Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Department of Human Services v. Moore

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 1994No. 92-CA-0629Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

DAN M. LEE,

Presiding Justice, concurring in part, dissenting in part:

I concur with parts L, II., and V. of the majority’s opinion. However, with regard to parts III. and IV. of that opinion, I respectfully dissent.

The majority correctly states in the introductory portion of its opinion that, “[e]vi-dence presented at trial concerning the relationship between Milton and Pattie is in obvious conflict.” It is unclear which specific testimony adduced at trial, concerning Pat-tie’s alleged relationship(s) with other men, ' which troubles the majority. Because of the conflicting evidence presented…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Catholic Diocese of Natchez-Jackson v. JaquithMississippi Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Copiah Dairies, Inc. v. AddkisonMississippi Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Ball v. SloanMississippi Supreme Court · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API