Clark v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Clark v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.

166 So. 3d 32, 2013 Miss. LEXIS 134, 2013 WL 776735

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 28, 2013

DocketNo. 2009-CT-00554-SCT

StatusPublished

This text of 166 So. 3d 32 (Clark v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clark v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., 166 So. 3d 32, 2013 Miss. LEXIS 134, 2013 WL 776735 (Mich. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

MICHAEL K. RANDOLPH, Presiding Justice,

for the Court.

This matter is before the Court en banc on the Court’s own motion. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed by counsel for Appellants was granted by order of this Court entered on September 6, 2012. Upon further consideration, the Court finds that there is no need for further review, and that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari should be dismisséd.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 17(f) of the Mississippi Rules of Appellate Procedure, that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed by counsel for Appellants is dismissed.

SO ORDERED.

AGREE: DICKINSON AND RANDOLPH, P.JJ., LAMAR, PIERCE, KING AND COLEMAN, JJ. CHANDLER, J., OBJECTS TO THE ORDER WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN STATEMENT JOINED BY KITCHENS, J. WALLER, C.J., NOT PARTICIPATING.

CHANDLER, Justice,

objecting to the order with separate written statement:

¶ 1. I would not dismiss the Petition for Writ of Certiorari. I believe the law is clear that the trial judge must be present at all times during the trial that the jury is receiving evidence. Because that was not done in this case, I would reverse and remand for a new trial.

KITCHENS, J, JOINS THIS SEPARATE WRITTEN STATEMENT.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI