Rule 2. PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH RULES;

SUSPENSION OF RULES

(a) Dismissal of Appeal.

(1) Mandatory Dismissal. An appeal shall be dismissed if the notice of appeal was

not timely filed pursuant to Rules 4 or 5.

(2) Discretionary Dismissal. An appeal may be dismissed upon motion of a party or

on motion of the appropriate appellate court (i) when the court determines that there is an

obvious failure to prosecute an appeal; or (ii) when a party fails to comply substantially with

these rules. When either court, on its own motion or on motion of a party, determines that

dismissal may be warranted under this Rule 2(a)(2), the clerk of the Supreme Court shall give

written notice to the party in default, apprising the party of the nature of the deficiency. If

the party in default fails to correct the deficiency within fourteen (14) days after notification,

the appeal shall be dismissed by the clerk of the Supreme Court. The attorney for the party

in default has the burden to correct promptly any deficiency or to see that the default is

corrected by the appropriate official.

(b) Other Sanctions. The Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals may, after

reasonable notice given by the clerk of the Supreme Court and opportunity to show cause to

the contrary, and after hearing, if requested, impose such sanctions as may be appropriate on

any party, court reporter, trial court clerk, or attorney who fails to comply with these rules

or any order issued pursuant to these rules. Trial court judges have concurrent jurisdiction

to sanction any party, court reporter, trial court clerk, or attorney who fails to comply with

Rules 3, 10, and 11. A copy of any such sanction order shall be served on the clerk of the

Supreme Court and may be reviewed by the Supreme Court for abuse of discretion.

rney who fails to comply with these rules

or any order issued pursuant to these rules. Trial court judges have concurrent jurisdiction

to sanction any party, court reporter, trial court clerk, or attorney who fails to comply with

Rules 3, 10, and 11. A copy of any such sanction order shall be served on the clerk of the

Supreme Court and may be reviewed by the Supreme Court for abuse of discretion.

(c) Suspension of Rules. In the interest of expediting decision, or for other good

cause shown, the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals may suspend the requirements or

provisions of any of these rules in a particular case on application of a party or on its own

motion and may order proceedings in accordance with its direction. The time for taking an

appeal under Rules 4 or 5 may be extended in criminal and post-conviction cases, but not in

civil cases.

[Amended effective January 1, 1999; June 29, 2017; June 19, 2026.]

Advisory Committee Historical Note

Effective January 1, 1999, Rule 2(a)(2) was amended to provide that motions for

additional time will not be entertained after notice of deficiency has issued. 717-722 So.2d

XXVII (West Miss.Cases 1998).

Effective January 1, 1999, Rule 2(b) was amended to effect a technical change. 717-

722 So.2d XXVII (West Miss.Cases 1998).

Effective July 1, 1997, the Comment to Rule 2 was amended to reflect the

promulgation of new Rule 4(h). 689-692 So.2d LXVI (West Miss. Cases 1997).

Effective January 1, 1995, Miss.R.App.P. 2 replaced Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 2, embracing

proceedings in the Court of Appeals. 644-647 So.2d XXIV-XXVI (West Miss.Cases 1994).

Effective March 17, 1994, Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 2(a)(2) was amended to provide that if the

party in default fails to correct the deficiency within 14 days after notification, the appeal

shall be dismissed by the clerk. 632-635 So.2d XLII-XLIII (West Miss.Cases 1994)

5, Miss.R.App.P. 2 replaced Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 2, embracing

proceedings in the Court of Appeals. 644-647 So.2d XXIV-XXVI (West Miss.Cases 1994).

Effective March 17, 1994, Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 2(a)(2) was amended to provide that if the

party in default fails to correct the deficiency within 14 days after notification, the appeal

shall be dismissed by the clerk. 632-635 So.2d XLII-XLIII (West Miss.Cases 1994).

Comment

Perpetuating the spirit underlying the former rules of the Mississippi Supreme Court,

the present rules will be construed to facilitate the just and efficient disposition of causes

brought before the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, compliance with

even the most technical requirements of the rules is encouraged.

Under Rule 2(a)(1), if an appeal is not taken within the time specified in Rules 4 or

5, either court, on its own motion or on motion of party, shall dismiss it. Rule 4(g) states

when an extension of time may be granted by the trial court. Rule 2(c) provides for the

suspension of Rule 2(a)(1) in criminal and post-conviction cases.

Where dismissal appears warranted for any other reason, the rule provides for the

clerk to give written notice of the deficiency to counsel for the defaulting party. Specifically,

the clerk will notify counsel that the party is in default in some manner and has 14 days to

correct the noted deficiency. If the deficiency is not corrected within 14 days after

notification, the appeal shall be dismissed by the clerk. In pro se proceedings, notification

of deficiency shall be sent to the party. The rule recognizes that deficiencies may result from

actions of third parties, such as court officials. The primary responsibility, however, for

assuring correction of the deficiency remains with the defaulting party.

Rule 2(b) states the inherent disciplinary authority of either appellate court over

parties and officers of the court

eedings, notification

of deficiency shall be sent to the party. The rule recognizes that deficiencies may result from

actions of third parties, such as court officials. The primary responsibility, however, for

assuring correction of the deficiency remains with the defaulting party.

Rule 2(b) states the inherent disciplinary authority of either appellate court over

parties and officers of the court. Because Rules 3, 10, and 11 involve actions to be taken in

the trial court to prepare the appellate record, the rule recognizes the concurrent jurisdiction

of the trial court to impose sanctions for noncompliance with those rules. See Wilson v.

State, 461 So. 2d 728, 729 (Miss. 1984).

Rule 2(c) provides for suspension of the rules for reasons of expedition or good cause

shown. It is important to note that in civil cases, under Rule 2(c), the Court may not extend

the time for taking an appeal except as provided by Rule 4 (g) or (h). This is a departure

from prior law. See Clark v. City of Pascagoula, 473 So.2d 477 (Miss.1985); but see Roberts

v. Grafe Auto Co., Inc., 653 So.2d 250, 250-251 (Miss. 1994) (The Court held that several

verdict forms signed by the trial court were not "final judgments" triggering the 30-day time

for appeal. The Court further stated that "[e]ven assuming arguendo that the forms could be

construed to be final judgments, [appellant] was never notified of their existence, and her

right to due process would protect her from losing her right to appeal since she was not aware

of the jury verdict forms and was not notified of their existence.") Where a party has filed

an otherwise timely notice of appeal which is ineffective under Rule 4(d) or 4(e), the Court

may, however, suspend the operation of 4(d) or 4(e) to prevent manifest injustice. This is not

an extension of the "time for taking" the appeal. Also, because procedures for criminal

appeals apply to post-conviction relief proceedings, Miss. Code Ann

t notified of their existence.") Where a party has filed

an otherwise timely notice of appeal which is ineffective under Rule 4(d) or 4(e), the Court

may, however, suspend the operation of 4(d) or 4(e) to prevent manifest injustice. This is not

an extension of the "time for taking" the appeal. Also, because procedures for criminal

appeals apply to post-conviction relief proceedings, Miss. Code Ann. § 99-39-25(1), the

Supreme Court may suspend the rules and extend the time for taking an appeal in those

proceedings. Rules 2(c) and 4(g) thus supplant the procedure described in Jones v. State, 355

So.2d 89, 90 (Miss.1978).

APPEALS FROM TRIAL COURTS