Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Clark Sand Co., Inc. v. Kelly

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 2011No. 2008-IA-01437-SCTPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKitchens, Justice

¶ 53. Because I would affirm the trial court’s denial of summary judgment in toto, I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part. First, I must disagree that David Bozeman’s claims in the prior McBride action are barred by the statute of limitations. Because the action brought by Ruby Kelley encompassed Bozeman’s previous claims, the saving statute preserved those so-called “survival-type” claims. I also would affirm the trial court’s finding that Ruby Kelley had standing to bring this wrongful death action as the decedent’s personal representative, and I would further affirm the trial…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Long v. McKinneyMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Cleveland v. MannMississippi Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Burley Ex Rel. Hill v. DouglasMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  4. DuPree v. CarrollMississippi Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Dailey v. HoustonMississippi Supreme Court · 1963

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API