Entergy Mississippi, Inc. v. Richardson
134 So. 3d 287
| Miss. | 2014Background
- Feb. 2001 accident involved a truck owned by Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
- Feb. 2004 Richardson filed tort action against Entergy and the truck driver.
- Discovery occurred; 2012 docket call warned dismissal for lack of substantial activity for 12 months.
- Richardson or counsel failed to appear; court dismissed for failure to prosecute (no defense motion).
- >10 days later Richardson moved to reinstate; court granted, finding dilatory behavior by all parties and no timely scheduling actions.
- Entergy appealed arguing no valid Rule 60(b) grounds and statute of limitations; Richardson argued Rule 60(b)(6) discretion; court ultimately held dismissal proper but reinstatement improper; reversed and case dismissed without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the motion to reinstate was barred by the statute of limitations | Richardson argues Rule 60(b) grounds permit reinstatement despite Knight. | Entergy argues Knight bars reinstatement when dismissed for lack of prosecution. | Motion not barred by statute of limitations. |
| Whether valid Rule 60(b) grounds existed to justify reinstatement | Richardson relied on Rule 60(b)(6) grounds. | No valid Rule 60(b) grounds were shown. | No extraordinary grounds; reinstatement improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knight v. Knight, 85 So.3d 832 (Miss. 2012) (statute tolling not applied to new action dismissal, equitable considerations noted)
- King v. Lujan, 646 P.2d 1243 (N.M. 1982) (tolling concerns under Rule 60(b) context; avoid indefinite refiling)
- Meiboom v. Watson, 994 P.2d 1154 (N.M. 2000) (Rule 1-060(B) reinstate context; equitable relief limits discussed)
- Cucos, Inc. v. McDaniel, 938 So.2d 238 (Miss. 2006) (right result for wrong reason; Rule 60(b) labeling issues)
- Stringfellow v. Stringfellow, 451 So.2d 219 (Miss. 1984) (Rule 60(b) relief requires extraordinary circumstances; not mere relitigation)