Margie Edna (Galloway) Mallett Wilson v. Byron Keith Mallett
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2008-CA-01196-COA
MARGIE EDNA GALLOWAY MALLETT
WILSON
APPELLANT
v.
BYRON KEITH MALLETT
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
07/02/2008
HON. VICKI B. COBB
DESOTO COUNTY CHANCERY COURT
H.R. GARNER
STEVEN G. ROBERTS
CIVIL - DOMESTIC RELATIONS
MOTION TO SET ASIDE AGREED ORDER
DENIED
APPEAL DISMISSED – 10/06/2009
BEFORE MYERS, P.J., IRVING AND BARNES, JJ.
IRVING, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Margie Edna Galloway Mallett Wilson appeals the DeSoto County Chancery Court’s
entry of an agreed order reached by Wilson and her former husband, Byron Keith Mallett,
regarding custody and child support for their minor child, Byron Keith Mallett Jr. Finding
that we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss this appeal.
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUE
¶2.
An agreed order was entered in this case on July 2, 2008. Shortly thereafter, on July
7, 2008, Wilson filed a motion to set aside the judgment pursuant to Rule 59 of the
Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure. Then, the following day, Wilson filed a motion for an
emergency hearing; however, before the chancellor could rule on Wilson’s motions, she filed
a notice of appeal in the DeSoto County Chancery Court.
¶3.
It is well settled that:
If any party files a timely motion of a type specified immediately below[,] the
time for appeal for all parties runs from the entry of the order disposing of the
last such motion outstanding. This provision applies to a timely motion . . .
under Rule 59 to alter or amend the judgment . . . or . . . for relief under Rule
60 if the motion is filed no later than 10 days after the entry of judgment. A
notice of appeal filed after announcement or entry of the judgment but before
disposition of any of the above motions is ineffective to appeal from the
judgment or order, or part thereof, specified in the notice of appeal, until the
entry of the order disposing of the last such motion outstanding.
M.R.A.P. 4(d). Accordingly, because Wilson filed a motion to set aside the agreed order, it
was no longer a final judgment.
¶4.
We note that Mallett did not raise the issue of lack of jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the
law is clear in this state that “[w]hether raised by the parties or not, this Court is required to
note its own lack of jurisdiction.” Michael v. Michael, 650 So. 2d 469, 471 (Miss. 1995)
(citing Common Cause of Miss. v. Smith, 548 So. 2d 412, 414 (Miss. 1989)).
¶5.
We conclude that Wilson’s appeal was premature and is dismissed for lack of
appellate jurisdiction.
¶6.
THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. ALL COSTS
OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS,
CARLTON AND MAXWELL, JJ., CONCUR.
2
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.