John A. Brown v. Collections, Inc.
188 So. 3d 1171
| Miss. | 2016Background
- John A. Brown received inpatient treatment at Memorial Hospital at Gulfport in Aug. 2008 and incurred $45,074.05 in charges; he accepted an insurance check and did not pay the hospital. Collections, Inc. (assignee) sued Brown in Harrison County Court for unpaid charges.
- Brown answered, asserting a set-off and later sought leave to amend his answer to add a recoupment defense based on alleged malpractice and tortious conduct by hospital staff.
- The county court denied Brown’s motion to amend as time-barred and issued a "partial final judgment" purporting to certify the order under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).
- Brown appealed to the Circuit Court (rather than seeking interlocutory review in the Mississippi Supreme Court under M.R.A.P. 5); the circuit court reviewed de novo, affirmed the denial, and also entered a Rule 54(b) certification.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court found the county court’s order (1) did not decide a claim but only a defense, (2) improperly used Rule 54(b) to certify a ruling on a defense, and (3) was the subject of an improper interlocutory appeal to the circuit court rather than a Rule 5 petition to the Supreme Court—therefore it vacated the circuit-court judgment, dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remanded to county court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the county court’s denial of leave to amend to assert recoupment was appealable under M.R.C.P. 54(b) | Brown: the court’s Rule 54(b) certification made the denial immediately appealable | Collections: the order addressed only a defense and did not adjudicate a claim; Rule 54(b) inapplicable | Held: Not appealable under Rule 54(b); certification invalid because it disposed only of a defense, not a claim |
| Whether recoupment constitutes an independent claim or only a defensive claim | Brown: framed recoupment as defensive, not an offensive claim | Collections: recoupment is a defense and cannot be certified as a separate final claim | Held: Recoupment is a defense; Rule 54(b) cannot be used to appeal rulings that merely dispose of defenses |
| Whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal from county court | Brown: appealed to circuit court (argued appeal should be permitted despite procedural route) | Collections: interlocutory appeals from county court must be sought in the Supreme Court under M.R.A.P. 5/URCCC 4.06; circuit court lacked jurisdiction | Held: Circuit court lacked jurisdiction; interlocutory appeals from county court go to Supreme Court and require a Rule 5 petition |
| Whether failure to seek Rule 5 interlocutory permission to the Supreme Court was waivable by filing in circuit court | Brown: filing in circuit court should be excused; prior cases preserved issues despite procedural defects | Collections: Rule 5 timing is mandatory and non-waivable; Brown’s failure to petition the Supreme Court within 21 days was fatal | Held: Brown’s failure to file a Rule 5 petition within 21 days was not waived; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- M.W.F. v. D.D.F., 926 So. 2d 897 (Miss. 2006) (general rule that only final judgments are appealable)
- In re Estate of Lewis, 135 So. 3d 202 (Miss. Ct. App. 2014) (final-judgment definition and requirement to settle all issues)
- Maurer v. Boyd, 111 So. 3d 690 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (discussing finality requirement)
- Cox v. Howard, Weil, Labouisse, Friedrichs, Inc., 512 So. 2d 897 (Miss. 1987) (looking to federal precedent on Rule 54(b) analysis)
- Flynn & Emrich Co. v. Greenwood, 242 F.2d 737 (4th Cir. 1957) (Rule 54(b) cannot be used to appeal disposition of a defense)
- U.S. Plywood Corp. v. Hudson Lumber Co., 210 F.2d 462 (2d Cir. 1954) (dismissal where only a defense was adjudicated)
- Exxon Corp. v. Oxxford Clothes, Inc., 109 F.3d 1069 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 54(b) appropriate only when a cause of action is adjudicated)
- Hennepin Cty. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 587 F.2d 945 (8th Cir. 1978) (orders striking defenses are interlocutory and non-appealable)
- Smith v. Benedict, 279 F.2d 211 (7th Cir. 1960) (defining claim as cause of action for Rule 54(b) purposes)
- Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247 (1935) (recoupment arises from the transaction on which plaintiff’s action is grounded and is defensive)