State of Mississippi, by and through Michael Watson in his Official Capacity as Secretary of State and Trustee of the Public Tidelands Trust v. RW Development, LLC, The City of Biloxi, Mississippi and Harrison County, Mississippi, 357 So.3d 1028

Property dispute over the Veterans Avenue pier area in Biloxi: the land south of Highway 90 includes sand beach and submerged tidelands owned by the State as public trust tidelands.
Biloxi (City) and Harrison County approved an option/lease with RW Development, LLC to rebuild a public municipal pier and grant RW a nonexclusive lease/usage rights for adjacent development.
Secretary of State (State) sued, arguing Mississippi law requires a tidelands lease from the Secretary of State before development on public trust tidelands; chancery court denied the State relief and allowed the City/County/RW arrangement.
Chancery court held specific statutory grants (Ports & Harbors statutes and the Seawall Act) authorized the City and County to reclaim, use, and lease the subject property for public purposes and that the State was estopped from now insisting on a separate tidelands lease.
Supreme Court affirmed the chancery court: (1) Sections 59-15-1 and 59-7-405 authorize the City to lease the property for public pier purposes without a separate Secretary-of-State tidelands lease; and (2) the State is equitably estopped from demanding a lease here.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether RW must obtain a tidelands lease from the Secretary of State before building/leasing on the tidelands	State: Secretary of State has exclusive authority to lease state tidelands; any development requires a tidelands lease	City/County/RW: Specific statutory grants (Ports & Harbors statutes; Seawall Act) authorize reclamation/use and permit City/County to lease for public purposes without a separate Secretary-of-State lease	Held: No lease required here — specific statutes authorize City/County action and preclude need for redundant Secretary-of-State lease for this public-purpose pier
Whether the Secretary of State is estopped from now requiring a tidelands lease	State: The State cannot be estopped from asserting dominion over public lands; prior inaction does not create title or authority	City/County/RW: Longstanding practice of constructing municipal piers and the State’s prior acquiescence caused RW and others to rely to their detriment; equitable estoppel applies	Held: State is estopped — historical acquiescence and reliance support equitable estoppel against requiring a lease in this circumstance

Columbia Land Dev., LLC v. Sec’y of State, 868 So. 2d 1006 (Miss. 2004) (State holds title to public trust tidelands and Secretary of State acts as trustee)
United States v. Harrison Cnty., 399 F.2d 485 (5th Cir. 1968) (federal adjudication recognizing state ownership of the sand beach and vesting management powers in the county under the applicable statutes)
RW Dev., LLC v. Miss. Gaming Comm’n, 307 So. 3d 404 (Miss. 2020) (Court rejected RW’s claims that littoral rights or other arguments established ownership/lease rights to the sand beach for gaming-site purposes)
Bayview Land Ltd. v. State, 950 So. 2d 966 (Miss. 2007) (discusses circumstances under which equitable estoppel may be applied against the State)
Cinque Bambini P’ship v. State, 491 So. 2d 508 (Miss. 1986) (holds State’s title to public land cannot be lost by laches/adverse possession; estoppel against State is limited)
Miss. State Highway Comm’n v. Gilich, 609 So. 2d 367 (Miss. 1992) (interpreting Seawall Act authority of county supervisors to build/maintain shore protections)