Mahaffey v. Maner


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CA-00857-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-09-2010
Opinion Author: Roberts, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Real property - Amendment of complaint - M.R.C.P. 15(b) - Adverse possession
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Irving, J.
Procedural History: Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 04-27-2009
Appealed from: SCOTT COUNTY CHANCERY COURT
Judge: H. David Clark
Disposition: PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT DISMISSED AND PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CONFIRMED AS DESCRIBED IN RELEVANT DEEDS BASED ON DEFENDANTS’ ADVERSE POSSESSION OF PROPERTY AT ISSUE
Case Number: 2008-0274

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Mitchell Ryan Mahaffey




WILEY JOHNSON BARBOUR, RONALD HENRY PIERCE



 

Appellee: Shelby Maner and Bonnie Maner P. SHAWN HARRIS  

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: Real property - Amendment of complaint - M.R.C.P. 15(b) - Adverse possession

Summary of the Facts: Mitchell Mahaffey filed a complaint for ejectment and “confirmation of common boundary” naming Shelby Maner and Bonnie Maner as defendants. After Mahaffey presented his case-in-chief, he moved to amend his complaint to conform with the evidence presented at trial. The chancellor denied Mahaffey’s motion. The Maners moved for a directed verdict. The chancellor characterized the Maners’ motion as a motion to dismiss. Finding that the Maners had adversely possessed the property at issue, the chancellor granted the Maners’ motion. Mahaffey appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Mahaffey argues the chancery court erred when it denied his motion to amend his complaint to conform to the evidence. Mahaffey raised his motion immediately after he had rested his case-in-chief. Mahaffey originally sought to confirm his deed, and after presenting his evidence, he sought to completely abandon his initial theory and sought to adopt the opposite theory. A party is not entitled to an absolute right to amend pleadings under M.R.C.P. 15(b). Amendments are to be denied if allowing the amendment would prejudice the defendant. Mahaffey originally sought to confirm his deed, and later he sought to amend his complaint so he could argue for reformation of his deed. It would have prejudiced the Maners to allow Mahaffey to completely abandon his initial argument and adopt the alternative argument when the Maners had been preparing to rebut Mahaffey’s claim for approximately one year. Even if the chancery court would have allowed Mahaffey to amend his pleadings, that would not have changed the outcome of the litigation. The facts are clear from Mahaffey's own witnesses that the Maners met the standard of proof for adverse possession.


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