Oral arg. – Miss.S.Ct. – May 25, 2016

At 10:00 the Court will hear Linde Health Care Staffing v. Claiborne County Hospital, a case involving the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

 Linde Health Care entered into a contract with Patient’s Choice Medical Center of Claiborne County, LLC,  to staff the Claiborne County Hospital.  When Patient’s Choice breached the contract by failing to pay, Linde Health Care invoked the arbitration procedures in the contract and was awarded a judgment of $182,849.73 plus pre and post judgment interest.    Linde Health Care then had the judgment confirmed in a Missouri Court.   Linde did not proceed against Patient’s Choice, however.  Linde proceeded  against Claiborne County Hospital. The County had to take over the hospital after Patient’s Choice breached the contract.

Thereafter, Linde Health Care sought to enforce the judgment in the Circuit Courts of Claiborne and Madison County.  CCH contested enforcement of the judgment on the grounds that the Hospital did not sign the contract with Linde.  Both courts agreed with CCH.  Linde Health Care argues that the Mississippi courts did not have the power to vacate the judgment of the Missouri Court  pursuant to the Full Faith and Credit Clause and that the Hospital’s sole method of attacking the arbitration award was via the provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act and the time for doing so had elapsed. CCH argued that the Mississippi courts did not set aside the award; rather, they refused to enforce it because CCH was not a proper party to the proceeding inasmuch as the contract was with Patient’s Choice.

Linde Health Care’s brief

Claiborne County Hospital’s brief

Linde Health Care’s reply

Watch the argument here


At 1:00 the Court will hear Henry Kinney v. Southern Mississippi Planning and Development District which raises the question of whether Planning and Development Districts are public agencies subject to public agency laws. 

Henry Kinney filed a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that the South Mississippi Planning and Development District is a public agency subject to the laws governing public agencies and, more specifically,  that the appointment of Leonard Bentz as the Exceutice Director  was invalid because it did not comply with the Open Meetings laws and that  he does not meet the qualifications for the position.  The Court granted summary judgment to SMPDD and Kinney appealed.

Henry Kinney’s brief

Intervenor’s Miss. Assoc. of Planning and Development’s brief 

S.M.P.D.D.’s brief

Kenney’s reply brief

Watch the argument here

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s