Foster v. Edwards
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-01683-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-03-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, P.J. Holding: Vacated. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Appeal of municipal authority's decision - Timeliness of appeal - Section 11-51-75 - Section 31-7-57 - Section 21-17-5(2)(g) Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-08-2009 Appealed from: Sunflower County Circuit Court Judge: Richard Smith Disposition: Summary Judgment Entered for Defendants Case Number: 2008-0467 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Thomas Foster, Clarence Powell, Roy L. Williams, Hue L. Fleming and City of Ruleville, Mississippi |
OTTOWA E. CARTER JR. |
|
|
| Appellee: | Shirley Jean Edwards, Hattie Robinson Jordan, James Johnson, Johnny Hill, Maro Robinson, and James Butch Jenkins, In Their Individual Capacities | DANIEL J. GRIFFITH | ||
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: | Appeal of municipal authority's decision - Timeliness of appeal - Section 11-51-75 - Section 31-7-57 - Section 21-17-5(2)(g) |
| Summary of the Facts: | A group of concerned citizens (the “Foster Group”) appeared before the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Ruleville, to contest garbage-service fee increases and the alleged use of city equipment to dig private graves. The City refused to take corrective action, and the Foster Group filed a complaint in chancery court. The Foster Group sued the mayor and members of the board in their individual and official capacities. The chancery court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Foster Group did not appeal the dismissal; rather, it filed a complaint in circuit court. In this suit, the Foster Group purported to act for the use of the City of Ruleville and sued the mayor and board only in their individual capacities. The City filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment. The circuit court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The Foster Group appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Foster Group failed to file its appeal within the time constraints of section 11-51-75, the exclusive avenue for appealing municipal-authority decisions. The rate increases complained of occurred in 2004 and 2005, but the Foster Group waited until 2007, years beyond the ten-day deadline, to file its first complaint. Therefore, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to grant summary judgment. Instead, the circuit court should have dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction. This is true even though the Foster Group proceeded under sections 31-7-57 and 21-17-5(2)(g) when it re-filed its suit in circuit court. Because the Foster Group failed to follow the procedural requirements of section 11-51-75, the chancery and circuit courts had no choice but to dismiss its claim for lack of jurisdiction. In a last ditch effort to salvage its claim and side-step the requirements of section 11-51-75, the Foster Group sued the mayor and board, individually, under sections 31-7-57 and 21-17-5(2)(g). Because the Foster Group’s action was, in reality, an appeal of a municipal authority’s decision, section 11-51-75 applied. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
