Austin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-01656-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-01-2011 Opinion Author: Myers, P.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Employment - Unsworn responses to interrogatories - Causal relationship Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, P.J., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS-OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-21-2009 Appealed from: RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: SAMAC RICHARDSON Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS Case Number: 2007-157 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Marsha K. Austin |
E. MICHAEL MARKS, JULIE ANN EPPS |
||
| Appellee: | The State of Mississippi, Mississippi Department of Mental Health, Cheryl Phillips and James Chastain | LOUIS G. BAINE III, JAN F. GADOW, MICHELLE TOLLE HIGH, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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: | Employment - Unsworn responses to interrogatories - Causal relationship |
| Summary of the Facts: | Marsha Austin filed suit against the State of Mississippi, the Mississippi Department of Mental Health, and two MDMH employees, Cheryl Phillips and James Chastain, alleging that she had been fired for complaining about understaffing and falsification of medical records at the Mississippi State hospital at Whitfield, where she had worked as a nurse. MDMH denied the substance of Austin’s complaint, maintaining that she had been fired for falsifying a timecard. MDMH also raised various defenses, including sovereign immunity. The circuit court granted summary judgment to MDMH, and Austin appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The only discovery in this case was propounded by MDMH. In her response to the motion for summary judgment and her brief on appeal, Austin relies entirely on her responses to MDMH’s interrogatories as evidence to defeat summary judgment. However, Austin’s interrogatory responses, as they appear in the record, are unsworn. Unsworn responses to interrogatories are not competent evidence to oppose summary judgment. Austin argues that a genuine issue of material fact may be inferred from MDMH’s admissions in its answer. She notes that MDMH admitted that Austin had been employed as a nurse, had complained about understaffing on one occasion, and had been terminated. There is no evidence suggesting a causal relationship between the complaint and the termination; MDMH instead maintained that Austin was terminated for tardiness and falsifying a timecard. In fact, the allegation that Austin was terminated for complaining about understaffing was made in the complaint and specifically denied by MDMH in its answer. The record contains no competent evidence sufficient to support any of Austin’s alleged causes of action. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
