Alston v. Pope, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-01760-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CA-01760-COA ; 2010-CT-01760-SCT ; 2010-CT-01760-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-28-2013 |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-31-2012 Opinion Author: Russell, J. Holding: Reversed and remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Section 11-11-3(4)(b) - Forum non conveniens - Written stipulation - Waive statute of limitations - Void order - M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4) - Reasonable time Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving, P.J., Barnes and Ishee, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, P.J., Maxwell and Fair, JJ. Dissenting Author : Roberts, J. Dissent Joined By : Carlton, J. Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY Writ of Certiorari: yes Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-30-2010 Appealed from: Wayne County Circuit Court Judge: Robert Bailey Disposition: DISMISSED Case Number: CV2007 209 B |
|
| Note: | The Court of Appeals was reversed on 3/28/2013. The SCT opinion can be found at http://courts.ms.gov/Images/Opinions/CO83418.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Shirley Alston and Robert Alston |
STEPHEN J. MAGGIO |
|
|
| Appellee: | Justin P. Pope and T. K. Stanley, Inc. | B. STEVENS HAZARD STEVEN JAMES GRIFFIN | ||
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: | Personal injury - Section 11-11-3(4)(b) - Forum non conveniens - Written stipulation - Waive statute of limitations - Void order - M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4) - Reasonable time |
| Summary of the Facts: | Shirley Alston was a passenger in a vehicle that collided with a vehicle driven by Justin Pope in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Pope was within the course and scope of his employment operating a vehicle owned by his employer, T.K. Stanley, Inc., at the time of the accident. Shirley and her husband, Robert, filed suit in the Circuit Court of Wayne County, Mississippi against Pope and T.K. Stanley, asserting negligence as their cause of action. One of the defendants in this case, Pope, resides in Mississippi, and T.K. Stanley, the other defendant, has its principal place of business in Mississippi. The defendants filed their motion to dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens. The circuit court entered its order and final judgment dismissing the case with prejudice. The Alstons re-filed their complaint in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment in the Alabama proceeding, asserting a statute-of-limitations defense. Thereafter, the Alstons filed their motion for relief from judgment in the Mississippi circuit court. The Alabama circuit court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment due to the running of Alabama’s two-year statute of limitations for negligence actions. The circuit court in Mississippi entered its judgment denying the Alstons’ motion for relief from judgment. The Alstons appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Section 11-11-3(4)(b) The Alstons argue that the circuit court erred in dismissing their Mississippi action because the defendants failed to file a written stipulation agreeing to waive any statute of limitations defense they might have had in Alabama pursuant to section 11-11-3(4)(b). The Mississippi Supreme Court has held that there is one classic instance when the doctrine of forum non conveniens will never be applied, and that is to dismiss a case if it is barred elsewhere by a statute of limitations, unless or until the defendant is willing to stipulate that he will waive the statute of limitation defense. Here, the defendants were required to file a written stipulation waiving the statute of limitations defense before the circuit court could dismiss the case on the ground of forum non conveniens. Section 11-11-3(4)(b) does not permit “oral” stipulations. To this day, the defendants have failed to file any such written waiver despite the statutory mandate as well as the defense counsel’s representation to the circuit court that they would do so on the day of the hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss. The defendants ignored the circuit court’s order, the plain language of the statute, and their own prior representations to the circuit court that they would file the written waiver. The overall effect of defendants’ actions was to prevent the Alstons from having their day in court on the merits. Therefore, the circuit court’s order is void because the court was without authority to dismiss the case under the doctrine of forum non conveniens prior to the defendant filing the stipulation of waiver. Issue 2: M.R.C.P. 60(b) motion M.R.C.P. 60(b)(4) provides for relief from a judgment or order on the basis that the judgment is void. A motion under subsection (4) of the rule must be filed “within a reasonable time.” For purposes of timeliness, the Court considers whether the opposing party has been prejudiced by the delay in seeking relief and whether there is good reason for the defaulting party’s failure to take appropriate actions sooner. In this case, the order and final judgment was entered by the circuit court on October 28, 2008, and the Alstons filed their motion for relief of judgment under Rule 60(b)(4) on May 12, 2010–approximately a year and a half later. Because the circuit court’s order and judgment entered on October 28, 2008, is void, the timeliness of the Alstons’ Rule 60 motion is now moot. Nevertheless, the Alstons’ motion was made within a reasonable time. The Alstons had good reason for not filing their motion sooner – they were waiting for the defendants to file the required written stipulation waiving any statute-of-limitations defense they might have in Alabama as required by statute. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
