City of Meridian Mississippi v. $104,960.00 U.S. CURRENCY, 2015-CT-00710-SCT

Background

On June 2, 2012, Meridian police stopped Maria Catalan, consented to search her 2003 Ford F-150, and found $104,690 hidden in a compartment; no drugs or criminal charges were filed.
The City of Meridian filed a civil forfeiture petition under Miss. Code Ann. §§ 41-29-153(a)(5) and (a)(7) seeking forfeiture of the currency and the truck.
Catalan moved to dismiss under M.R.C.P. 12(b)(6); the county court granted the motion and ordered return of the property. The circuit court and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Mississippi Supreme Court granted certiorari to review whether the petition satisfied Rule 8 notice-pleading and whether the trial court converted the motion into a Rule 56 summary-judgment proceeding by considering matters outside the pleadings without required notice.
The Supreme Court held the petition met Rule 8 notice-pleading requirements and found the county court relied on facts outside the pleadings (thus effectively converting the motion to summary judgment without the Rule 56 notice). The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (City)	Defendant's Argument (Catalan)	Held
Whether the forfeiture petition stated a claim under Rule 8 such that it survived a 12(b)(6) motion	Petition provided statutory basis, identified property, when/where seized, and alleged property was used or intended for use in violation of the Mississippi Controlled Substances Law — sufficient notice	Petition was conclusory and failed to plead facts showing use or intended use to facilitate drug offenses (an essential element of statutory forfeiture)	Court: Petition met Mississippi notice-pleading Rule 8 and could not be dismissed under 12(b)(6) at this stage
Whether the county court improperly relied on matters outside the pleadings when ruling on the 12(b)(6) and 12(c) motions	County court acted within scope of pleadings	County court used facts/evidence not in petition/answers (e.g., details of stop, search, disputed statements, discovery rulings)	Court: County court did consider matters outside pleadings, converting the motion into a Rule 56-type ruling without required notice; reversal and remand required
Whether conversion to summary judgment without notice violated procedural rules	Not applicable	Conversion requires at least ten days’ notice under Rule 56(c)	Court: Conversion occurred without required notice; proceedings must be reapportioned consistent with Rule 56
Standard for pleading sufficiency in Mississippi (procedural tension)	City relied on Mississippi’s notice-pleading regime and precedent permitting liberal pleading	Catalan urged stricter pleading requiring factual allegations of each element	Court avoided resolving whether to adopt Twombly/Iqbal federal plausibility standard; decided petition sufficient under existing Mississippi notice-pleading principles

Key Cases Cited

Jourdan River Estates, LLC v. Favre, 212 So. 3d 800 (Miss. 2015) (12(b)(6) legal-sufficiency standard and de novo review)
Rose v. Tullos, 994 So. 2d 734 (Miss. 2008) (dismissal under 12(b)(6) only where plaintiff cannot prevail under any set of facts)
J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc. v. Forrest Gen. Hosp., 34 So. 3d 1171 (Miss. 2010) (pleading survival standard discussion)
Children’s Med. Grp., P.A. v. Phillips, 940 So. 2d 931 (Miss. 2006) (Mississippi is a notice-pleading state; only reasonable notice required)
One Hundred Seven Thousand Dollars v. State ex rel. Harrison County Sheriff’s Dep’t, 643 So. 2d 917 (Miss. 1994) (civil forfeiture may be supported by circumstantial evidence)
United States v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $119,984.00, More or Less, 304 F.3d 165 (2d Cir. 2002) (discussing adverse inference from claimant’s Fifth Amendment silence in civil forfeiture)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (abrogating the extreme “no set of facts” Conley formulation; plausibility pleading standard)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (clarifying plausibility standard and distinguishing conclusions from factual allegations)
Penn Nat’l Gaming, Inc. v. Ratliff, 954 So. 2d 427 (Miss. 2007) (Mississippi cases requiring pleading of factual allegations for material elements)
Stanton & Associates, Inc. v. Bryant Constr. Co., 464 So. 2d 499 (Miss. 1985) (Mississippi adoption of the Conley “no set of facts” language)