 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. Clay County11/13/2003
relitigation communications. The notice is the announcement that suit is imminent if agreement is not reached. Diffused, even somewhat confused notice staggered over months of contacts does not provide the certain notice required under the statute.
Id. at 104. Soileau also held that " compliance with the obligation to deliver or send by registered mail the notice of claim is not shown by proof that the chief executive officer learned of the claim through other means." Id. at 105. See also Holmes v. Defer, 722 So.2d at 628 (requiring strict compliance and holding that actual knowledge is irrelevant). However, Soileau and Holmes were decided prior to Reaves and Carr, and prior to the 1999 amendments to 11-46-11. Their precedential effect, then, is limited, as their analysis was based on a strict interpretation of the Act, rather than one focusing on whether the claimant's notice substantially complied with the Act.
. In Reaves this Court held that " tatutes such as this should be read reasonably." Reaves, 729 So.2d at 1240. The Court continued, " he purpose of the Act is to insure that governmental boards, commissioners, and agencies are informed of claims against them." Id. Since that holding, this Court has been increasingly lenient in the amount of claim notice it requires to satisfy the Act. The determinative facts appears to have become whether the governmental agency is notified in fact of the potential of a claim against it.
. In Ferrer v. Jackson County Board of Supervisors, 741 So. 2d 216 (Miss. 1999), this Court found substantial compliance when no notice of claim was sent at all based on extensive settlement negotiations between the two parties' lawyers (and the County's insurance provider) before the complaint was filed. Id. at 219. Both parties to the present appeal agree that Clay County sent a settlement check to Williams in November 1999 and that the County, through Robinson, had agreed to pay her medical bills. Williams has alleged that the supervisors told her in March 2000 that they would meet to discuss her claim. These events can be construed as settlement negotiations.
. In Smith County School District v. McNeil, 743 So. 2d 376 (Miss. 1999), the Court even hinted that three letters sent to a governmental entity's insurance carrier may constitute substantial compliance with the notice provisions of section 11- 46-11(1). Id. at 378-79. As mentioned, in March 2000, after Williams' meeting with him and the supervisors, Robinson put Clay County's insurer on notice of the claim.
. In Powell v. City of Pascagoula, 752 So.2d 999 (Miss. 1999), this Court found substantial compliance despite minor deficiencies in the notice of claim. The Court found that the claimant made a reasonable, good faith effort to comply with the Act's requirements. Because the city received actual notice of her claim and suffered no actual prejudice as a result of the deficiency, this Court found that summary dismissal was improper. Id. at 1004-05. Similarly, in the case at bar, Clay County received actual notice of Williams' injury on several different occasions prior to the expiration of the SOL. She told the county's statutory agent (Robinson) about the injury when it happened, she later followed up with a letter to that same agent, and when the extent of her injury was known she met with and informed Clay County through two supervisors. After she was insulted and her accident belittled, Williams sought counsel, who brought suit and filed formal notice. Williams' good faith efforts to inform Clay County of her injuries were sufficient to toll the SOL.
. In Chamberlin v. City of Hernando, 716 So.2d 596 (Miss. 1998), the plaintiff alleged that a lett
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|