Jackson Jambalaya

It’s amazing what a couple of nights in jail will do for one’s motivation. Regardless, good luck winning that one on appeal. Judge Smallwood was well within her discretion to toss him in jail. Further, the MS Supreme Court is liable to enter an interim suspension after seeing the evidence against him.

Please tell him to not be so impatient. The state of Mississippi Supreme Court will do like they always, take a look at this in 12. To 15 months from now.
.

Did Corey pay the notice of appeal filing fee with client funds?

Macy for the win!

Fuck. That. Guy. A literal embarrassment to everyone that offers professional services. MS bar should probably make a statement or something…

It isn't his fault as he had intermittent cellphone connectivity. If only there were still "pay phones" on every corner.

Would have been better if he had signed, “Corey N. Ferraez, Jailbird."

This guy makes Carlos the Clown look like a saint…well…almost.

He needs a lawyer - badly

So he's saying that he's got the missing money now?

I just can't believe he hasn't set up a GoFundMe

Carlos made millions. He doesn't care about his bar standing. Corey is in jail. No comparison.

This is too funny. Maybe he should write a song and sing to raise bell money!

Is this even a final, appealabe order? He needs counsel.

Did he misspell his own name?

There are Arabs, Asians, Africans and so on with businesses, Why just the enforcement on the Latin community? They are the hardest working out of all the groups.

His best legal strategy : pay the money, now!

@10:38 lol no he didn’t. The huge judgment he brags about was a default judgment. Meaning, the other side didn’t respond because they had nothing to lose. He collected nothing. Can’t squeeze blood out of a stump. Determining the economic viability of a claim is very important as a lawyer

An attorney who can't even figure out the right way to "appeal." Coming from a guy who clerked up at the Supreme Court, let me give you some free legal advice, Cory. You file a "Notice of Appeal" when you're taking a direct appeal from a Final Judgment. This contempt order ain't a Final Judgment. The contempt Order is interlocutory. What you were supposed to file is a Petition for Interlocutory Appeal. But even that is assuming you're a named Party to the case--which he isn't. As it stands, he's currently listed on the docket as a (terminated-from-representing-anybody) attorney in the case--not an actual Party to the case. Since he cannot take an appeal through those normal mechanisms due to the oddities of the situation, what he should have filed was a Petition for Writ of Mandamus under Miss. R. App. P. 21. Not only would that have gotten his request for release in front of the Supreme Court much sooner (moron), but it's the technically proper avenue that he was supposed to use anyways. See, In re Nichols, 749 So. 2d 68, 72 (Miss. 1999). Now, because a "Notice of Appeal" is filed in the trial court (whereas a petition for any type of extraordinary writ gets filed directly in the Supreme Court), that "Notice of Appeal" is going to sit for a nice little while in the Perry County Chancery Court until the clerks get around to transferring it so that a Supreme Court docket number can be generated. Assuming his "appeal" doesn't get mooted out for some reason before it makes it up there, by the time the staff attorneys at the Court realize what it is that he has actually filed (side note: they treat filings what they truly are substantively, and it doesn't matter what "title" you give the documents), then they can alert the Justices that they have (substantively) a petition for an extraordinary writ sitting in front of them. Once that happens, the Court will expeditiously be able to deny the stupid thing. Why? BECAUSE IT'S STUPID! WHY ARE YOU APPEALING CORY? TURN OVER THE MONEY THAT DOESN'T BELONG TO YOU, AND JUDGE SMALLWOOD'S ORDER AUTOMATICALLY RELEASES YOU FROM JAIL! AUTOMATICALLY! SAME DAY! THE ONLY REASON YOU'RE SITTING THERE IS BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL SITTING THERE IS BECAUSE YOU WON'T GIVE UP THE MONEY! This is mind-numbing insanity. Does he really think the Supreme Court will jump in to let him out of jail to assist him in his plot of refusing to turn over the remaining $200k belonging to his elderly widowed client? The moves he is making throughout this whole thing legit hurt my brain. I genuinely want to know how he thinks this story plays out in the end in his mind?? Word to the wise Cory: if you're going to make dumb legal maneuvers, please at least procedurally do it in the correct way.

Are these "final judgments" to be appealed? I had the same initial question.

You people who say “ just pay back the money” are nuts. He doesn’t have the money.

And our Jew-hater works in a comment about the Jews in this thread. Too bad it's not getting approved. So sorry you wasted your time.

Contempt orders are immediately appealable. His bigger problem is filing using USPS. At least in Jackson, it can take thirty days to mail an envelope from downtown to Fondren. The rules normally allow three days for mailing.

