Legal Opinion · Concurrence

American Family Life Assurance of Columbus v. Ellison

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 2009No. 2007-IA-01610-SCTPublished

1Concurrence

GRAVES, Presiding Justice,

Specially Concurring.

¶ 16. Today the majority reaches a conclusion that is consistent with Mississippi Code Section 11-11-3 and this Court’s pri- or interpretations of that statute. However, because the majority’s decision fails to address the relevant legal precedent, I must specially concur. Since the venue statute was amended relatively recently, there are only a few cases from this Court regarding its interpretation. Most pertinent to today’s decision are this Court’s decisions in Baptist Memorial Hospital-DeSoto, Inc. v. Bailey, 919 So.2d 1 (Miss.2005), and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Capital City Ins. v. GB" Boots" SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Medical Assur. Co. of Mississippi v. MyersMississippi Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Baptist Memorial Hospital-DeSoto, Inc. v. BaileyMississippi Supreme Court · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API