Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Estate of Grantham
Decision Date | 03 March 2022 |
Docket Number | 2019-CT-00913-SCT |
Citation | 334 So.3d 85 |
Parties | GAMMA HEALTHCARE INC. and Employers Insurance Company of Wausau v. ESTATE OF Sharon Burrell GRANTHAM |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: M. REED MARTZ, D. BETH SMITH
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: STEVEN HISER FUNDERBURG
EN BANC.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
¶1.The Workers’ Compensation Commission and an Administrative Judge (AJ) had ordered Gamma Healthcare and Employers Insurance Company of Wausau (Employer/Carrier) to replace Sharon Burrell Grantham's septic and HVAC systems and to pay for insurance on a handicapped-accessible van.The Commission, sua sponte , issued a separate order sanctioning the Employer/Carrier for causing an unnecessary delay by appealing the AJ's order to the full Commission without reasonable grounds.The Employer/Carrier appealed.While this case was pending before the Court of Appeals, Sharon Grantham died.Thereafter, the Court of Appeals dismissed the case as moot.The Court of Appeals applied the general rule followed by federal courts by vacating the outstanding Commission and AJ orders.The appeals court reversed and rendered the Commission's sanctions order against the Employer/Carrier, determining that the Commission had abused its discretion by its imposition of the sanction, reasoning that the Employer/Carrier had a reasonable legal argument for its appeal.Grantham's estate filed a petition for a writ of certiorari , which this Court granted.
Allred v. Webb , 641 So. 2d 1218, 1220(Miss.1994)(quotingMonaghan v. Blue Bell, Inc. , 393 So. 2d 466, 466-67(Miss.1980) )."Thus, standing must exist when litigation is commenced and must continue through all subsequent stages of litigation, or the case will become moot."Frisby v. City of Gulfport(In re City of Biloxi) , 113 So. 3d 565, 572(Miss.2013).1"A case is moot if ‘a judgment on the merits ... would be of no practical benefit to the plaintiff or detriment to the defendant.’ "Id.(quotingGartrell v. Gartrell , 936 So. 2d 915, 916(Miss.2006) )."If an appeal involves questions about rights which no longer exist, the appeal will be dismissed."Gartrell , 936 So. 2d at 916(citingMcDaniel v. Hurt , 92 Miss. 197, 41 So. 381, 381(1906) ).In this case, Grantham's estate "concede[d] that Grantham's death abates the Employer/Carrier's obligations to replace the septic and HVAC system and pay insurance premiums."Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Est. of Grantham , No. 2019-WC-00913-COA, ––– So.3d ––––, ––––, 2020 WL 7040956, at *1(Miss. Ct. App.Dec. 1, 2020).In light of Grantham's untimely death and the concession by her estate, we agree with the Court of Appeals that this case is moot.
¶3.However, the main issue is not whether the case is moot.Rather it is whether the Court of Appeals erred by vacating the Commission's and the AJ's valid orders to replace the septic and HVAC systems in a case that became moot on appeal due to circumstances beyond the control of the parties.Additionally, did the court err by following federal vacatur law instead of existing Mississippi law?These are issues of first impression.We find that the Court of Appeals did not err and that the federal vacatur rule is appropriate.The Commission's orders were vacated properly.
¶4.Lastly, Grantham's estate challenges the appeals court's overturning of the Commission's sanctions award.We affirm the Court of Appeals’ reversing and rendering of the Commission's sanctions award.
¶5.The Court of Appeals related the facts as follows:
Id. , at –––– – ––––, 2020 WL 7040956 at *1-2(alterations in original)(footnote omitted).
¶6.On February 27, 2019, the Commission entered an order affirming the administrative judge's findings and denying the Employer/Carrier's motion.Id.In a separate, sua sponte order, the Commission sanctioned the Employer/Carrier "pursuant to its authority in 71-3-59 that the Employer/Carrier shall pay reasonable attorney's fees in the amount of $200.00 per hour for a total of 20 hours as a result of instituting an appeal without reasonable grounds and causing unnecessary delay in this matter."The Commission determined that the Employer/Carrier's appeal reviewing the AJ's order to replace the septic and HVAC systems was " ‘without reasonable grounds’ because there was no ‘medical evidence’ to dispute that...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Howard Indus. v. Hayes
... HOWARD INDUSTRIES, INC. APPELLANT/ CROSS-APPELLEE v. SELINA HAYES APPELLEE/ ... positions." Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Est. of ... Grantham , 334 So.3d ... ...
-
Virden v. Campbell Delong, LLP
... ... Co. v ... Fouche &Assocs. Inc. , 218 So.3d 1180, 1187 ... (¶20) (Miss. Ct. App ... advisory opinions." Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Est. of ... Grantham , 334 So.3d ... ...
-
Howard Indus., Inc. v. Hayes
...the opposing party. This and similar sanctions are "analogous to Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 11." Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Est. of Grantham, 334 So. 3d 85, 93-94 (Miss. 2022). ¶10. In imposing a $1,000 sanction on the employer, the AJ found as follows:The collective testimony and th......
-
Wilbourn v. Wilbourn
...to live. The physical custody provisions of the final judgment no longer have any real practical effect. See, e.g., Gamma Healthcare Inc. v. Est. of Grantham, 334 So. 3d 85, 87 (¶2) (Miss. 2022) ("A case is moot if a judgment on the merits would be of no practical benefit to the plaintiff o......