Bryan D. HOPSON, Decedent, By and Through his next of kin, Derek D. HOPSON v. Scotty MEREDITH, County Medical Examiner.
No. 97-CP-00704-SCT.
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
August 13, 1998.
719 So.2d 1176
SULLIVAN, Presiding Justice
Katherine B. Parker, for Appellee.
Before SULLIVAN, P.J., and McRAE and SMITH, JJ.
SULLIVAN, Presiding Justice, for the Court:
¶ 1. Bryan D. Hopson (hereinafter Bryan) was killed in an automobile accident on June 10, 1997, while riding in the front passenger seat of a car driven by Wyoman “Todd” Reed. Reed was charged with “felony leaving the scene of an accident in which a death was involved.” Coahoma County Medical Examiner Scotty Meredith ordered an autopsy on Bryan‘s body. Derrick D. Hopson, Bryan Hopson‘s next of kin, (hereinafter Hopson) filed a Petition for Temporary Restraining
STATEMENT OF THE LAW
I.
WHETHER THE CHANCERY COURT “LACKS AUTHORITY” TO PROHIBIT AN AUTOPSY UPON TRANSFER OF THE MATTER FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT WHICH HAS STATUTORY JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE MATTER.
¶ 2. Although both parties address this issue as a question of jurisdiction, Judge Ross‘s Order Denying Temporary Restraining Order and Other Relief does not state that the chancery court lacked jurisdiction over the case. Instead, Judge Ross made findings of fact relating to the necessity of an autopsy in the case and concluded “that this Court lacks the authority to issue the relief requested by Petitioner Derek D. Hopson.” We find that the chancery court denied the requested relief on the merits and not based upon a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. However, because both parties address the issue of jurisdiction in their briefs, a brief discussion of proper jurisdiction in this case is warranted.
¶ 3. The circuit court holds jurisdiction over family members’ petitions from the county medical examiner‘s decision to perform an autopsy.
The chancery court in addition to the full jurisdiction in all the matters and cases expressly conferred upon it by the constitution shall have jurisdiction of all cases transferred to it by the circuit court or remanded to it by the supreme court; and such further jurisdiction, as is, in this chapter or elsewhere, provided by law.
II.
WHETHER THE STATE MEDICAL EXAMINER OR THE COUNTY MEDICAL EXAMINER HAS “UNFETTERED DISCRETION” IN ORDERING AN AUTOPSY.
¶ 4. Hopson contends that the county medical examiner should not be allowed unfettered discretion in ordering autopsies, and that the chancery court therefore erred in refusing to hear Hopson‘s case.
Family members or others who disagree with the medical examiner‘s determination [to order an autopsy] shall be able to petition and present written argument to the State Medical Examiner for further review. If the petitioner still disagrees, he may petition the circuit court which may, in its discretion, hold a formal hearing.
¶ 5. The county medical examiner has the duty of ordering an autopsy in any case in which “it is advisable and in the public interest that an autopsy or other study be
CONCLUSION
¶ 6. The chancery court was compelled to rule on Hopson‘s petition upon transfer of the case from circuit court. We find that the Coahoma County Chancery Court exercised proper jurisdiction over the proceedings in this case. In light of the circumstances surrounding Bryan‘s death, Meredith properly ordered an autopsy of Bryan‘s body pursuant to statutory law. We hold that the chancery court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hopson‘s petition for a temporary restraining order.
¶ 7. AFFIRMED.
PRATHER, C.J., PITTMAN, P.J., and BANKS, McRAE, JAMES L. ROBERTS, Jr., SMITH, MILLS and WALLER, JJ., conc
