Jackson v. Bell

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court held that an election-contest petition filed without the attorney certificates required by Mississippi Code Section 23-15-927 may be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. However, because lack of jurisdiction is a nonmerits issue, the dismissal must be without prejudice rather than with prejudice. The court vacated the dismissal with prejudice and remanded for entry of an order dismissing the action without prejudice.

Holdings

1. The requirement that an election-contest petition include certificates from two practicing attorneys is a jurisdictional prerequisite to judicial review, and a petition filed without the certificates may be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
2. A dismissal of an election-contest action for failure to satisfy a jurisdictional, nonmerits prerequisite may not be with prejudice; it must be without prejudice.
3. Esco v. Scott is overruled to the extent it permits dismissal with prejudice of an election-contest action for failure to satisfy a jurisdictional, nonmerits prerequisite.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an election-contest petition that fails to satisfy the attorney-certificate requirement of Mississippi Code section 23-15-927 may be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
2. Whether dismissal of an election-contest petition for lack of jurisdiction may be entered with prejudice.

Disposition

vacated