12 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2013 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
King v. City of Jacksongreen2 sentences2000Id. at 1316. 1999Also in King v. City of Jackson, 667 So.2d 1315, 1316 (Miss.1995), this Court held that "as a matter of public policy the decision of a city whether to place traffic or warning signs is a governmental function, not proprietary." The outcome would be the same under the public policy function test. ¶ 13. | 3 | 4 |
Mohundro v. Alcorn Countygreen2 sentences2013Miss.Code Ann. § 65-21-1 (emphasis added); see Barr v. Hancock County, 950 So.2d 254, 258 (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (“the placement of a warning sign at the culvert would be considered a ministerial function, as set forth in Mississippi Code Annotated Section 65-21-1”); Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So.2d 848, 854 (Miss.1996) (“[t]he minimum requirements of the construction of culverts is specified in Miss. 2012Code Ann. § 65-21-1 (emphasis added); see Barr v. Hancock County, 950 So. 2d 254, 258 (Miss. 2007) (“the placement of a warning sign at the culvert would be considered a ministerial function, as set forth in Mississippi Code Annotated Section 65-21- 1”); Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So. 2d 848, 854 (Miss. 1996) (“[t]he minimum requirements of the construction of culverts is specified in Miss. | 2 | 2 |
Barr v. Hancock Countygreen2 sentences2013Miss.Code Ann. § 65-21-1 (emphasis added); see Barr v. Hancock County, 950 So.2d 254, 258 (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (“the placement of a warning sign at the culvert would be considered a ministerial function, as set forth in Mississippi Code Annotated Section 65-21-1”); Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So.2d 848, 854 (Miss.1996) (“[t]he minimum requirements of the construction of culverts is specified in Miss. 2012Code Ann. § 65-21-1 (emphasis added); see Barr v. Hancock County, 950 So. 2d 254, 258 (Miss. 2007) (“the placement of a warning sign at the culvert would be considered a ministerial function, as set forth in Mississippi Code Annotated Section 65-21- 1”); Mohundro v. Alcorn County, 675 So. 2d 848, 854 (Miss. 1996) (“[t]he minimum requirements of the construction of culverts is specified in Miss. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Gaubertgreen1 sentence2010See Dancy, 944 So. 2d at 18 (quoting Gaubert, 499 U.S. at 324 ) (When “established governmental policy, as expressed or implied by statute, regulation, or agency 6 In Jones, under the public-function test, this Court reasoned that the initial placement of warning signs at the planning stage involved policy considerations. | 1 | 1 |
Dancy v. EAST MISSISSIPPI STATE HOSP.green1 sentence2010See Dancy, 944 So. 2d at 18 (quoting Gaubert, 499 U.S. at 324 ) (When “established governmental policy, as expressed or implied by statute, regulation, or agency 6 In Jones, under the public-function test, this Court reasoned that the initial placement of warning signs at the planning stage involved policy considerations. | 1 | 1 |
Willing v. Estate of Benzgreen1 sentence2009Furthermore, the MTC argues that pursuant to Willing v. Estate of Benz, 958 So.2d 1240, 1254-55 (¶40) (Miss.Ct.App.2007), the MTC is exempt from liability because if one of the exemptions from liability found in section ll-46-9(l)(a-y) applies, it does not matter if the application of other exemptions in that section involve a question of material fact; summary judgment must be granted on the exemption established as a matter of law. ¶ 12. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Mississippi Dept. of Transp.
green
2 sentences2012Jones, 744 So.2d at 262-63 . 2010Jones, 744 So. 2d at 262-63 . | 2 | 2010–2012 |
Jones v. Panola County
green
2 sentences2003Id. at 777 . 2001Id. at 777 . | 2 | 2001–2003 |
Parker v. City of Philadelphia
green
2 sentences1999In Parker, 725 So.2d at 784 , this Court employed the governmental/proprietary function test in holding that the placement of warning signs on a road is a governmental function, and therefore immune from suit. 1998In Parker, 725 So. 2d at 784 , this Court employed the governmental/proprietary function test in holding that the placement of warning signs on a road is a governmental function, and therefore immune from suit. | 2 | 1998–1999 |
Leflore County v. Givens
red
1 sentence2007Recognizing that the placement of road signs has been found to be a discretionary duty, the Willings represent that "the placement of warning signs was in no way involved in this case." Citing Jones, Leflore County v. Givens, 754 So.2d 1223 (Miss.2000), and Mississippi Department of Transportation v. Cargile, 847 So.2d 258 (Miss.2003) for support, the Willings argue that the duty to warn is a separate and distinct duty that must be observed using ordinary care. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Mississippi Dept. of Transp. v. Cargile
green
1 sentence2007Recognizing that the placement of road signs has been found to be a discretionary duty, the Willings represent that "the placement of warning signs was in no way involved in this case." Citing Jones, Leflore County v. Givens, 754 So.2d 1223 (Miss.2000), and Mississippi Department of Transportation v. Cargile, 847 So.2d 258 (Miss.2003) for support, the Willings argue that the duty to warn is a separate and distinct duty that must be observed using ordinary care. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.