 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Little v. Mississippi Department of Human Services11/7/2002
hearing; and (9) DHS and Judge Ward conspired to keep Little's son for a "clandestine foster child ring" and attempted to "kidnap" Little's other children.
. As for the first and second allegations of Little's son being a "hostage" held under a "blanket custody order," not only is DHS immune from suit under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act, but DHS is statutorily authorized to take a child into custody by Miss. Code Ann. § 43-21-301 (2000) when there is an order by a judge, the period of custody does not exceed 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and state holidays, and provided that there is probable cause to believe that:
(a) The child is within the jurisdiction of the court; and
(b) Custody is necessary; custody shall be deemed necessary:
(i) When a child is endangered or any person would be endangered by the child; or
(ii) To insure the child's attendance in court at such time as required; or
(iii) When a parent, guardian or custodian is not available to provide for the care and supervision of the child; and
(c) There is no reasonable alternative to custody. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-21-303 (2000) allows a law enforcement officer or DHS agent, in the exercise of discretion, to take custody of a child, and the statute further provides the criteria under which the officer or agent may take custody.
. Little indicates in his brief that a child may not be held more than 24 hours, but the statutes specifically state that a judge may authorize temporary custody. Miss. Code Ann. § 43-21-303(4).
. The scope of review of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is that the allegations in the complaint must be taken as true, and the motion should not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff will be unable to prove any set of facts in support of his claim. Overstreet v. Merlos, 570 So.2d 1196, 1197 (Miss. 1990); Grantham v. Miss. Dep't of Corrections, 522 So.2d 219, 220 (Miss. 1988); Lester Eng'g Co. v. Richland Water & Sewer Dist., 504 So.2d 1185, 1187 (Miss. 1987); Stanton & Assocs., Inc. v. Bryant Constr. Co., 464 So.2d 499, 505 (Miss. 1985). Concerning Little's first two allegations, it clearly appears beyond doubt that Little would be unable to prove any set of facts in support of these allegations. As for Little's remaining allegations, there is no evidence in the record supporting any of these allegations, thus, once again, inasmuch as it appears beyond doubt that Little would be unable to prove any set of facts in support of any of these allegations, Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal by the circuit judge was not only appropriate, but mandated by law.
CONCLUSION
. Inasmuch as Little's claims were improperly before the circuit court, that court appropriately ruled that it had no jurisdiction to hear Little's claims. Additionally, the circuit court was eminently correct in ruling that Rule 12(b) dismissal was appropriate due to Little's failure to comply with the notice provisions of the Mississippi Tort Claims Act (Miss. Code Ann. §§ 11-46-1 to -23 (2002)) and Little's failure to state any claim or claims upon which relief could be granted. The judgment of the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial District of Harrison County is therefore affirmed.
. AFFIRMED.
PITTMAN, C.J., McRAE AND SMITH, P.JJ., WALLER, COBB, DIAZ, EASLEY AND GRAVES, JJ., CONCUR.
Page 1 2 3 4 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|