Opinion ID: 1094919
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether the court erred in refusing to grant plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Text: Misso argues that the lower court erred in denying his motion for summary judgment. This Court has stated that under Miss.R.Civ.Pro. 56, [t]he party moving for summary judgment bears the burden of persuading the trial court that no genuine issue of material fact exists, and that they are, based on the existing facts, entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Daniels v. GNB, Inc., 629 So.2d 595, 600 (Miss. 1993) (citations omitted). In American Legion Ladnier Post Number 42, Inc. v. City of Ocean Springs, 562 So.2d 103, 106 (Miss. 1990), this Court asserted that even in cases where there is doubt as to whether there is a genuine issue of material fact, the trial judge should err on the side of denying the motion and permitting a full trial on the merits. Id. (citations omitted). A motion for summary judgment generally should be denied where the record is incomplete regarding any material fact. Id. (citing Smith v. Sanders, 485 So.2d 1051, 1054-55 (Miss. 1986)). The lower court found based on the motion filed by Misso and affidavits attached thereto that the case did present issues of material fact. The lower court stated in its denial of the summary judgment that there appeared to be questions among the election commissioners themselves as to whether the actions taken were appropriate. This is evidenced by the vote of 3-2 on the allowing of a dozen ballots. Further, the matter of whether those votes allowed by the election commission were legal votes, is a disputed matter among the commissioners themselves, as well as between the majority of the commissioners and the election managers. Because there were material issues of fact presented to the lower court, its decision not to grant a summary judgment was correct, and should not be overturned on appeal.