Gandy v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 47172
| Decision Date | 18 June 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 47172,47172 |
| Citation | 279 So.2d 648 |
| Parties | Evelyn GANDY, Commissioner of Insurance, and A. F. Summer, Attorney General, State of Mississippi, Complainants-Appellants, v. RESERVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Maurice R. Black, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for complainants-appellants.
Bacon & Smith, Jackson, for defendant-appellee.
The Commissioner of Insurance and the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi filed their bill of complaint against the Reserve Life Insurance Company praying for an injunction to restrain the defendant from increasing its premium rates on policies then in force and to order the reinstatement of policies terminated because of past rate increases. They also prayed for the refund of premiums in excess of past rates and that the defendant be enjoined from violating Chapter 473, Mississippi Laws of 1964, and for an accounting.
The defendant insurance company filed a demurrer to the bill of complaint and by it charged that the complainants were without lawful authority to maintain the suit, and additionally that the bill did not state a cause of action upon which relief could be granted. The Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County sustained the demurrer without stating its reasons therefor and the complainants, having declined to amend the bill, appeal here.
The appellants first challenge that part of the demurrer which charges they are without lawful authority to institute and maintain this suit and argue that under the applicable law they are so empowered. We are of the opinion the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Insurance, both separately and conjunctively, have the lawful authority to maintain this suit. The Attorney General is a constitutional officer possessed of all the power and authority inherited from the common law as well as that specifically conferred upon him by statute. This includes the right to institute, conduct and maintain all suits necessary for the enforcement of the laws of the state, preservation of order and the protection of public rights. State v. Warren,254 Miss. 293, 180 So.2d 293, 182 So.2d 234 (1965); Dunn Construction Co. v. Craig, 191 Miss. 682, 2 So.2d 166, 3 So.2d 834 (1941); and Capitol Stages v. State, 157 Miss. 576, 128 So. 759 (1930). Since the nature of the present bill is to maintain and preserve the lawfully enacted statutes of the state relating to insurance by restraining violations thereof, we conclude that the Attorney General is vested with the authority and, indeed, has the duty so to do.
The Insurance Commissioner similarly has the authority to enforce the statutory provisions relating to insurance by the institution of suit. Section 5624, Miss.Code 1942 (1956). Since each of these officials is empowered to bring suit, certainly there is no prohibition...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hood v. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals
...necessary for the enforcement of the laws of the State, preservation of order and the protection of public rights.Gandy v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 279 So.2d 648, 649 (Miss.1973); State ex rel. Allain v. Miss. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 418 So.2d 779, 781 (Miss.1982). Mississippi statutory law also s......
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Shevin v. Exxon Corp.
...226 S.W.2d 559 (1950); D'Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners, 11 Cal.3d 1, 112 Cal.Rptr. 786, 520 P.2d 10 (1974); Gandy v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 279 So.2d 648 (Miss.1973); Bonniwell v. Flanders, 62 N.W.2d 25 (N.D.1953); Agey v. American Liberty Pipe Line Co., 141 Tex. 379, 172 S.W.2d 972 (......
-
In re Standard
...public rights.’ ” Hood ex rel. Mississippi v. Microsoft Corp., 428 F.Supp.2d 537, 544–45 (S.D.Miss.2006) (quoting Gandy v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 279 So.2d 648, 649 (Miss.1973)); see, e.g., Miss.Code Ann. § 75–24–9 (granting the state attorney general exclusive authority to seek injunctive ......
-
In re Standard & Poor's Rating Agency Litig.
...public rights.’ ” Hood ex rel. Mississippi v. Microsoft Corp., 428 F.Supp.2d 537, 544–45 (S.D.Miss.2006) (quoting Gandy v. Reserve Life Ins. Co., 279 So.2d 648, 649 (Miss.1973) ); see, e.g., Miss.Code Ann. § 75–24–9 (granting the state attorney general exclusive authority to seek injunctive......