T. Mitchell Kalom v. Darryl Ford Brady
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2003-CA-00150-COA
T. MITCHELL KALOM
APPELLANT
v.
DARRYL FORD BRADY, DAWN LYNN BRADY AND
JACKSON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS
DATE OF TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEES
12/17/2002
HON. JAMES W. BACKSTROM
JACKSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
WAYNE L. HENGEN
MARK H. WATTS
ROBIN REID BOSWELL
CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY
AFFIRMED BOARD OF SUPERVISOR’S ORDER
DENYING APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR
RIGHT-OF-WAY.
AFFIRMED - 05/11/2004
BEFORE KING, C.J., BRIDGES, P.J., AND CHANDLER, J.
BRIDGES, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
T. Mitchell Kalom (Kalom) petitioned the Jackson County Board of Supervisors (Board) for a
private way over the land of several adjoining neighbors. The Board heard the petition and the objections
of the adjoining land owners and denied the petition. Kalom then appealed the Board’s decision to the
Jackson County Circuit Court where the decision was affirmed. From the circuit court’s decision Kalom
now appeals on a single issue.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
I. WHETHER THE JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WAS ARBITRARY AND
CAPRICIOUS IN DENYING HIS PETITION FOR PRIVATE WAY?
FACTS
¶2.
In April of 2000, Kalom purchased a forty acre parcel of land in Vancleave, Jackson County,
Mississippi, by special warranty deed. This piece of property is landlocked from public roads. A year and
a half later Kalom petitioned the Board requesting a private way for ingress and egress naming twenty
neighboring landowners as respondents. In particular Kalom requested a fifty foot wide and six hundred
sixty foot long private way, in a south-west direction, along the property lines of Darryl and Dawn Brady
and Curtis Davis. A private way in this direction would connect with a way that already exists over the
property of Curtis Davis. The private way on Davis’s property was created, used, owned and maintained
by a dozen adjacent landowners.
¶3.
Kalom testified that his plans for the property were to manage timber and hunting. However,
through its discussion with Kalom the Board discovered Kalom also intended to subdivide the property for
as many as five homes. He also stated that his reasoning for requesting the private way from the southern
part of his property was that it is a shorter distance to the public road and from that route additional bridges
and structures would not have to be constructed.
¶4.
The opposing landowners offered as proof the fact that Kalom sent letters to the adjacent land
owners on the north, west, and south boundaries of his land Henry Havens, Kenneth Papania and Darryl
Brady respectively. In these letters Kalom did not offer to purchase a private way from those land owners
but rather notified them that if they did not give him an easement he would go to the Board. Kalom also
sent a letter to Curtis Davis whose land was farther south of his property just beyond Darryl Brady.
2
Davis’s land would also have to be crossed and already had a private way. Kalom also did not offer to
purchase a right to use the existing private way even though the dozen or so users of the road had spent
thousands of dollars creating and maintaining the private road. James Davis who owns the property
adjacent to Kalom’s on the eastern boundary was never contacted.
¶5.
Kalom also proposed the route to run from the north of his property in a westerly direction along
the property of Henry Havens but it is boggy and contained no dry access. Any other way created from
the north through the Havens’ property would bisect the property. The route suggested to run from the
west of his property would have bisected the property of Kenneth Papania going through the location were
the Papania’s hoped to build a home. The route considered to the east was not reasonable since it
contained a branch of the Bluff Creek and would be more difficult to construct a road.
¶6.
Additional testimony offered by those opposed was that the northern route was shorter than his
proposed southern route. The southern route would run directly over Curtis Davis’s driveway. The
eastern route would cross only one property owner before it entered sixteenth section land with public
roads. James Brady’s land was fenced-in pasture land for his cattle and creating a private way would
require him to remove his fence. Also, the property on the southern boundary, James Brady’s, was the
only property bordering Kalom that had a dwelling on it.
ANALYSIS
¶7.
