Title: Mandel v. James Graham Brown Foundation, Inc.
Citation: 375 So. 2d 1017
Docket Number: 51508
State: Mississippi
Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date: October 3, 1979

375 So. 2d 1017 (1979) David and June MANDEL et al. v. JAMES GRAHAM BROWN FOUNDATION, INC. No. 51508. Supreme Court of Mississippi. October 3, 1979. Rehearing Denied October 31, 1979. Hopkins &amp; Logan, Floyd J. Logan, Gulfport, for appellants. Daniel, Coker, Horton, Bell &amp; Dukes, Pete H. Carrubba, Gulfport, for appellee. Before SMITH, LEE and BOWLING, JJ. LEE, Justice, for the Court: David Mandel and June Mandel, parents of Michael David Mandel, a 15-year-old minor, brought suit in the Circuit Court of Harrison County, Mississippi, Honorable Leslie B. Grant, presiding, against Joseph Cheleno, Biloxi River Development Co., Inc., Harrison County, Mississippi, and James Graham Brown Foundation, Inc., for damages sustained as a result of personal injuries incurred by Michael David Mandel. The lower court sustained a motion to dismiss as to James Graham Brown Foundation, Inc., for lack of in personam jurisdiction, the Mandels nonsuited as to the resident defendants and have appealed here from the dismissal order. *1018 The sole question is whether or not Mississippi Code Annotated Section 13-3-57 (1972), as amended, known as the "Long-Arm Statute," extends jurisdiction to the appellee, a non-resident corporation not qualified to do business in the State of Mississippi. Appellee, a Kentucky corporation, owns five hundred thirty-eight (538) acres of land in Harrison County, has the maintenance and control of said property, pays taxes thereon, uses and enjoys said property, and is protected in same by the laws of the State of Mississippi. After hearing the motion to dismiss, the trial judge entered the following order: Mississippi Code Annotated Section 13-3-57 (1972), as amended, provides, in part, the following: In Smith v. Temco, Inc., 252 So. 2d 212 (Miss. 1971), the Court said: Although Smith v. Temco, Inc. was a products liability case, the statute applies to other cases in tort and contract which are properly covered by the statute, and is not restricted to a particular type case. Appellee *1019 contends that the Long-Arm Statute does not apply to it for the reason that, among other things, the declaration did not charge the commission of a tort by it in this state. On the motion to dismiss the declaration for lack of in personam jurisdiction, all allegations of the declaration, well pleaded, together with reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, are accepted as true. The declaration charges knowledge on the part of appellee of a dangerous condition in the waters of the Biloxi River, adjacent to and surrounding the property of appellee, and particularly charges negligence on the part of the appellee as follows: (1) Failing to make a proper and reasonable inspection of the river to insure that there were no dangers to swimmers. (2) Failing to put up warning signs stipulating the danger from the shallow water to those swimmers diving into the water at this particular juncture of the river. (3) Failing to provide qualified and trained supervision over the swimming and other activities at the park. (4) Failing to implement some type of safety program which would have enhanced the safety of this particular area of the river. (5) Failing to keep the park area reasonably safe for its intended use. We are of the opinion that the allegations of the declaration are sufficient for the Circuit Court of Harrison County to acquire jurisdiction of appellee under the Long-Arm Statute. We do not speculate upon what issues, defenses and status between the parties may be developed upon trial of the case. The lower court erred in dismissing the declaration and the case is reversed and remanded for a trial on the merits. REVERSED AND REMANDED. PATTERSON, C.J., SMITH and ROBERTSON, P. JJ., and SUGG, WALKER, BROOM, BOWLING and COFER, JJ., concur.