Opinion ID: 1608488
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: the trial court erred in denying prisock's request for an injunction mandating the louisville municipal school district grant the hunting and fishing lease to him.

Text: ¶ 16. Prisock cross-appealed on the theory that the Chancery Court erred by not compelling the Board to grant the hunting and fishing license to him. The chancellor's order stated that the school district may re-advertise according to law for bids on this 16th section hunting land but must do so recognizing that Travis L. Prisock, Sr .... is hereby adjudicated statutory preference as the most recent leaseholder. Implicit in the order was the option for the Board to award the lease to Prisock. ¶ 17. The chancellor's decision rested on his interpretation of § 29-3-41, and thus we review de novo. The statute clearly states in pertinent part: [I]f the Board of Education receives an acceptable bid, the most recent holder of said hunting and fishing rights if it shall have made an offer, shall have the final right to extend its lease for the term advertised at the annual rental equal to said highest offer received by the Board of Education. Miss.Code Ann. § 29-3-41 (1999) (emphasis added). ¶ 18. The record clearly reflects that the Board found Tucker's bid to be acceptable, thereby triggering Prisock's unconditional statutory right to match the bid. We find that the chancery court erred in denying Prisock's request for injunctive relief. The Board does not have the discretion to re-advertise merely because it dislikes or disapproves of the most recent leaseholder. [3] Because the statute grants Prisock the final right to extend [his] lease for the term advertised, we find that Prisock should be granted a five year lease, effective immediately.