APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL
Transcription
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL
E-Filed Document Feb 2 2015 16:48:19 2012-CT-01793-SCT Pages: 9 IN THE SUPREME COURT COU RT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2010-CA-00307 CONSOLIDATED WITH 2012-CA-01793 2012-CA-O I 793 CHERRI C HERRI R. PORTER APPELLANT vs. VS. MAX MULLINS, MULLiNS, ST STATE ATE FARM FIRE AND AN D CASUALTY COMPANY C OMPANY AND AN D GRAN D CASINO OF MISSISSIPPI, INC. - BILOXI GRAND APPELLEE APP EAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT APPEAL OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI JUDGE LA WREN CE PAUL BOURGEOIS, JR. PRESIDING LAWRENCE APPELLANT'S SUI' SUPPLEMENT I' LEMENTAL AL BRIEF James Eldred Renfroe, RenfTOe, MSB 10096 Renfroe & & Perilloux, PLLC Attorney for Appellant/Plaintiff 648 Lakeland East Drive Ste A Flowood, MS 39232 Phone 601.932.1011 601.932. 10 II Phone 60 1.932.10 14 Facsimile: 601.932.1014 Email: jrenfroe@mslawfirm.biz IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2010-CA-00307 CONSOLIDATED WITH 2012-CA-01793 CHERRI R. PORTER APPELLANT vs. MAX MULLINS, STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY AND GRAND CASINO OF MISSISSIPPI, INC. - BILOXI APPELLEE APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARRISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI JUDGE LAWRENCE PAUL BOURGEOIS, JR. PRESIDING APPELLANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF James Eldred Renfroe, MSB 10096 Renfroe & Perilloux, PLLC Attorney for Appellant/Plaintiff 648 Lakeland East D1ive Ste A Flowood, MS 39232 Phone 601.932.l 011 Facsimile: 601.932.1014 Email: jrenfroe@mslawfirm.biz TA BLE OF CONTENTS Table of Authorities ........... . ........... .... .. . ..................... . . .. .. . III I. Supplemental Brief in Regard s to Grand Cas ino of Mi ssissippi , inc. - Biloxi ............. 1 n. Supplemental Briefin Regards lO Grand Casino of Mississippi, Inc. - Biloxi ............ 2 Conclusion ......... . ........ . .. . ... , ................................. . . . ..... 3 Cel1ificate of Service . . ..•... .. •.. . .. . ........•..... . .• .... .. •.. . .. . . .. .. ....... 5 II TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES : Bay Point High and DIY, LLC v. New Palace Casino, LLC 46 So.3d 821 (Miss.2010) ......................... . ....................... I COl'hem v. Uniled Services Alitomobile Association 20 So.3d 601 (Miss.2009) .......................... • ......•..... . ... ....... 2 Eli investments, LLC v. Silver Slipper Casino Venture, LLC 118 So. 3d 151 (Miss. 2013) ............................................... 1 J & W Foods Corp. v. Stale Farm MUll/allns. Co 723 So.2d 550, 552 (M iss. 1998) ................................. .. ......... 2 Shaw v. Shaw 603 So.2d 287, 292 (M iss. 1992) quot ing Estate a/Myers v. Myers, 498 So.2d 376, 378 (Miss. 1986) .......... ..... ... ... . I III L SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN REGARDS TO GRAND CAS INO OF MISSISSIPPI, INC.-BILOXI One of the paramou nt concerns this COUl1 should consider is that at the time of the hearing for the Grand Casino's Motion for Summary Judgment Eli investments did not exist. Eli Investments, LLC \I, Silver Slipper Casino Venture, LLC, 118 So.3d 15 1 (Miss. 2013) Cherri R. Porter (hereinafter Porter) correctly argues in her Petition for Certiorari that the Court should compare the geographic locations of the casino barges at issue. Grand Casino of Mississippi, Lnc.- Biloxi (hereinafter Grand Casino) rebutted this in their response with the assertion that " the Missi ssi ppi Supreme Court will not rev iew matters on appeal that were not rai sed at the trial level." Shcotl v. Shaw, 603 So.2d 287, 292 (Miss. 1992), quoting Es/Ctle of Myers v. Myers, 498 So.2d 376,378 (Miss. 1986). This argument fa ils in that the Trial COUl1 specifi call y stated that Porter's case is indistinguishable from BCIY Poin!. Bay Point High {lnd D,y, LLC v. New Palace Casino, LLC. 46 So.3d 821 (Miss.2010). At the time of the hearing, Act of God defense as raised by the Court only existed in relat ion to Katri na liti gatiol1lhrough Bay Point. Eli investments altered this as it specificall y changed the interpretation and in fact establi shed the locality of the cas ino being an important isslIe in regards to the Act of God defense. The Trial COLIrt only had at the time of the hearing Bay Poinr and as slIch, could not weigh it in regards to Eli inveslmenls. As poi nted out by this Court in Eli inveSlments, should the Plaintiff proffer a reasonable theory of neglect or more human interference, then such is prope r to be submined before a