Thompson v. True Temper Sports, Inc.
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-01351-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-15-2011 Opinion Author: Maxwell, J. Holding: Dismissed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Alienation of affection - Finality of judgment - M.R.C.P. 54(b) - M.R.A.P. 5 Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Russell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Myers, J. Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS - OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-16-2010 Appealed from: Monroe County Circuit Court Judge: Thomas J. Gardner Disposition: DISMISSED THOMPSON’S ALIENATIONOF-AFFECTION CLAIMS AGAINST TRUE TEMPER Case Number: CV10-005-GM |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Homer D. Thompson, III |
JEFFERY M. NAVARRO |
|
|
| Appellee: | True Temper Sports, Inc. a/k/a True Temper Corporation | SHERYL BEY | ||
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: | Alienation of affection - Finality of judgment - M.R.C.P. 54(b) - M.R.A.P. 5 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Homer Thompson III filed alienation-of-affection claims against True Temper Sports, Inc., the employer of his wife and her alleged paramour, Stephen M. Brown. The circuit judge dismissed the claim against True Temper. Brown remains a defendant. Thompson appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Thompson argues his claim against True Temper should survive dismissal under M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) because he met the minimal pleading requirements of both: placing True Temper “on reasonable notice of the claims against it,” and demonstrating a cognizable action “upon which, under some set of facts, he might prevail.” Neither party raises the finality and appealability of the court’s final order dismissing True Temper under M.R.C.P. 54(b). When all the issues in a case or claims against all the parties are not resolved in a judgment, no appeal of right can be taken. This is a multiple-party, multiple-claim action governed by Rule 54(b). The circuit court’s judgment does not adjudicate Thompson’s alienation-of-affections claim against Brown. And while Rule 12(b)(6) allows dismissal of specific claims or parties, it must be read in conjunction with Rule 54(b), which provides a grant of partial dismissal is interlocutory without a Rule 54(b) certification. Here, the judgment was not certified as final under Rule 54(b). Without this Rule 54(b) certification, the judgment Thompson attempts to appeal is interlocutory. An interlocutory order is only appealable if the Mississippi Supreme Court grants permission under M.R.A.P. 5. Thompson neither sought nor was afforded permission under Rule 5 to proceed with an interlocutory appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
