Phil Bryant and Deborah Bryant v. Deep South Today d/b/a Mississippi Today, Mary Margaret White, Adam M. Ganucheau, and Anna L. Wolfe

No. 2025-CA-00380-SCT · Supreme Court of Mississippi · April 23, 2026 · No. 2025-CA-00380-SCT

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi considered an appeal arising from defamation, false-light, and loss-of-consortium claims brought by Phil and Deborah Bryant. The court dismissed as moot the appeal concerning denial of partial summary judgment because a later amended complaint superseded the earlier pleading, but reversed the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal and remanded, holding that the complaint sufficiently stated a claim.

Court
Supreme Court of Mississippi
Writing for the Court
Presiding Justice Coleman; Chief Justice Randolph; Presiding Justice King; Justice Ishee; Justice Griffis; Justice Sullivan; Justice Branning
Jurisdiction
Supreme Court of Mississippi
Decision date
April 23, 2026
Docket number
2025-CA-00380-SCT
Procedural posture
The Bryants appealed the Madison County Circuit Court's denial of their partial summary-judgment motions and its subsequent dismissal of their complaint under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Standard of review
On review of a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, the court accepts the complaint's allegations as true and asks whether it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that the nonmovant can prove no set of facts entitling the plaintiff to relief. Factual inconsistencies and the weight of conflicting allegations are matters for trial, not a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Phil Bryant, Deborah Bryant v. Deep South Today d/b/a Mississippi Today, Mary Margaret White, Adam M. Ganucheau, Anna L. Wolfe
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

defamationmotions to dismisssummary judgmentmootnessappellate procedure

Practice areas

tortscivil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appeal from the denial of the Bryants' partial summary-judgment motions was moot because a second amended complaint superseded the pleading on which those motions were based.
  2. Whether the Bryants' complaint sufficiently stated a defamation claim involving a public figure under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
  3. Whether factual inconsistencies between the complaint and materials referenced or attached to it could be resolved on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

Holdings

  1. An amended complaint that does not adopt or incorporate the earlier pleading supersedes it and renders the earlier pleading of no legal effect; therefore, an appeal concerning summary-judgment motions directed to the superseded pleading is moot.
  2. The complaint sufficiently stated a defamation claim because it alleged a false defamatory statement, unprivileged publication to a third party, actual malice, and either defamation per se or special harm.

Key quotations

An amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and renders it of no legal effect unless the amended complaint specifically refers to and adopts or incorporates by reference the earlier pleading. (¶2)
A complaint does not prove evidence; it must simply allege a claim that, under some set of facts, could entitle the plaintiff to relief. (¶5)
Motions to dismiss may not be granted “unless it appears beyond any reasonable doubt that the non movant can prove no set of facts in support of the claim which would entitle them to relief.” (¶6)

Factual background

Phil and Deborah Bryant sued Mississippi Today, its employees, and contributors, asserting defamation, false light, and loss-of-consortium claims based on allegedly false and defamatory statements concerning Phil Bryant's conduct in office and welfare funds. The complaint alleged that the statements were false, published to third parties, and made with actual malice. The defendants argued that the complaint's allegations were contradicted by text messages, admissions, and attached materials.

Procedural history

The Bryants filed claims for defamation, false light, and loss of consortium. The circuit court denied their partial summary-judgment motions on May 16, 2024, and later granted the defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion on April 4, 2025. The Supreme Court of Mississippi dismissed the appeal concerning the summary-judgment denials as moot because a second amended complaint superseded the pleading on which those motions were based, reversed the dismissal, and remanded.

Remand instructions

The case is remanded to the Madison County Circuit Court for proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…