jury. P0l1er's expert specifi cally slaled that there were no annual structura l inspections perform ed on any marine structures including but not limited to, breasting dolphins, moo ring dolphins, - 1- bollards, monopoles, floating docks, cells and other mooring devices and that Grand Casino had no heavy storm mooring plan whic h is a dev iance of the customary practice. (R.93-99Case#20 12-CA-O 1793). The rebuttal to this by the Grand Casino is that they complied with the Gaming Commission's regulations, a fac t that in of itse lf is incorrect as the regulations are specific on the category for which the mooring should withstand a hurricane and with that category being greater than that of Katrina. II. SUPPLEMENTAL BRlEF IN REGARDS TO GRAND CASINO OF MISSISSIPPI, INC.-BILOXI In applying Corban v. United Servs. Auto. Ass '/1, the Court of Appeals fa iled to properly apply the standard for concurrent event as testimony proffered by Porter in regards to State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (here inafter State Farm) as testimony was unrefutted that Porter's home withstood the stonn surge, an excluded event, but not did not survive the striking by the barge which is covered 'LInder an al l inclusive policy. The unrebutted affidavit of Roy Carubba, PE ( R 434 ) speci fi cally states the home was destroyed by the barge and not by any other means. As acknowledged, the issue of the value of the home once it was destroyed by a covered peril is an issue that State Farm can present, but it shou ld be properly presented to ajury. State Farm argues in their response to the writ that the fact that the barge was sent by the storm surge makes it a non~covered peril. The prob lem with this logic is that the pol icy covers items striking the residence and does not contain the language of how the items were propelled. ( H. 462 ) This Court has repeated ly held Ihal insurance agreements are to be construed against the insured and any ambiguity is to be construed against the issuer of the po li cy. J&W Foods CO/po v. Slale Farm MUll/ai Ins. Co, 723 So.2d 550. 552 (Miss. I 998). The agreement (policy) -2- submitted by State Farm can not then be altered by such to deny coverage by adding a " but fo r" argument as propounded by State Faml in regards to the but for the storm surge. the barge wo uld not have struck the home. At best, the language constitutes an amb iguety and permits Porter to survive summary judgment. CON C LUSION As stated, Appellees assel1ion that the events and circ umstances that caused the destruction ofCherri R. Porter's home is not based upon applicable law. Grand Casino Mississippi Inc.· Biloxi reliance upon the "Act of God" theory is not j ust ified especially when taken into accmmt the factua l evidence pro ffered by Cherri R . Porter in regards to the inspection and maintenance of the moo rings and as well as the lack of heavy storm mooring plan. Eli Investments is directly on point to th is case. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company and Max Mullins proffered no defense or causation of the true source of the destruction, but only asserted that '-it must have happened because of the hurricane" type defense as well as proffering no expert as to the cause of the destruction. The fact of both these arguments fail to meet the requ ired standard for summal), j udgment and at bare minimum Cherri R. Porter has lodged enough of factual proof to render the true destruct ion a question for a jul)'. As such. Appellant requests that the summary j udgments granted in this be remanded fo r a trial by jul)'. -3- This the 2nd day of February 2015. J, . s Eldre Renfroe, MSB 10096 Re froe . erilloux, PLLC Att . Y for Appellant/Plaintiff 648 Lakeland East Dri ve Ste A Flowood, MS 39232 Phone 601.932.10 I I Facsimile: 601.932.1014 Email: jrcnfroe@msiawfirm.biz -4- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, James Eldred Renfroe, do hereby certify thal l have this date caused the above and foregoing to be filed with the Mississippi State Supreme COlin Clerk and have cause a copy of each to be mailed to the fo ll owing, first class mail , postage pre~paid. Han. John Kavanaugh Hon. Ricardo A. Woods Han. Kasee Sparks Heisterhagen Burr & Fonnan, LLP PO Box 2287 Mob ile AL 36652-2287 Attorneys for Grand Casino of Mississ ippi, Inc. - Biloxi Han. Vincent Castigiioia, Jr. Bryan, Nelson, Schroeder, Castigliola & Banahan, PLLC PO Drawer 1529 Pascagoula MS 39568 Attorneys for Stale Farm Fire and Casualty Company and Max Mullins I-Ion. Lawrence P. Bourgeois, .Ir. Circuit Court Judge Harrison County, Miss iss ippi PO Box 1461 Gultporl MS 39502-1461 Trial Judge This the 2"" day o f February 2015. -5-