Title: EXT. OF BOUNDARIES OF MOSS POINT v. Sherman

State: mississippi

Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court

Document:

492 So. 2d 289 (1986) In the Matter of the EXTENSION OF the BOUNDARIES OF the CITY OF MOSS POINT, Mississippi v. Ann Louise SHERMAN, et al. No. 55725. Supreme Court of Mississippi. August 6, 1986. John G. Corlew, Watkins & Eager, Jackson, Richie E. Perkins, Moss Point, for appellant. Earl L. Denham, Levi & Denham, Ocean Springs, for appellees. Before HAWKINS, P.J., and DAN M. LEE and ANDERSON, JJ. HAWKINS, Presiding Justice, for the Court: This is an appeal by the City of Moss Point from a decree of the chancery court of Jackson County denying an ordinance of the City of Moss Point seeking to extend and enlarge its municipal corporate limits. Finding the chancellor's opinion supported by substantial evidence and not manifestly wrong, we affirm. The City of Moss Point sought to annex approximately 12 square miles of area located on the north boundary of the city and encompassing the area commonly known as Escatawpa. The annexation effort was opposed by Anne Louise Sherman and other residents and citizens of the Escatawpa area. On October 1, 1983, the chancery court issued its written opinion denying the proposed annexation based upon Moss Point's failure to meet the fourth and eighth criteria set forth by this Court in its opinion in City of Jackson v. City of Ridgeland, 388 So. 2d 152 (Miss. 1980). The chancellor's finding with regard to this criteria is as follows: This Court after a careful review of the record in this case is of the opinion that the chancellor's holding as to Moss Point's inability to substantiate and verify its ability to finance the acquisition requested is supported by credible substantial evidence introduced at trial and must therefore be upheld by this Court. The chancellor made the following finding of fact concerning Moss Point's failure to provide municipal services to residents of the Ford community, a community within its present boundaries, as follows: Although there was conflicting evidence in the record concerning the city services furnished to the Ford community, we must give great deference to the finding of the chancellor, who relied not only on the evidence presented in court, but also on an on-site examination of the area. The opinion of the chancellor being supported by substantial evidence and not manifestly wrong, it is hereby affirmed. AFFIRMED. WALKER, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., and DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON, SULLIVAN, ANDERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.