Opinion ID: 1095279
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: the circuit judge erred as a matter of law in dismissing marcum's cause of action.

Text: ¶ 19. As discussed above, Marcum filed her lawsuit one (1) year and nine (9) months after her cause of action allegedly accrued. The lower court properly applied the one (1) year statute of limitations contained in § 11-46-11 of the MTCA, which superseded the minor savings clause of § 15-1-59, and dismissed Marcum's lawsuit. As a result, we hold that the learned trial judge correctly applied the law and properly dismissed this case. This issue is without merit. III. THE MISSISSIPPI TORT CLAIMS ACT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT VIOLATES THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE INDIVIDUALS IN THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI. IV. SECTION 11-46-11 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT VIOLATES THE EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS OF MINORS. ¶ 20. Marcum argues for the first time on appeal that the MTCA violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution and discriminates against individuals in Mississippi including minors. In Ellis v. Ellis, 651 So.2d 1068 (Miss.1995), we reaffirmed the well-established principle that, [T]his Court has also consistently held that errors raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered, especially where constitutional questions are concerned. Id. ( citing Patterson v. State, 594 So.2d 606, 609 (Miss.1992); Contreras v. State, 445 So.2d 543, 544 (Miss.1984); Smith v. State, 430 So.2d 406, 408 (Miss. 1983)). Since these claims were not contemporaneously raised at the trial level, they are procedurally barred and are dismissed.