Anderson v. Britton & Koontz Bank, N.A.
55 So. 3d 1130
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Anderson sued B&K Bank and Redd Pest Control for wrongful disposal of her personal property after foreclosure, with the bank taking her belongings to a local dump.
- Redd Pest Control was substituted as a defendant for Erma Redd; the circuit court later substituted and answered for Redd Pest Control.
- B&K Bank moved for summary judgment on all claims; Redd Pest Control did not join or move for summary judgment.
- On October 1, 2009 the circuit court granted summary judgment to B&K Bank on all claims; a later November 9, 2009 order clarified the judgment applied only to B&K Bank.
- Anderson appealed October 1, 2009, but there was no Rule 54(b) certification; the court later clarified the scope, but did not enter final judgment.
- The court held the absence of 54(b) certification makes the order interlocutory and subject to dismissal for lack of a final appealable order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the partial grant of summary judgment is final and appealable | Anderson argues the order disposes of all issues against B&K Bank and is final. | B&K Bank argues no final judgment because 54(b) certification was not entered. | Not final; no 54(b) certification. |
| Whether Rule 54(b) certification was required for appeal | Anderson maintains the order should be appealable despite lack of express certification. | B&K Bank contends certification is required when fewer than all claims/parties are resolved. | Certification required; absence renders order interlocutory. |
| Whether the interlocutory order is subject to appeal without Rule 5 permission | Anderson seeks appellate review of interlocutory order in the absence of Rule 5 permission. | Appellate jurisdiction requires Rule 5 permission for interlocutory appeals. | Appellate jurisdiction not present; appeal dismissed for lack of permission. |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Cont’l Mineral Processing, 39 So.3d 998 (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (identifies jurisdictional issue for interlocutory appeals)
- Williams v. Delta Reg’l Med. Ctr., 740 So.2d 284 (Miss.1999) (discusses finality and Rule 54(b) prerequisites)
- Ind. Lumbermen’s Mut. Ins. Co. v. Curtis Mathes Mfg. Co., 456 So.2d 750 (Miss.1984) (two-step certification for Rule 54(b) finality)