In the Matter of the Estate of Anthony Walter Smith: W.E. Davis, Administrator v. Raymond Smith, No. 2009-CA-01838-SCT

In a Desoto County estate matter, the Supreme Court ruled that the estate was not entitled to prejudgment interest for the beneficiary’s share of estate taxes due where there existed a legitimate disagreement or dispute among the parties’ regarding each one’s tax liability and where the Estate had previously over estimated the amount due from the beneficiaries and where no bad faith was shown and the damages were unliquidated.

The Supreme Court also upheld a judgment against the estate for 24-months back rent where the administrator locked the beneficiary out of two farm buildings in which he owned a life estate for two years following a judgment reforming of title in which the Court determined the beneficiary had a life estate in the property.

The administrator’s obligation to protect the estate property expired when it was determined that the beneficiary had a life estate in the property. The administrator then had a new obligation to relinquish the property to the beneficiary.

Dooley et al. v. Byrd and Independent Roofing Systems, Inc., No. 2009-CA-01830

A Rankin County Circuit Court wrongful death case brought by beneficiaries of Jonathan Wayne Dooley, a two-year-old child who died when the vehicle his mother was driving  struck the rear end of a flatbed trailer that was hanging out of a driveway onto Highway 468. The jury’s verdict was for the defendants. Family conflict existed between the heirs and several heirs were represented at trial by separate attorneys.

The Supreme Court held that all wrongful-death claims must be litigated in one suit and upheld the trial court’s granting of a beneficiary’s joinder motion, stating that Miss. Code Ann. 11-7-13 also mandated that outcome.

Each wrongful-death beneficiary has a right to participate fully in all aspect of a trial. Joining Plaintiff had a right to question all witnesses (trial court had limited questioning to the first Plaintiff to file). Trial court committed reversible error in denying joining Plaintiff’s right to question all the witnesses.

Court also gave a lengthy analysis of jury instructions with regard to warning devices for trucks and buses as contemplated by Section 63-7-71 after upholding the trial court’s denial of Plaintiff’s jury instruction that misstated the law.

The Court did find error in granting jury instructions that removed fact issues from the jury’s consideration.

Rebuild America, Inc. v. Tim A. Norris, No. 2009-CT-01191-SCT

A Hinds County Chancery Court case setting aside a tax sale for failure to effect personal service pursuant to Section 27-43-3, which requires notice of the tax sale in three forms, personal service by summons, mail at his usual address, and by publication in a newspaper in county which land is located. All three requirements must be met. Under some circumstances where the clerk and sheriff have complied with their duties the tax sale may be confirmed even though the owner never received actual notice of the tax sale, however the sheriff has not complied with his duties in this case when he did not effect personal service despite knowing the owner’s home address.