Mississippi Supreme Court agrees to hear anti-concurrent cause case
A huge development: the Mississippi Supreme Court has agreed to hear the interlocutory appeal of Corban v. USAA, which I have written about here. Being as this case is about anti-concurrent cause, my favorite subject next to Scruggs and the Trailer Lawyers, I wish I had more time to write about this, but I don't. So this Anita Lee story will have to suffice for today.
Seriously, how can you "construe" it to mean anything other than what it says? That's what the Fifth Circuit did, and it's bound to be what the Mississippi Supreme Court will do. To do otherwise would be to invite U.S. Supreme Court review, which would delay Gulf Coast policyholders from getting what they're due (but not more) several more years.
On a somewhat related matter, the LA supreme Court decision on Landry vs LA Citizens was just released. I don't have the ruling yet, but will get circulated pretty quickly. This one has the potential to have more impact then Sher or any of the ACC rulings to date.
Be sure to note..."Justice Oliver Diaz Jr., who is from the Coast, presided on the three-judge panel that agreed to accept the case for the court."
Interesting..... The same person who said in a press release when announcing his reelection to the supreme court "...big insurance, big oil and other huge corporations who have no interest in the rights of individuals."
It is my opinion that if the MSSC rules on it, that would be the final say and that the US Supremes would have no jurisdiction to review the case. Is that correct, or is there some legal avenue that it could go up to the US court from the MSSC?
Perhaps tieing it into the NFIP could give it SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States) jurisdiction since the NFIP is a Federal Program. I'm thinking that determining who has to cover what and if a case can be made for the NFIP to cover this then it would seem to stand to reason the SCOTUS could have jurisdiction.
There will be no SCOTUS review of this case. No jurisdiction in any form. It will end with the MSSC.
It will be interesting to see if they rule prior to the end of the year elections. I wouldn't count on it.
Randy, thanks for your input. I wasn't sure if SCOTUS could have jurisdiction but I was simply stating the only possible way it might have been able to but I admit it was a stretch.
The writ of certiorari hasn't been suspended, has it?
Article I, Section 10: "No state shall ... pass any law ... impairing the obligation of contracts ..." and U.S. Supreme Court Rule 10(b), Considerations Governing Review of Certiorari: "a state court of last resort has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of another state court of last resort or a United States court of appeals" would appear to me to combine in a manner that would make a grant of the writ likely if the Mississippi Supreme Court were to construe or interpret the ACC differently from decisions upon the same issue that have been issued by their brothers and sisters on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Supremes review if conflict among the circuits, not if a circuit rules contrary to a state supreme court on a matter of state law. As long as MS Sup Ct rules only on state law, it's final.
Don't NFIP claims pose a federal question?