Salts, et al. v. Gulf Nat'l Life Ins. Co., et al.
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-00021-SCT Linked Case(s): 2001-CA-00021-SCT ; 2001-CA-00021-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-06-2004 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Dismissal of action - Failure to comply with order - M.R.C.P. 37(b)(2)(c) Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Cobb, P.J., and Easley, J. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, Graves and Randolph, JJ. Dissenting Author : Dickinson, J. Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-01-2000 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: L. Breland Hilburn Disposition: Dismissed the action. Case Number: 251-96-630CIV |
|
| Consolidated: 2002-CA-01697-SCT Michael Salts, Alice Marie Salts and Salts Funeral Home, Inc. v. Gulf National Life Insurance Company, Phillip Duncan, Stan Howell, William McDonald and Prentiss Funeral Directors, Inc. d/b/a Booneville Funeral Home; Hinds Circuit Court 1st District; LC Case #: 251-96-630 CIV; Ruling Date: 09/12/2002; Ruling Judge: Bobby DeLaughter | ||
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Michael Salts, Alice Marie Salts and Salts Funeral Home, Inc. |
K. DAVID SAWYER
SCOTT WATSON WEATHERLY, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | Gulf National Life Insurance Company, Selected Funeral Insurance Company, Jeremiah O'Keefe, Estate of James C. Maxey, Booneville Funeral Home, Phillip Duncan, Stan Howell and William McDonald | MICHAEL A. HEILMAN CHRISTOPHER THOMAS GRAHAM MARC A. BIGGERS |
|
|
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: | Contract - Dismissal of action - Failure to comply with order - M.R.C.P. 37(b)(2)(c) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Michael and Alice Marie Salts and Salts Funeral Home, Inc., filed a lawsuit against Gulf National Life Insurance Co., Phillip Duncan, Stan Howell, William McDonald and Prentiss Funeral Directors, Inc. d/b/a Booneville Funeral Home, alleging that they denied the exclusivity of an agreement between the parties and entered into conflicting contracts with others. An order of dismissal was eventually entered in favor of some of the defendants, and the plaintiffs appealed. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as not being properly before the Court since all defendants had not been dismissed. Gulf National Life Insurance Company filed a Motion for Clarification and Entry of Final Order of Dismissal in the circuit court on the ground that the plaintiffs had failed to cooperate in the discovery of this case. The judge entered a final judgment dismissing, with prejudice, all of the plaintiffs' claims against all of the defendants. The plaintiffs appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The plaintiffs argue that the court abused its discretion in dismissing their action with prejudice against Gulf National and the other defendants, because the order of the trial court did not indicate that lesser sanctions were ever considered and Gulf National was not prejudiced in any way by the plaintiffs continuing the scheduled depositions. Pursuant to M.R.C.P. 37(b)(2)(c), a judge may, in appropriate cases, impose the sanction of dismissing the action or proceeding. However, in deciding to impose a drastic sanction as dismissal, the defendant's own dilatory conduct may become a relevant and mitigating factor if deemed outside the realm of reasonableness and acceptability. Dismissal is proper when the failure to comply with the court's order results from wilfulness or bad faith, and not from the inability to comply. Here, the plaintiffs filed their initial complaint against Gulf National and other defendants in 1996. After the court was made aware of the problems with scheduling depositions, it entered an order setting the depositions of the plaintiffs for February 2, 2000. Whether it was their decision or on advice from their attorneys, the plaintiffs chose to disregard the order and did not submit themselves for their scheduled depositions. This was a willful failure to comply with the court's order, and the defendants' trial preparation has been substantially prejudiced. Therefore, dismissal was proper. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
