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 partDickinson, Presiding Justice

¶ 50. The Mississippi wrongful-death statute13 authorizes several categories of persons-including “interested parties” — to file suit. This Court has clearly held that the deceased’s heirs under the laws of intestate succession qualify as “interested parties.”14 But today, the majority says a devisee under a will is not an “interested party” because (according to the majority) a “will has no legal effect and confers no rights or authority until it is probated.” Because the majority is not correct on this point, I concur only in part and in result.

¶ 51. There is very little practical…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Long v. McKinneyMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Burley Ex Rel. Hill v. DouglasMississippi Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Partee v. KortrechtMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
  4. Beach v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API