@10:26 am: I think you’re thinking of Federal case law. The “finality” rules for purposes of appeal do have some distinctions between Federal/State. I believe you are correct if this were in Fed. If you’re an attorney, go look at that case I cited for the State posture. This should have been teed up as a petition for an extraordinary writ (particularly since he’s not a named party to the case).

9:34 p.m.: It's the weekend. Take a break from the Adderall, if you can.

10:26 is correct. See Miss. Code Ann. § 11-51-12. But, it requires the posting of a bond.

In re Nichols is an interesting case, regarding a "writ of prohibition," but this isn't about a money judgment against Corey, so I don't know that it applies.

@12:51: hilarious. Legit made me laugh.

@1:02 (re-commenting this because I think the first one was too long): On that statute you cited, all it says is that the contemnor "may appeal." It does not set out *how* one should appeal (file a NOA in trial court? file a petition in SC? etc.). And that point leads me into my favorite case in Mississippi history: Newell v. State, 308 So. 2d 71 (Miss. 1975). It's essentially our State's Marbury v. Madison. If y'all think my ramblings are long now, I could scribble out a tome about that. Being keenly aware of my proclivities, I'll cut it "short" today. Applying separation of powers under Miss. Const. Art. 1, §§ 1 & 2, the Newell Court held that the judiciary controls procedural rules in our State, not the legislative branch. If you want an example of how this plays out in appellate procedure versus a contrary statute, see Matter of City of Petal, 301 So. 3d 591, 597 (Miss. 2020). Legislature had set the appeal time re: a statutory cause of action to 10 days. Supreme Court said nope, it's 30 days, because our appellate rules trump your statute. So let's give this the full context in light of all that. The statute says he "may appeal," but doesn't provide *how,* and the appellate rules control in any event, so let's look at the rules. The contempt Order is not a Final Judgment—does not resolve all claims against all Parties (no direct appeal). The Order hasn't been certified as "final" under Miss. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (no direct appeal). Cory ain't a named Party to the case (no interlocutory appeal). Where does that leave us? What do we have left to get this in front of the Justices of the Mississippi Supreme Court? Ah yes... the old school English writs... the last resort. That’s why I would have petitioned for a writ. But all of this is for naught, because I suspect whatever you call it, it’s going to be denied.

Thelaw: You are just wrong.

"Illinois Central appeals under Miss.Code Ann. § 11–51–11 (Supp.2001), appeal from judgment of criminal contempt. Section 11–51–12 (Supp.2001), is entitled, appeal from judgment of civil contempt. The latter section was added to the code in 1991. Whether this is a civil or criminal contempt will be discussed further in Issue IV. Pursuant to these statutes, a person ordered to be punished for either type of contempt, “may appeal to the court to which other cases are appealable from said tribunal.” Miss.Code Ann. § 11–51–11 & 12 (Supp.2001). Thus, an appeal from a contempt order may be had on direct appeal, even though the underlying case is ongoing."


Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Winters, 815 So. 2d 1168, 1170 (Miss. 2002), overruled by Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McGill, 890 So. 2d 859 fn 1 (Miss. 2004)

@1:49: "You are just wrong." Ouch... my feelings... Regarding Illinois Cent. v. Winters, first, those were named Parties in the suit appealing that (not like Cory). Second, Winters involved an award of attorney fees under Rule 37. For reasons too long to get into here, that type of award is treated separately for purposes of direct appeal (for a full discussion on the distinction, see Wright & Miller, “Finality—Trial and Post-Trial Orders—Attorney Fees and Sanction Orders,” 15B Fed. Prac. & Proc. Juris. § 3915.6, (2d ed.)). Third, let's assume that case is implying what you are putting down. Bad case law does get overturned--per the very citation you made. Let's recreate what you did there. You copied that citation directly from Westlaw. And then you manually hand-typed in the words "fn 1" into the wrong place. Take another look at your citation. You overlooked that Westlaw generated both the Winters case AND the one *overruling* Winters (Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. McGill). Whoops. My point remains: the judiciary controls the procedural mechanisms for appeal. If I'm wrong, I would love an explanation as to how that contention does not comport with the analysis in Matter of City of Petal, 301 So. 3d 591, 597 (Miss. 2020). While I do enjoy this type of back and forth, again, we are fighting over tOmato and tomAto. Call it whatever you want. His "appeal" will be denied.

There’s a huge difference in whether it’s denied on the merits or is dismissed for technical reasons.

12:25, The rules of procedure only control over a statute where this is a conflict with a statute (leaving aside jurisdictional issues), and any reported decision that pre-dates the Rules has to be looked at carefully.

Regarding contempt, the statutes provide the right to appeal, and the rules provide the means.

I realize you can argue this to death, but that doesn't mean your arguments are arguably-correct.