Hopkins v. City of Mendenhall
2013 Miss. App. LEXIS 42
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Church petitioned to close East Court Street; City adopted Ordinance 244 closing the street; Hopkins appealed to circuit court which upheld the ordinance; record lacked findings or reasons for the City’s decision; on appeal, court reversed and remanded for factual findings supporting the City’s public-good basis.
- April 6, 2010 meeting accepted petition and authorized public hearing; April 26, 2010 public hearing held with proponents and opponents; June 1, 2010 Board adopted Ordinance 244 closing the street between East and Oak Streets; minutes and bill of exceptions lacked supporting discussion or testimony.
- Ordinance 244 contains only conclusory findings; the court held statutory requirements require a public-good finding and compensation to abutting landowners, but the record lacked those findings.
- Court concluded it cannot review the City’s decision without factual findings; reversed circuit court and remanded for underlying findings.
- The opinion discusses that there is no petition or hearing requirement before closing, but mandates public-need-based findings and compensation, which were missing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petition form deficiencies void the action | Hopkins argues petition/formal defects void the action | City contends petition valid and proper | Partially determined: court found lack of factual findings but did not definitively void petition form. |
| Whether City had authority to accept petition on April 6, 2010 | Hopkins contends lack of authority or improper process | City argues statutory power to close streets exists | Court requires factual basis; authority not dispositive without findings. |
| Whether April 26, 2010 hearing was valid given lack of findings | Hopkins asserts hearing insufficient without findings | City asserts hearing complied with process | Hearing proceedings insufficient without supporting findings; remand for findings. |
| Whether closing the street was for the public good with compensation to abutting landowners | Hopkins claims not shown and violates public-use requirements | City says closes for public convenience with alternatives available | Court held the record lacked factual basis to determine public-good and compensation compliance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mill Creek Props., Inc. v. City of Columbia, 944 So.2d 67 (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (requires public good finding and compensation; may not close for private benefit)
- Precision Commc’ns, Inc. v. Hinds Cnty., 74 So.3d 366 (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (standards for reviewing municipal decisions; substantial evidence and arbitrary action)
- Puyper v. Pure Oil Co., 215 Miss. 121 (1952) (where authorities may act upon their own motion in the absence of a statute requiring petition)