Opinion ID: 1962078
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: whether the trial court had jurisdiction over the case.

Text: The Governor also claims that the action should be dismissed because absent an express statutory provision for an appeal, there is no right to an appeal. Bickham v. Department of Mental Health, 592 So.2d 96, 97-98 (Miss. 1991). Alternatively the Governor argues that this case should have been transferred to chancery court, because where there is no express statutory provision for the appeal of an administrative decision, proper jurisdiction lies in the chancery court. Charter Medical Corporation v. Mississippi Health Plan. & Dev., 362 So.2d 180, 181 (Miss. 1978). An appeal is any complaint to a superior court of an injustice done by an inferior one in the general use of the word. Illinois Central R. Co. v. Moore, 215 So.2d 419 (Miss. 1968). Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed. (1990) defines appeal as: Resort to a superior (i.e., appellate) court to review the decision of an inferior (i.e., trial) court or administrative agency. A complaint to a higher tribunal of an error or injustice committed by a lower tribunal in which the error or injustice is sought to be corrected or reversed. What is being litigated is an act of the Governor, who is not an agency or a court. Thus, this litigation is an original action to contest the sufficiency of the Governor's actions. The circuit court is a court of general subject matter jurisdiction with authority to hear all matters civil, subject matter jurisdiction of which is not vested in some other court. Miss.Const. of 1890, art. VI, § 156. Barlow v. Weathersby, 597 So.2d 1288, 1293 (Miss. 1992). This Court has repeatedly held that our courts have the power to hear claims that public officials have violated their mandatory, non-discretionary duties of office. Poyner v. Gilmore, 171 Miss. 859, 158 So. 922 (1935); Fordice v. Thomas, 649 So.2d at 840. It follows that the circuit court would then have jurisdiction to determine if this claim is one for violation of ministerial duties or not. Finally, since the Constitution or a statute did not vest jurisdiction in a particular court, the circuit court had the authority under our Constitution and the State Bill of Rights to entertain such a suit. Id. at 841. Therefore, the circuit court had jurisdiction over this case.