The standard of review when reviewing a Board’s decision “is substantial evidence, the same
standard which applies in appeals from decisions of administrative agencies and Boards.” Wilkinson
County Bd. of Supervisors v. Quality Farms, 767 So.2d 1007, 1009 (¶8) (Miss.2000) (citing Barnes
v. Bd. of Supervisors, 553 So.2d 508, 511 (Miss.1989)). "The decision of an administrative agency is not
to be disturbed unless the agency order was unsupported by substantial evidence; was arbitrary or
3
capricious; was beyond the agency's scope or powers; or violated the constitutional or statutory rights of
the aggrieved party." Id. (citing Bd. of Law Enforcement Officers Standards & Training v. Butler, 672
So.2d 1196, 1199 (Miss.1996)). Substantial evidence is "such relevant evidence as reasonable minds might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion," more than a "mere scintilla" of evidence. Id. (citing Johnson
v. Ferguson, 435 So.2d 1191, 1195 (Miss.1983)).
I. WHETHER THE JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WAS ARBITRARY AND
CAPRICIOUS IN DENYING HIS PETITION FOR PRIVATE WAY?
¶8.
Kalom asserts the Board was arbitrary and capricious in its reasoning for denying his petition.
Kalom’s request to disturb and invade the property of another is considerable. This State has always held
the right to use and control one’s property as sacred. Whitefort v. Homochitto Lumber Co., 130 Miss.
14; 93 So. 437, 439 (1922). Whitefort established the burden Kalom had to prove under Mississippi
Code Annotated section 65-7-201 holding: “The statute does not contemplate granting one citizen or
corporation a right of way through the property of another citizen or corporation as a matter of mere
convenience or as a mere matter of saving expense. There must be real necessity before private property
can be invaded by a citizen for private purposes, if that can be done at all.” Id. The Board in its decision
found Kalom failed to prove his proposed private way was reasonably necessary and not merely for
convenience.
¶9.
"An administrative agency's decision is arbitrary if not done according to reason or judgment, but
dependent on the will alone. An action is capricious if done without reason, in a whimsical manner, implying
either a lack of understanding of or disregard for the surrounding facts and settled controlling principles."
Miss. State Dept. of Health v. Natchez, 743 So.2d 973, 977 (¶13) (Miss.1999). The Board’s reasoning
for its unanimous decision was that there were other routes through which Kalom could gain access to a
4
public road but that Kalom failed to present sufficient evidence that his proposed route was the least
intrusive to the current owners and the most reasonable to Kalom. The Board further reinforced its ruling
by stating that no proof, other than his own statements, was offered by Kalom regarding the infeasibility
of alternate routes.
¶10.
The decision of the Board would require Kalom to prove that the areas to the north were boggy
and would require a bridge. That the only possible road to the west would bisect the location where the
Papania’s wished to build their home. Also, all routes to the east would have to cross the Bluff Creek
which would also require a road. Kalom could have easily attained such proof by having an expert walk
the tract and give his opinion regarding the ease or difficulty of constructing a road, such proof Kalom did
not provide. This decision by the Board was done with reason and judgment and in regard for the
surrounding facts and principles and lack of proof. Kalom’s claim that the Board’s decision was arbitrary
and capricious fails.
¶11.
On a procedural note the Court would like to bring to the parties' attention that the procedural
requirements of Mississippi Code Annotated section 65-7-201 have been changed since this case was
heard in the Circuit Court of Jackson County. Effective April 20, 2003, any petition for private way
through the land of another should be brought through an action in eminent domain. Therefore, any future
attempts by Kalom to establish a private way for his property should begin by filing his petition with the
special court of eminent domain for Jackson County.
¶12. THE JUDGMENT OF THE JACKSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT IS AFFIRMED.
ALL COSTS OF APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
KING, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., THOMAS, LEE, IRVING, MYERS, CHANDLER
AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR.
5
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.