367 So.3d 151
Miss.2023Background
- James Hal Ross created a revocable trust (2000) providing for a marital trust (for Suzanne) and a credit trust (for his three sons); Ross died in 2003 and the estate closed in 2005.
- Trustmark was named trustee but never acted; Pinnacle later served as trustee; Suzanne was executrix and retained or transferred substantial trust/estate assets.
- Ross’s sons sought to reopen the estate (2013) and later sued (2016/2019 amended) alleging trust mismanagement, improper sales/transfers, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, unjust enrichment, and related claims.
- Defendants moved to dismiss on statute-of-limitations grounds; the chancery court granted dismissal applying the general three-year limitations period; the Court of Appeals reversed in part, applying a ten-year limitations period to some claims and finding a factual dispute about one son’s mental incapacity.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve (1) whether the Court of Appeals erred by deciding statutes not raised below and (2) whether the son Matthew’s mental disability tolled the limitations period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Court of Appeals could apply 10-year statutes (§§15-1-7, 15-1-39) when those statutes were not raised in chancery | Ross sons argued ten-year statutes apply because claims seek recovery of land and assert trust-related causes | Defendants argued the 10‑year statutes were never pled below and are waived; appellate courts cannot consider new issues | Court: appellate consideration of statutes not raised below was error; issue is waived; Court of Appeals reversed on that ground and chancery dismissal reinstated as to waiver |
| Whether Matthew’s mental disability tolled the statute of limitations under §15-1-59 | Ross sons: Matthew suffers lifelong autism/intellectual disability and cannot manage ordinary affairs, so tolling applies | Defendants: evidence is conclusory and insufficient; chancery correctly found no genuine factual dispute | Court: evidence created genuine issue of material fact about unsoundness of mind; affirmed Court of Appeals on tolling and remanded to chancery to apply tolling to claims |
| Whether the chancery court correctly found insufficient evidence of Matthew’s incapacity | Ross sons relied on medical affidavits, prior conservatorship findings, and physicians’ certificates | Defendants: affidavits are broad/conclusory under Stroud; burden not met | Court: affidavits and documentary evidence sufficed to create a triable factual issue; chancery’s finding reversed in part and remanded |
| Whether the ten-year statutes should be applied to any claims on remand | Ross sons pressed the ten‑year statutes on appeal for the first time | Defendants: application of ten‑year statutes was not pleaded below and thus procedurally barred | Court: Court of Appeals erred to decide ten‑year issue sua sponte; Supreme Court reversed that portion but remanded to chancery to consider ten‑year applicability consistent with tolling analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Conservatorship of Melson, 809 So. 2d 647 (Miss. 2002) (sets test for "unsoundness of mind" tolling: inability to manage ordinary affairs)
- In re Estate of Miller v. Miller, 409 So. 2d 715 (Miss. 1982) (party cannot invoke a statute not pleaded or applicable)
- Stowe v. Edwards, 331 So. 3d 24 (Miss. Ct. App. 2021) (issues not raised in trial court are waived on appeal)
- Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Halliburton Co., 826 So. 2d 1206 (Miss. 2001) (standard of review: motions to dismiss/summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- Stroud v. Progressive Gulf Ins. Co., 239 So. 3d 516 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017) (affidavits must show particular facts, not mere conclusory assertions)
- Gordon v. Wall (In re Will of Waller), 273 So. 3d 717 (Miss. 2019) (trial court cannot be put in error on matters not presented to it)