 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Alexander v. AC & S, Inc., NO. 2005-CA-01031-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of the nonresidents' asbestos injury suit without prejudice was correct as plaintiffs could not be joined under Miss. R. Civ. P. 20 unless their claims were connected by a distinct, litigable event and the causes of action had accrued outside the state. The dismissal did not violate the nonresident due process or equal protection rights.
|
|||||
| Dedeaux v. Pellerin Laundry, Inc., NO. 2003-CT-02408-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A new trial in a couple's action for damages from an automobile accident was granted as the trial court had procedurally barred them from protesting the legal sufficiency of the additurs, but Miss Code Ann. § 11-1-55 (Rev. 2002) was properly interpreted to require the court to offer the option of accepting the additur or a new trial to all parties.
|
|||||
| E. Miss. State Hosp. v. Adams, NO. 2005-IA-01899-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although state hospital and state mental health department properly and timely raised defenses of insufficient process and insufficient service of process under Miss. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(5) in their answer to a wrongful death action, their subsequent participation in litigation and their failure to pursue the defenses for two years waived the defenses.
|
|||||
| Estate of Kelly v. Cuevas, NO. 2005-CT-00011-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As decedent's will was not a foreign will, but a domestic will, sounding in Mississippi law, executed by the decedent in Mississippi where he had resided in a residential care facility for 25 years, and where he died, the trial court properly determined that it had subject matter jurisdiction to probate the will under Miss. Code Ann. § 91-7-1.
|
|||||
| James v. Miss. Bar, NO. 2005-BA-01622-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The imposition of a public reprimand against the attorney in her disciplinary proceeding was appropriate because she represented a party in a case related to one over which she formerly presided as a judge, which was in violation of Miss. R. Prof. Conduct 1.12(a).
|
|||||
| McGee v. State, NO. 2003-CT-01686-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant raised a Batson challenge during voir dire, the prosecutor gave gender as her race-neutral reason for striking an African-American juror. Allowing the State to exclude the potential juror based on his gender was a violation of the equal protection clause. The entire judicial process was infected, warranting a new trial.
|
|||||
| Natchez Elec. & Supply Co. v. Johnson, NO. 2004-CT-00155-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals erred in reversing jury's finding in favor of contractor in Miss. Code Ann. § 11-53-81 open account case and granting JNOV to supplier; supplier admitted at trial that invoices which formed basis of its suit were "in error" and fact supplier had already credited contractor $ 19,025 due to billing errors carried weight with jury.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
