Vinod Khosla v. State of Mississippi

CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 22, 2019
Docket2017-IA-01637-SCT
StatusPublished

This text of Vinod Khosla v. State of Mississippi (Vinod Khosla v. State of Mississippi) 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
Vinod Khosla v. State of Mississippi, (Mich. 2019).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

NO. 2017-IA-01637-SCT

VINOD KHOSLA, KFT TRUST, VINOD KHOSLA, TRUSTEE, SAMIR KAUL, DENNIS CUNEO, VK SERVICES, LLC, KHOSLA VENTURES, LLC, KHOSLA VENTURES ASSOCIATES II, LLC, KHOSLA VENTURES II, L.P., KHOSLA VENTURES III, L.P., KHOSLA VENTURES ASSOCIATES III, LLC, FRED CANNON, CHRISTOPHER A. ARTZER, ANDRE DITSCH, JOHN HACSKAYLO, RALPH ALEXANDER, DR. WILLIAM ROACH AND GARY L. WHITLOCK

v.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI EX REL. JIM HOOD

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/06/2017 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WILLIAM A. GOWAN, JR. TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: WILLIAM M. QUINN, II W. THOMAS McCRANEY, III LINDSEY B. SILVER WILLIAM C. BRABEC MICHAEL G. BONGIORNO HIRAM RICHARD DAVIS, JR. PETER J. KOLOVOS LEAH N. LEDFORD KIP MENDRYGAL JAMES POTTER STREETMAN, III PAUL E. COGGINS J. DOUGLAS MINOR, JR. ALICIA N. NETTERVILLE DEAN KIEHL ROY D. CAMPBELL, III JAN NIELSEN LITTLE JUSTINA K. SESSIONS STEVEN P. RAGLAND MATTHEW WADE ALLEN LEONARD D. VAN SLYKE, JR. COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: J. DOUGLAS MINOR, JR. ROY D. CAMPBELL, III ALICIA N. NETTERVILLE JAN NIELSEN LITTLE STEVEN P. RAGLAND JUSTINA K. SESSIONS DEAN A. ZIEHL WILLIAM C. BRABEC H. RICHARD DAVIS MICHAEL G. BONGIORNO PETER J. KOLOVOS LINDSEY B. SILVER LEAH N. LEDFORD JAMES P. STREETMAN, III PAUL E. COGGINS KIP MENDRYGAL ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: WILLIAM M. QUINN II W. THOMAS McCRANEY III NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - INSURANCE DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED AND REMANDED - 08/22/2019 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED:

EN BANC.

KITCHENS, PRESIDING JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

¶1. This Court consolidated three cases from the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District

of Hinds County for purposes of interlocutory appeal.1 Circuit Court District Seven,

comprised of Hinds County only, is a multi-judge district. The three cases were assigned

1 (1) Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. State, No. 2017-IA-01554-SCT (Miss. Aug. 22, 2019) (Safeco); (2) Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. State, No. 2017-IA-01558-SCT (Miss. Aug. 22, 2019) (Liberty Mutual); (3) Vinod Khosla et al. v. State, No. 2017-IA-01637-SCT (Miss. Aug. 22, 2019) (Cannon). The parties refer to the third case as Cannon rather than Khosla because the original complaint in the underlying action was styled Hood ex rel. Mississippi v. Fred Cannon et al., No.: 15-CV-00017 (Hinds Cty. Circuit Court, 1st Jud. Dist., filed January 13, 2015) (Cannon).

2 randomly to circuit court judges under Uniform Civil Rule of Circuit and County Court

Practice 1.05A. The original assignments were as follows:

(1) Safeco - Circuit Court Judge William Gowan

(2) Liberty Mutual - Senior Circuit Court Judge Tomie Green

(3) Cannon - Circuit Court Judge William Gowan

With the approval of Judge Green and Judge Gowan, Safeco and Cannon were reassigned

or transferred to Judge Green’s docket. Safeco and Cannon objected to the reassignments,

arguing that neither Judge Green nor Judge Gowan had the authority to make the

reassignments. To the extent that a court is authorized to transfer or reassign cases for those

reasons the majority has established in Safeco, we hold in this case that the trial court acted

within its discretion in transferring the case to another judge in the same court district. This

Court now has rescinded the order of consolidation and has deconsolidated the cases.

