Hudson v. Gulf Refining Co.

• Decision Date: 12 May 1947
• Docket Number: 36406.
• Citation: 30 So.2d 421,202 Miss. 331
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: HUDSON et al. v. GULF REFINING CO. et al.

30 So.2d 421

202 Miss. 331

HUDSON et al. v. GULF REFINING CO. et al.

No. 36406.

Supreme Court of Mississippi

May 12, 1947

Lamar Easterling, Lester C. Franklin, George E Shaw, and Robert E. Perry, all of Jackson, and Cameron &amp Wills, of Meridian, for appellant.

Hathorn & Hathorn, of Hattiesburg, C. C. Richmond, of Jackson Wilbourn, Miller & Wilbourn, of Meridian, Wells, Wells Newman & Thomas and Stevens, Stevens & Cannada, all of Jackson, Buchanan & Harper and Welch, Cooper and Welch, all of Laurel, Green & Green, of Jackson, Beard & Pack and A. S. Scott, all of Laurel, I. W. Coleman, of Jackson, and John E. Green, Jr., of Houston, Tex., for appellee.

GRIFFITH Justice.

This case was submitted to Division B of this Court on March 24, 1947, and was decided by that Division on April 21, 1947. 30 So.2d 66. Within the time allowed, a suggestion of error was filed, and at the same time this motion that the case be transferred to be heard on the suggestion of error by the Court in banc. Motions by any of the parties to transfer from a Division to the Court in banc have never heretofore been entertained, and this for obvious reasons. The only methods by which a case in a division may be transferred to the full court are those set forth in the amendment to the Constitution of 1890, now known as Section 149A of the Constitution, Vol. 1, Code 1942, pp. 221, 222, in addition to which a division, upon its own motion, but never on the motion of a party litigant, when the division deems it expedient or proper to do so, may take a case in that division into the Court in banc. These are matters of internal administration by the Court with which parties have no litigious interest, and they will not be heard on the subject either by the Court in banc or by Divisions, or by application to any individual Judge, else the Court might be flooded with motions and applications of that sort.

When one of the Judges of a division is disqualified in a particular case a litigant may suggest to the presiding judge that for that reason, and for that reason alone, it should be transferred to the other division, and this is sometimes allowed, although not as a matter of right.

The Court in banc takes notice of the present motion because, and because only, of the following ground assigned therein, quoting it:

'This Court has been sitting in banc and hearing all cases presented for a number of years prior to the month in which this case was submitted and no minute entry was made by the Court creating divisions as the Court is now constituted, or...