Fletcher v. Diamondhead Incorporators, 2011 Miss. LEXIS 517

Fletcher appeals a chancery-court order incorporating the City of Diamondhead, arguing lack of jurisdiction due to insufficient signatures, improper notice, denied cross-examination, and potential abuse of discretion in not ordering a new trial.
Chancery Court found jurisdiction met: petition satisfied Section 21-1-13 and notice requirements were met, and substantial evidence supported two-thirds of qualified electors signing.
The hearing proceeded after delays and multiple recusals, with Special Chancellor Middleton ultimately presiding, followed by Chancellor Bridges after Middleton’s death.
Fletcher challenged the two-thirds-signature calculation, notice timing after continuances, and the potential need for renotice; the court considered updated voter data and adjustments for deceased or moved residents.
Objectors who were pro se did not exercise cross-examination after testimony was tendered; the court did not violate due process regarding cross-examination.
The court concluded Bridges could decide without a new hearing under MRCP 63(b) and affirmed the final incorporation decree.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Two-thirds signature requirement met?	Fletcher asserts signatures fall short of two-thirds.	Incorporators contend updated data and adjustments show two-thirds.	Two-thirds requirement satisfied; petition jurisdiction affirmed.
Notice adequacy and renotice on continuance?	Fletcher argues renotice was required after continuance.	Original notice sufficed; continuance did not require renotice.	No renotice required; proper notice satisfied.
Right to cross-examine witnesses?	Objectors were denied cross-examination due to chancellor’s direction.	Pro se objectors had equal opportunity; they did not exercise it.	No due-process violation; cross-examination opportunity existed.
Second trial after death of Middleton?	Bridges should order a new trial due to missing witness weighing.	Under MRCP 63(b), successor could proceed without new hearing if capable.	No abuse of discretion; continuance authority valid.

Myrick v. Incorporation of Stringer, 336 So.2d 209 (Miss. 1976) (sets jurisdictional effect of signature requirement)
City of Jackson v. Byram Incorporators, 16 So.3d 662 (Miss. 2009) (review of petition sufficiency; manifest error standard)
City of Pascagoula v. Scheffer, 487 So.2d 196 (Miss. 1986) (two-thirds analysis; use of voter rolls and updates)
City of Ridgeland, 494 So.2d 348 (Miss. 1986) (two-thirds calculation method for annexations)
Norwood v. Extension of Boundaries of Itta Bena, 788 So.2d 747 (Miss. 2001) (notice requirements strict compliance; posting/publication)
In re Town of Mantachie, 685 So.2d 724 (Miss. 1996) (notice publication standards for incorporation proceedings)
In re City of Hattiesburg, 840 So.2d 69 (Miss. 2003) (renotice not required where due process satisfied by excess notice)
Pinecrest, LLC v. Harris, 40 So.3d 557 (Miss. 2010) (new-trial discretion when prior judge ordered new trial; distinguishable)
Bucket v. Chaney, 47 So.3d 148 (Miss. 2010) (pro se parties held to same procedural standards)
In re City Clinton, 955 So.2d 307 (Miss. 2007) (objectors’ rights and procedures in incorporation)