Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc. v. Blue, No. 45690
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | RODGERS; ETHRIDGE |
| Citation | 233 So.2d 127 |
| Docket Number | No. 45690 |
| Decision Date | 16 March 1970 |
| Parties | CHARLES F. HAYES & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. Harmon S. BLUE. |
Page 127
v.
Harmon S. BLUE.
Page 128
Boyd, Holifield & Harper, Laurel, for appellant.
A. S. Scott, Jr., Laurel, for appellee.
RODGERS, Justice.
This appeal arises from an action in nuisance in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial District of Jones County, Mississippi, for alleged damages sustained by appellee, Harmon S. Blue, through the breaking of the wall of a slush pit used in connection with the drilling and operation of an oil well on property, the surface of which was owned by appellee. The defendant below appeals from a jury verdict for plaintiff-appellee in the sum of $3,000.
No brief or other matter relating to the cause has been filed by the appellee in this case, though appellant filed a brief and certified that a true copy of the same was mailed, postage prepaid, United States mail, to the attorney for appellee on the 5th day of September, 1969. However, appellee's attorney has appeared and argued this case.
We have studiously considered the brief of the appellant, as well as the record, and we cannot affirm this case. We are of the opinion that this case is controlled by U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Company, et al. v. State of Mississippi for the Use and Benefit of Tompkins, 204 So.2d 852 (Miss.1967), wherein we held:
"The failure to file this brief (by the appellee) is tantamount to a confession of error, and will be accepted as such, and the judgment of the court below will be reversed, since an answer to the appellant's brief cannot be safely made by us, without our doing that which the appellee, by its attorney, should have done, i. e., brief the appellee's side of the case. This we are not called on to do, therefore the case falls within, and is governed by, W. T. Raleigh Co. v. Armstrong, 165 Miss. 380, 140 So. 527." (204 So.2d at 852, 853).
Moreover, this is the second appeal of this case to this Court. See: Blue v. Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc., 215 So.2d 426 (Miss.1968). In the first case we were of the opinion that the trial court should not have sustained a demurrer for the defendants. We differentiated between actions based upon negligence, trespass and nuisance. In Placid Oil Company v. Byrd, 217 So.2d 17 (Miss.1968), at page 18, we said that, where the minerals are owned by persons with the right of ingress other than the surface owners of land, '* * * In this situation each party is charged...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Muhammad v. Muhammad, No. 92-CA-470
...Price v. Price, 430 So.2d 848, 849 (Miss.1983); Green v. Green, 317 So.2d 392 (Miss.1975); Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127 (Miss.1970). Automatic reversal is not required, however; Robert's argument should at least create enough doubt in the judiciousness of the t......
-
Bolivar v. R & H Oil and Gas Co., Inc., Civ. A. No. E90-0094(L)
...well as a prerequisite to the imposition of liability for damages caused to the property. See Charles F. Hayes & Assoc., Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127, 128 (Miss.1970); Placid Oil Co. v. Byrd, 217 So.2d 17, 18 (Miss. 1968); Cities Serv. Oil Co. v. Corley, 197 So.2d 244, 246 (Miss.1967); see a......
-
First Mobile Home Corp. v. Little, No. 47458
...v. Rogers, 284 So.2d 304 (Miss.1973); Jackson v. Walker, 240 So.2d 606 (Miss.1970); Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127 The foregoing rule is a good rule and its purpose is, of course, to prevent this Court from having to brief a case for one of the litigants; but whe......
-
Reynolds v. Amerada Hess Corp., No. 1999-CA-00585-SCT.
...damage or use more of the land surface than is reasonably necessary in its mining operation. Charles F. Hayes & Assocs., Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127, 128 (Miss.1970) (collecting authorities). It is undisputed in this case that these rights were granted to Humble in the 1940 lease and that T......
-
Muhammad v. Muhammad, No. 92-CA-470
...Price v. Price, 430 So.2d 848, 849 (Miss.1983); Green v. Green, 317 So.2d 392 (Miss.1975); Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127 (Miss.1970). Automatic reversal is not required, however; Robert's argument should at least create enough doubt in the judiciousness of the t......
-
Bolivar v. R & H Oil and Gas Co., Inc., Civ. A. No. E90-0094(L)
...well as a prerequisite to the imposition of liability for damages caused to the property. See Charles F. Hayes & Assoc., Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127, 128 (Miss.1970); Placid Oil Co. v. Byrd, 217 So.2d 17, 18 (Miss. 1968); Cities Serv. Oil Co. v. Corley, 197 So.2d 244, 246 (Miss.1967); see a......
-
First Mobile Home Corp. v. Little, No. 47458
...v. Rogers, 284 So.2d 304 (Miss.1973); Jackson v. Walker, 240 So.2d 606 (Miss.1970); Charles F. Hayes & Associates, Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127 The foregoing rule is a good rule and its purpose is, of course, to prevent this Court from having to brief a case for one of the litigants; but whe......
-
Reynolds v. Amerada Hess Corp., No. 1999-CA-00585-SCT.
...damage or use more of the land surface than is reasonably necessary in its mining operation. Charles F. Hayes & Assocs., Inc. v. Blue, 233 So.2d 127, 128 (Miss.1970) (collecting authorities). It is undisputed in this case that these rights were granted to Humble in the 1940 lease and that T......