Hubbard v. Bancorpsouth Bank, 135 So. 3d 882

Hubbards took a first mortgage from Trustmark and a later second mortgage from BancorpSouth on the same residence; both notes were later in default.
Trustmark (first-lien holder) foreclosed and sold the property on April 7, 2011; BancorpSouth did not foreclose and received no proceeds.
BancorpSouth sued the Hubbards on February 5, 2013 for amounts due under the second-note (21 months after foreclosure).
Hubbards asserted an affirmative defense that the suit was time-barred by the one-year statute in Miss. Code § 15-1-23 (post-foreclosure limitation).
The DeSoto County Circuit Court granted BancorpSouth judgment on the pleadings, applying the three-year catchall statute (§ 15-1-49); Hubbards appealed.
The Supreme Court affirmed judgment but held the correct limitations period for a nonforeclosing lender’s suit on a promissory note is six years under § 75-3-118, not three or one year.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Which statute of limitations governs BancorpSouth’s suit on the unpaid promissory note?	BancorpSouth: six-year limitations under § 75-3-118 for notes payable at a definite time.	Hubbards: one-year post-foreclosure limitation under § 15-1-23 applies to the second note.	The one-year statute applies only to foreclosing lenders; the six-year § 75-3-118 governs nonforeclosing lenders’ suits; three-year § 15-1-49 is a catchall and not controlling.
Did the trial court err by applying § 15-1-49 (three-year catchall)?	BancorpSouth: § 15-1-49 is inapplicable where a specific statute (§ 75-3-118) governs.	Hubbards: § 15-1-49 could control if other statutes don’t apply.	Trial court erred in reasoning but not in result; case was timely under either § 15-1-49 or § 75-3-118.
Does § 15-1-23 bar suits by nonforeclosing lienholders after foreclosure by another lender?	BancorpSouth: no; § 15-1-23 targets the foreclosing mortgagee.	Hubbards: codification broadened § 15-1-23 to encompass notes secured by property that was foreclosed, regardless of claimant.	Court follows Lewis: § 15-1-23 applies only to the foreclosing mortgagee; nonforeclosing creditors are not bound by the one-year limit.
Was judgment on the pleadings appropriate?	BancorpSouth: yes; statute of limitations does not bar the claim.	Hubbards: no; claim time-barred.	Yes; judgment affirmed because suit was timely under § 75-3-118.

Lewis v. Simpson, 176 Miss. 123, 167 So. 780 (Miss. 1936) (one-year post-foreclosure statute applies to the foreclosing mortgagee, not nonforeclosing creditors)
Jordan v. BancorpSouth Bank, 964 So.2d 1205 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (suits on unpaid promissory notes governed by § 75-3-118 six-year period)
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. King, 921 So.2d 268 (Miss. 2005) (de novo review standard for judgment on the pleadings)