 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Delta Home Health Incorporated v. Mississippi Association For Home Care3/5/2002
e rights and liabilities of all the parties.
. In response to Mid-Delta's position on the entry of final judgment, the Association argues that the entry of the Rule 54(b) final judgment was entirely appropriate under the rule because there is no dispute that Continue Care mailed out the letters in question and because "this Court can be certain that the Continue Care entities will not raise the issue raised by [the Association] on this appeal - - namely, the defense of lack of involvement in mailing out the letters, . . . it can not reasonably be said that the issue presented in this appeal and those which may ultimately be litigated and appealed by either Mid-Delta or the Continue Care entities in the remainder of the case are such that they should be brought before this Court as a 'single unit.'"
. We are not persuaded that the trial court erred in directing a final judgment as to the Association. As we have determined, there is no evidence showing that the Association has any involvement in Continue Care's dissemination of the October 18 letter or in the dissemination of the January 26 letter in unmarked envelopes. We agree with the circuit court that there was no just reason for the delay of the entry of the final judgment.
. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANTS.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, MYERS, CHANDLER AND BRANTLEY, JJ., CONCUR. IRVING, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.
|