Tommy Wright, Sr. d/b/a Affordable/Hi-Tech Enterprises, LLC v. Joseph Brisco, Kevin Winters and Warren County Missionary Baptist Association

CourtCourt of Appeals of Mississippi
DecidedJanuary 27, 2026
Docket2025-CP-00258-COA
StatusPublished

This text of Tommy Wright, Sr. d/b/a Affordable/Hi-Tech Enterprises, LLC v. Joseph Brisco, Kevin Winters and Warren County Missionary Baptist Association (Tommy Wright, Sr. d/b/a Affordable/Hi-Tech Enterprises, LLC v. Joseph Brisco, Kevin Winters and Warren County Missionary Baptist Association) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tommy Wright, Sr. d/b/a Affordable/Hi-Tech Enterprises, LLC v. Joseph Brisco, Kevin Winters and Warren County Missionary Baptist Association, (Mich. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

NO. 2025-CP-00258-COA

TOMMY WRIGHT, SR. D/B/A APPELLANT AFFORDABLE/HI-TECH ENTERPRISES, LLC

v.

JOSEPH BRISCO, KEVIN WINTERS AND APPELLEES WARREN COUNTY MISSIONARY BAPTIST ASSOCIATION

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/28/2025 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. DEBRA MICHELLE GILES COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: WARREN COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: TOMMY WRIGHT SR. (PRO SE) ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES: KIMBERLY WALKER NAILOR NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - CONTRACT DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 01/27/2026 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:

BEFORE CARLTON, P.J., LAWRENCE AND LASSITTER ST. PÉ, JJ.

LASSITTER ST. PÉ, J., FOR THE COURT:

¶1. Tommy Wright agreed in a written contract to sell seven parcels of real property to

the Warren County Missionary Baptist Association (“the Association”) for $20,000. Wright

also agreed to remove a house from the property at 1416 Martin Luther King Boulevard in

Vicksburg and to grade the lot after removal.

¶2. At some point, the relationship between Wright and the Association broke down, and

Wright filed a complaint against the Association in the Warren County Chancery Court. The

Association counterclaimed against Wright, and the matter proceeded to a trial. Neither

pleading was included in the record on appeal. Following the trial, the chancellor denied Wright’s “petition for rescission” and ordered Wright to convey title to seven parcels of

property to the Association, to clear and grade the lot on one of the parcels, and to pay

attorney’s fees to the Association.

¶3. Wright timely appealed and presents three issues for our review, which we quote here:

(1) Did the trial court err in enforcing the contract due to procedural and substantive errors, including the conduct of an over-aggressive lawyer and a biased judge?

(2) Was the trial court’s finding that Wright’s trailer reduced the Association’s parking lot from twenty cars to two cars incorrect?

(3) Did the trial court improperly consider Wright’s medical condition, which was raised to ensure proceedings were not delayed or misinterpreted?

¶4. Wright’s brief contains no citations to the record or caselaw beyond mentioning two

case names without citation to the Southern Reporter or explanation of their holdings or

application to his appeal.1 The Association did not file an appellee’s brief.

¶5. Rule 28 of the Mississippi Rules of Appellate Procedure requires appellants to state

“the reasons for th[eir] contentions” and provide “citations to the authorities, statutes, and

parts of the record relied on” to support their arguments to the Court. M.R.A.P. 28(a)(7). Our

appellate courts have “consistently held that failure to cite any authority is a procedural bar,

and a reviewing court is under no obligation to consider the assignment” of error. Jones v.

Miss. Dep’t of Emp. Sec., 129 So. 3d 224, 225 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App. 2013). This rule applies

equally to pro se litigants, who “should be held to the same rules of procedure and

1 Wright states: “Relevant Mississippi case law supports the arguments for reversal. In Norman v. Anderson Reg’l Med. Ctr., the court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and the proper consideration of evidence. Additionally, the presumption of mental capacity and the burden of proof in such cases are well-established in Parks v. Parks.”

2 substantive law as represented parties.” Id. at (¶8).

¶6. “A trial court’s judgment is presumptively correct[,] and the appellant must

demonstrate error to this Court.” Jones v. Jones, 307 So. 3d 1229, 1231 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App.

2020). Wright wholly failed to demonstrate error to this Court by failing to provide citation

to relevant authorities or the parts of the record containing error.

¶7. Accordingly, the judgment of the chancery court is AFFIRMED.

BARNES, C.J., CARLTON AND WILSON, P.JJ., WESTBROOKS, McDONALD, LAWRENCE, McCARTY, EMFINGER AND WEDDLE, JJ., CONCUR.

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

Related

Jones v. Mississippi Department of Employment Security
129 So. 3d 224 (Court of Appeals of Mississippi, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Tommy Wright, Sr. d/b/a Affordable/Hi-Tech Enterprises, LLC v. Joseph Brisco, Kevin Winters and Warren County Missionary Baptist Association, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tommy-wright-sr-dba-affordablehi-tech-enterprises-llc-v-joseph-missctapp-2026.