Opinion ID: 859475
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Myrick: Right to Litigate

Text: ¶32. On cross-appeal, Myrick claims that HCCL waived its right to litigate its aestheticeffect claims by including those claims in mediation.7 HCCL counters that there is no contract provision which prevents the parties from mediating aesthetic-effect claims, and its good-faith attempt to mediate those claims does not constitute waiver. ¶33. Myrick fails to cite any authority in support of its position. It is the appellant’s duty to cite authority in support of its position, and the Court considers unsupported assignments of error to be abandoned. Jones v. Howell, 827 So. 2d 691, 702 (¶40) (Miss. 2002). Because 7 Myrick also claims that HCCL’s aesthetic claims are not aesthetic at all, but regard alleged defects in construction and paving. Myrick further contends that these claims are subject to arbitration. 14 Myrick fails to cite any authority in support of its position, the argument is barred from review.