Regarding this case, because the trial court was within its discretion to reassign the case, we

affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2. Defendants in this case are, inter alia, former officers, directors, employees, and

investors of KiOR Inc., a startup biofuels company. The State lent KiOR $75 million to

construct its first commercial-scale production facility in Columbus, Mississippi. The facility

was completed in 2012. Operations were suspended in early 2014, however, and KiOR filed

for bankruptcy later that year.

3 ¶3. In January 2015, the State sued Defendants, alleging fraudulent and negligent

misrepresentation, fraudulent and negligent omission, civil conspiracy, aiding and abetting,

and respondeat superior. The case was assigned randomly to Judge Gowan. He ordered the

complaint to be sealed, so the record is sealed for this interlocutory appeal as well. Several

amended complaints and motions to dismiss were filed afterward.

¶4. On November 3, 2017—three weeks after briefing had ended on the last motion to

dismiss—Judge Gowan sua sponte reassigned the case to Judge Green. The order reads, in

toto,

ORDER TRANSFERRING/REASSIGNING CASE

The undersigned Circuit Court Judge was assigned the above-styled cause. Upon agreement of the undersigned judge and Senior Judge, Tomie Green, the above-styled cause is hereby reassigned to Judge Green for judicial economy.

¶5. Judge Green agreed to the reassignment.

¶6. In response to the order, Defendants petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus,

which the Court treated as a petition for interlocutory appeal. We granted review and a stay

of the trial court proceedings and consolidated Cannon with Safeco and Liberty Mutual for

appeal. Today we have deconsolidated the three cases, and a separate decision is being

handed down for each.

¶7. The Cannon defendants argue that Judge Gowan did not have the authority to transfer

or reassign Cannon to Judge Green. On December 7, 2017, Judge Gowan filed a response

to Cannon’s petition under the Safeco docket number before this Court. In his response,

Judge Gowan submitted that Cannon

4 involves extensive and complex litigation, which requires the utmost attention from the judge presiding over the matter. . . . Before the transfer of this case, this [c]ourt was concerned with the fact that Judge Gowan, the presiding judge at the time, would not be the presiding judge for the duration of the litigation. The above-listed reasons led to the transfer of this case to Senior Judge Tomie Green for reassignment or for her adoption of the case.

¶8. On February 22, 2018, the State filed a motion to consolidate another cause with

Cannon, namely: KiOR, Inc. Liquidating Trust v. Fred Cannon et al., No.: 16-CV-00656

(Hinds Cty. Circuit Court, 1st Jud. Dist., filed Nov. 8, 2016) (KLT). KLT was pending on the

docket of then-Hinds County Circuit Judge Jeff Weill.2 The State alleged that both actions

“involve common defendants, an overwhelming number of overlapping facts and

circumstances, common witnesses . . . and common documentary evidence” and would

conform to Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 42 by avoiding inconsistent rulings. The

Cannon defendants argued the motion was a “bald attempt . . . for the State to create an

after-the-fact justification for Judge Gowan’s transfer.” We granted requests lifting the stay

in Cannon to allow the parties to supplement the record of actions pending before the trial

court regarding consolidation. Judge Weill stayed KLT pending the outcome of this

interlocutory appeal.

¶9. On appeal the State and Defendants assert several different issues; but the question

before the Court, as it pertains to Cannon, is

May trial court judges in a multi-judge district reassign cases amongst themselves?

2 KiOR, Inc., Liquidating Trust is a trust created by and through the KiOR, Inc., Chapter 11 Bankruptcy proceeding to pursue former KiOR claims and causes of actions for the benefit of creditors.

5 ¶10. To the extent that a court is authorized to transfer or reassign cases for those reasons

the majority has established in Safeco, we answer in the affirmative, and find no abuse of

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

Related

United States v. Arthur Lloyd Stone
411 F.2d 597 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)
Harris v. Fort Worth Steel and MacHinery Co.
440 So. 2d 294 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Vinod Khosla v. State of Mississippi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vinod-khosla-v-state-of-mississippi-miss-2019.