essential elements claim in Mississippi

2024The opponent, “meanwhile, ‘carries the burden of 5 producing sufficient evidence of the essential elements of her claim at the summary- judgment stage, as she would carry the burden of production at trial.’” Id. (quoting Karpinsky, 109 So. 3d at 89 ). ¶13.

2024The opponent, “meanwhile, ‘carries the burden of 5 producing sufficient evidence of the essential elements of her claim at the summary- judgment stage, as she would carry the burden of production at trial.’” Id. (quoting Karpinsky, 109 So. 3d at 89 ). ¶13.

2016Dickinson v. Vanderburg, 141 So.3d 455, 457 (¶4) (Miss.

2016Dickinson v. Vanderburg, 141 So.3d 455, 457 (¶ 4) (Miss.Ct.App.2014) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).

2001As Justice Bowling observed in dissent in Robinson in response to similar contortions to "save" a conviction, our task should not be colored by our view whether the accused appellant is in fact guilty or innocent. 434 So.2d at 211 (Bowling, J., dissenting).

1997As Justice Bowling observed in dissent in Robinson in response to similar contortions to "save" a conviction, our task should not be colored by our view whether the accused appellant is in fact guilty or innocent. 434 So. 2d at 211 (Bowling, J., dissenting).

2001The majority tacitly approves the very stratagem that this Court admonished against in Wadford v. State, 385 So.2d 951, 954 (Miss. 1980) where, in holding that the State was required to offer an instruction negating self-defense where the evidence raised the issue, the Court cautioned that "[t]his is not to suggest that, where a defendant is, on facts in evidence, entitled to a self defense instruction, the State may preempt the subject and cut him off by obtaining an instruction of its own setting forth the essential elements of that defense." ¶ 28.

1997The majority tacitly approves the very stratagem that this Court admonished against in Wadford v. State, 385 So. 2d 951, 954 (Miss. 1980) where, in holding that the State was required to offer an instruction negating self-defense where the evidence raised the issue, the Court cautioned that "[t]his is not to suggest that, where a defendant is, on facts in evidence, entitled to a self defense instruction, the State may preempt the subject and cut him off by obtaining an instruction of its own setting forth the essential elements of that defense." ¶28.

2014The supreme court again clarified that “while [defendants carry the initial burden of persuading the trial judge that no issue of material fact exists and that they are entitled to summary judgment based upon the established facts, [the plaintiff] carries the burden of producing sufficient evidence of the essential elements of her claim at the summary-judgment stage, as she would carry the burden of production at trial.” Id. at (¶ 13).

2014Wall Oil Co., 970 So.2d 127, 132 (¶ 17) (Miss.2007).) The supreme court again clarified that “while [defendants carry the initial burden of persuading the trial judge that no issue of material fact exists and that they are entitled to summary judgment based upon the established facts, [the plaintiff] carries the burden of producing sufficient evidence of the essential elements of her claim at the summary-judgment stage, as she would carry the burden of production at trial.” Id. at (¶ 13).

2025Rainer, 282 So. 3d at 755 (¶16) (quoting Scales, 988 So. 2d at 433 (¶17)). “[T]he burden then shifted to [Johnson] to come forth with sworn expert testimony” that the alleged breach of the standard of care proximately caused his injuries.

2024Under the MTCA, Berry was required to prove that the officers acted with reckless disregard, meaning “a conscious indifference to consequences, amounting almost to a willingness that harm should follow.” Durn, 861 So. 2d at 995 (¶10).

2016As the supreme court has consistently held, “Mere general allegations which do not reveal detailed and precise facts will not prevent the award of summary judgment.” Buckel, 47 So.3d at 153 (¶ 10) (quoting Brown v. Credit Ctr., Inc., 444 So.2d 358, 362 (Miss. 1983)).

2016As the supreme court has consistently held, “Mere general allegations which do not reveal detailed and precise facts will not prevent the award of summary judgment.” Buckel, 47 So.3d at 153 (¶ 10) (quoting Brown v. Credit Ctr., Inc., 444 So.2d 358, 362 (Miss. 1983)).

2016“For example, a challenge to an indictment for failure to charge the essential elements of a criminal offense affects a fundamental right, and may not be waived.” Ross v. State, 954 So.2d 968, 1015 (¶ 126) (Miss. 2007) (citing Jefferson v. State, 556 So.2d 1016, 1019 (Miss. 1989) (noting the essential-elements exception to the general rule that guilty pleas waive defects in the indictment)).

2016“For example, a challenge to an indictment for failure to charge the essential elements of a criminal offense affects a fundamental right, and may not be waived.” Ross v. State, 954 So. 2d 968, 1015 (¶ 126) (Miss. 2007) (citing 14 Jefferson v. State, 556 So. 2d 1016, 1019 (Miss. 1989) (noting the essential-elements exception to the general rule that guilty pleas waive defects in the indictment)).

2016“For example, a challenge to an indictment for failure to charge the essential elements of a criminal offense affects a fundamental right, and may not be waived.” Ross v. State, 954 So.2d 968, 1015 (¶ 126) (Miss. 2007) (citing Jefferson v. State, 556 So.2d 1016, 1019 (Miss. 1989) (noting the essential-elements exception to the general rule that guilty pleas waive defects in the indictment)).

2016“For example, a challenge to an indictment for failure to charge the essential elements of a criminal offense affects a fundamental right, and may not be waived.” Ross v. State, 954 So. 2d 968, 1015 (¶ 126) (Miss. 2007) (citing 14 Jefferson v. State, 556 So. 2d 1016, 1019 (Miss. 1989) (noting the essential-elements exception to the general rule that guilty pleas waive defects in the indictment)).

2016Neilson v. Dawson, 155 So.3d 920, 923 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2014) (quoting Karpinsky v. Am.