Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 41-75-23 (2026)

Appeal from denial, suspension or revocation of license; procedure

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any applicant or licensee aggrieved by the decision of the licensing agency after a hearing, may within thirty (30) days after the mailing or serving of notice of the decision as provided in Section 43-11-11, Mississippi Code of 1972, file a notice of appeal to the chancery court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County or in the chancery court of the county in which the institution is located or proposed to be located. Such appeal shall state briefly the nature of the proceedings before the licensing agency and shall specify the order complained of. Any person or entity whose rights may be materially affected by the action of the licensing agency may appear and become a party, or the court may, upon motion, order that any such person or entity be joined as a necessary party. Upon filing of the appeal, the clerk of the chancery court shall serve notice on the licensing agency, whereupon the licensing agency shall, within sixty (60) days or such additional time as the court may allow from the service of such notice, certify with the court a copy of the record and decision, including the transcript of the hearings on which the decision is based. No new or additional evidence shall be introduced in court; the case shall be determined upon the record certified to the court. The court may sustain or dismiss the appeal, modify or vacate the order complained of in whole or in part, as the case may be; but in case the order is wholly or partly vacated, the court may also, in its discretion, remand the matter to the licensing agency for such further proceedings, not inconsistent with the court's order, as, in the opinion of the court, justice may require. The order may not be vacated or set aside, either in whole or in part, except for errors of law, unless the court finds that the order of the licensing agency is not supported by substantial evidence, is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, is in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the licensing agency or violates any vested constitutional rights of any party involved in the appeal. Pending final disposition of the matter, the status quo of the applicant or licensee shall be preserved, except as the court otherwise orders in the public interest. Rules with respect to court costs in other cases in chancery shall apply equally to cases hereunder. Appeals in accordance with law may be had to the Supreme Court of the State of Mississippi from any final judgment of the chancery court.

Laws, 1983, ch. 433, § 12; Laws, 1986, ch. 437, § 27, eff. 7/1/1986.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1995–2013 · leading case: Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Fordice, 716 So. 2d 645 (Miss. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Fordice, 716 So. 2d 645 (Miss. 1998). · cites it 4× “" Miss. Code Ann. § 41-75-11 (1993). In the event of an adverse ruling, § 43-11-23 provides for an appeal to the chancery court pursuant to *662 Miss.”

Jackson Women's Health Org. v. Currier, 940 F. Supp. 2d 416 (S.D. Miss. 2013). · cites it 2× “Nonetheless, the State contends that no irreparable harm would flow from that ruling until the Clinic fully exhausts its judicial appeals, presumably to the United States Supreme Court.”

Jackson Women's Health Org. v. Currier, 878 F. Supp. 2d 714 (S.D. Miss. 2012). · cites it 10× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 41-75-23 . Finally, section 41-75-26 criminalizes operation of an abortion clinic out of compliance with the licensing requirements and provides a civil remedy for injunctive relief against violations of the abortion licensing law: any violation of any…”

Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Kirk Fordice (Miss. 1995). · cites it 4× “" Miss. Code Ann. § 41-75-11 (1993). In the event of an adverse ruling, § 43-11-23 provides for an appeal to the chancery court pursuant to 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.