Speed v. Hosemann, et al.


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2011-CA-01106-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 09-08-2011
Opinion Author: Lamar, J.
Holding: VACATED AND DISMISSED

Additional Case Information: Topic: Injunctive relief - Eminent domain - Proposed initiative 31 - Pre-election review
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Dickinson, P.JJ., Randolph, Chandler and Pierce, JJ.
Judge(s) Concurring Separately: Chandler, J., Specially Concurs With Separate Written Opinion Joined by Waller, C.J., Dickinson, P.J., Randolph and Pierce, JJ.
Dissenting Author : King, J.
Dissent Joined By : Kitchens, J.
Procedural History: Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 07-29-2011
Appealed from: HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: Winston Kidd
Disposition: The trial judge both denied Speed’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and ruled on the merits, finding that Speed’s complaint should be dismissed with prejudice and ordering that Hosemann be allowed to proceed in placing Initiative 31 on the ballot.
Case Number: 251-11-473-CIV

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Leland Speed




LUTHER T. MUNFORD ROBERT GREGG MAYER FRED L. BANKS, JR. RONALD D. FARRIS



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief

  • Appellee: Delbert Hosemann, Secretary of State of Mississippi and David Waide OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: HAROLD EDWARD PIZZETTA, III SAM E. SCOTT  
    Appellee #2:  

    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: Injunctive relief - Eminent domain - Proposed initiative 31 - Pre-election review

    Summary of the Facts: David Waide filed an Initiative with Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, and Hosemann has approved it for placement on the November 2011 general election ballot. The Initiative – known as Initiative 31 – attempts to restrict the state’s power to transfer certain property to certain parties after taking it by eminent domain. Leland Speed filed a complaint against Hosemann, along with a Motion for Expedited Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, asking the court to declare Initiative 31 unconstitutional and to enjoin Hosemann from placing it on the ballot. Speed later filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The trial judge both denied Speed’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and ruled on the merits, finding that Speed’s complaint should be dismissed with prejudice and ordering that Hosemann be allowed to proceed in placing Initiative 31 on the ballot. Speed appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: The issue presented in this appeal, i.e., the constitutionality of proposed Initiative 31, is not ripe for adjudication by the Court, such that any opinion thereon would be improperly advisory. As it presently stands, Initiative 31 is proposed legislation put forth for public debate and discourse. It has not been put into force and effect in a way to injure the parties complaining. General challenges to an initiative’s substantive constitutionality, such as this one, are not justiciable before the initiative has been enacted by the electorate. While minimum constitutional and statutory requirements must be met before a measure is placed on the ballot, a pre-election review of an initiative is limited to matters of form, i.e., the sufficiency of signatures and/or the ballot title or summary.


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