constitute neglect of duty, the seriousness of which is compounded by the fact that strikingly similar mistakes in the same office recently have been addressed by the Court. The clerk must pay the sum of $5,000, from her personal funds as sanctions for her failure to comply with Rule 77(d). If, on or before October 14, 2010, the clerk files a detailed statement explaining the practices and procedures she has implemented in her offices to ensure full compliance with Rule 77(d), and all other rules and statutes requiring her to provide notice to litigants and/or their attorneys, the Court will consider reducing the sanction, if it finds the clerk’s remedial measures to be sufficient. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
