Miss. Code Ann. » Miss. Code Ann. / Title 1 / Chapter 3
Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (2026)

Number, singular and plural

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Words used in the singular number only, either as descriptive of persons or things, shall extend to and embrace the plural number; and words used in the plural number shall extend to and embrace the singular number, except where a contrary intention is manifest.

Codes, 1857, ch. 66, art. 2; 1871, § 2931; 1880, § 11; 1892, § 1523; 1906, § 1604; Hemingway's 1917, § 1371; 1930, § 1395; 1942, § 703.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1995–2018 · leading case: Est. of Klaus v. Vicksburg Healthcare, 972 So. 2d 555 (Miss. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Est. of Klaus v. Vicksburg Healthcare, 972 So. 2d 555 (Miss. 2007). · cites it 18× “Miss.Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (Rev.2005). However, even if one reads the term "plaintiff" in its plural form, the plain meaning of Section 11-1-60(2)(a) is not that the noneconomic damages cap applies to all wrongful death beneficiaries in the aggregate.”
Am. Fam. Life Assurance of Columbus v. Ellison, 4 So. 3d 1049 (Miss. 2009). · cites it 4× “See Miss.Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (Rev.2005). [2] At the time, the venue statute included similar, but not identical, language to that in the current version of Mississippi Code 11-11-3(1)(a)-(b).”
Coleman v. State, 947 So. 2d 878 (Miss. 2006). · cites it 2× “Section 1-3-33. Miss.Code Ann. Section 97-23-19 fails to declare that a "private person" is to be used only in the singular.”
Champluvier v. State, 942 So. 2d 145 (Miss. 2006). · cites it 2× “" Miss.Code Ann. § 1-3-33. In this matter, no contrary intent was manifest.”
Mississippi Baptist Med. Ctr. v. Sylvia Dianne Harkins, 245 So. 3d 370 (Miss. 2018). · cites it 6× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (Rev. 2014). Therefore, as long as there is no manifest contrary intention, the statutory language also can be read as stating that the action “shall be brought only in the count[ies] in which the alleged act[s] or omission[s] occurred.”
Monica Ashbrook Darby v. Harold Combs, 229 So. 3d 108 (Miss. 2017). · cites it 3× “§ 1-3-33 (Rev. 2014). And we see no contrary intention manifested within the statute.”
Alta Klaus v. Vicksburg Healthcare, LLC (Miss. 2006). · cites it 16× “Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (Rev. 2005). However, even if one reads the term “plaintiff” in its plural form, the plain meaning of Section 11-1-60(2)(a) is not that the noneconomic damages cap applies to all wrongful death beneficiaries in the aggregate.”
Mississippi Dep't of Transp. v. Lori Allred (Miss. 2005). · cites it 10× “Section 1-3-33 which states, “[w]ords used in the singular number only, either as descriptive of persons or things, shall extend to and embrace the plural number; and words used in the plural number shall extend to and embrace the singular number, except where a contrary…”
James E. Mewbourn v. State of Mississippi (Miss. 1995). · cites it 6× “Both weapons were found at the same time in the defendant’s home, both in a front room and in the defendant’s bedroom.”
W. A. Coleman v. State of Mississippi (Miss. 2004). · cites it 2× “Section 1-3-33. Miss. Code Ann. Section 97-23-19 fails to declare that a “private person” is to be used only in the singular.”
Deborah Champluvier v. State of Mississippi (Miss. 2004). · cites it 2× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-33 . In this matter, no contrary intent was manifest.”
Am. Fam. Life Assurance of Columbus v. Virgil Ellison (Miss. 2007). · cites it 2× “See Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-33 (Rev. 2005). 3 Miss.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.