Chen v. Shope, 2018-IA-01421-SCT
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | RANDOLPH, CHIEF JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT |
| Citation | 283 So.3d 97 |
| Parties | Dr. Timothy CHEN v. Daniel SHOPE |
| Docket Number | NO. 2018-IA-01421-SCT,2018-IA-01421-SCT |
| Decision Date | 12 September 2019 |
283 So.3d 97
Dr. Timothy CHEN
v.
Daniel SHOPE
NO. 2018-IA-01421-SCT
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
September 12, 2019
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: REX MORRIS SHANNON, III, EUGENE RANDOLPH NAYLOR, Jackson
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ABBY GALE ROBINSON, Jackson
BEFORE RANDOLPH, C.J., ISHEE AND GRIFFIS, JJ.
RANDOLPH, CHIEF JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:
¶1. This interlocutory appeal is taken from the trial court's denial of Dr. Timothy Chen's motion to transfer venue from Hinds County to Madison County and the denial of his motion to strike the affidavit of Daniel Shope. We find that the trial court abused its discretion in denying both motions, that the trial court's order should be reversed, and that this case should be remanded with instructions to transfer venue to the County Court of Madison County.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW
¶2. Shope filed his original complaint against Chen in the County Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, alleging that Chen "medically aided and contributed" to Shope's opioid drug dependency by prescribing Shope Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen and Tramadol after he was hospitalized for an opioid overdose. In his complaint, Shope admits that a separate doctor was the "initial tort feasor [sic]" and that Chen had exacerbated Shope's
injuries. Chen was the only defendant in the original complaint.
¶3. Chen immediately moved to transfer venue to Madison County because Chen only practiced in Madison County, where he saw Shope. In support of his motion, Chen filed an affidavit stating that
The only location where I ever saw Plaintiff Daniel Shope as a patient was at the Baptist Medical Clinic–Madison located at 401 Baptist Drive, Suite 104, Madison, Madison County, Mississippi, 39110.
In response, Shope filed his own affidavit which stated, in full,
1. My name is Daniel Shope. I am a citizen of Hinds County.
2. When I overdosed on Opioids, I went to the Baptist Hospital in Jackson.
3. The Baptist Hospital called Dr. Timothy Chen and asked him what to do for me. Dr. Chen told them to give me medicine and they did what he said and gave me the medicine.
4. All of this happened at Baptist Hospital in Jackson.
Chen moved to strike Shope's affidavit because of numerous legal deficiencies: (1) it was not made on personal knowledge, (2) it was predicated on inadmissible hearsay, (3) it was void of supporting foundational facts, and (4) it was void of evidence that Shope was competent to testify on the matters stated.
¶4. On the same day Chen filed his motion to transfer venue, Shope filed an amended complaint adding Mississippi Baptist Hospital (Baptist). Baptist moved for dismissal based on Shope's failure to provide presuit notice. In response, Shope argued that notice was provided to Baptist when he provided notice to one of its doctors—Chen. Alternatively, Shope moved to stay the case for thirty days in an attempt to cure his failure to give presuit notice.1 Later, Shope filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint "to resolve excusable neglect [Miss. R. Civ. P.] 6(b) defects" that would "dispose of all of Defendants' motions...." Baptist opposed Shope's motion to amend again because Shope had failed to provide the requisite presuit notice to Baptist Hospital, and the amendment of the complaint could not cure that failure. Baptist Hospital argued that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction and that its motion to dismiss should be granted.
¶5. After hearing all pending motions, the trial judge denied Chen's motion to transfer venue and motion to strike Shope's affidavit, granted Baptist Hospital's motion to dismiss, and dismissed without prejudice Shope's amended complaint.
¶6. Chen petitioned this Court for interlocutory review of the trial judge's denial of his motion to transfer and motion to strike Shope's affidavit. Chen's petition was granted.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
I. Whether the trial court erred by denying Chen's motion to strike Shope's affidavit.
II. Whether the trial court erred by denying Chen's motion to transfer venue.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶7. "The decision to deny or grant a motion for a change of venue lies within the discretion of the trial court."
Bayer Corp. v. Reed , 932 So....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Millsaps, 2017-CA-01380-COA
...where the general venue statute applies under which a party has the right to have its case tried in the proper venue. Chen v. Shope , 283 So. 3d 97, 101 (¶12) (Miss. 2019). Moreover, at the trial level, that party specifically moved for a transfer of the case from what we find was an improp......
-
Dalon v. MS HUD Ocean Springs LLC, 2018-IA-00594-SCT
...calls for administration "by the American Arbitration Association under its most recent version of its Commercial Dispute Resolution 283 So.3d 97 Procedures ...." Thus, if this Court grants the motion to compel and orders the case to arbitration, the AAA will administer the arbitration notw......
-
Unifund CCR Partners v. Jordan (In re Jordan), 2021-CA-00761-COA
...does not equate to the type of evidence required to call the ‘making of the arbitration agreement’ into question"); Chen v. Shope , 283 So. 3d 97, 100 (¶9) (Miss. 2019) (when a "conclusory, self-serving affidavit [was] unsupported by material facts" it was "insufficient to support his claim......
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Millsaps, 2017-CA-01380-COA
...where the general venue statute applies under which a party has the right to have its case tried in the proper venue. Chen v. Shope , 283 So. 3d 97, 101 (¶12) (Miss. 2019). Moreover, at the trial level, that party specifically moved for a transfer of the case from what we find was an improp......
-
Dalon v. MS HUD Ocean Springs LLC, 2018-IA-00594-SCT
...calls for administration "by the American Arbitration Association under its most recent version of its Commercial Dispute Resolution 283 So.3d 97 Procedures ...." Thus, if this Court grants the motion to compel and orders the case to arbitration, the AAA will administer the arbitration notw......
-
Unifund CCR Partners v. Jordan (In re Jordan), 2021-CA-00761-COA
...does not equate to the type of evidence required to call the ‘making of the arbitration agreement’ into question"); Chen v. Shope , 283 So. 3d 97, 100 (¶9) (Miss. 2019) (when a "conclusory, self-serving affidavit [was] unsupported by material facts" it was "insufficient to support his claim......