Subject: Re: Mississippi AG's Opinion on Section 100
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 03:24:00 -0800 (PST)

Greg,

I've read the opinion and agree with your summary of it.  However, it doesn't 
answer the question for me as to whether a Mississippi court would uphold 
such a clause, or how other contracting parties have dealt with the issue.  
Due to the importance of the issue I will consult with a Mississippi firm to 
get a handle on the question.

Thanks for your help,

Kay

"Evans, Greg" <[email-masked]> on 03/02/2001 04:57:22 PM
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
cc: "Keffer, John" <[email-masked]> 

Subject: Mississippi AG's Opinion on Section 100

As an update to my earlier e-mail, I located both the Miss. AG's Opinion
letter construing Section 100 and the initial request from a State entity
that prompted the Opinion.  

Assuming a State entity is a party to a contract, the AG's Opinion does not
opine that Section 100 prohibits contractual clauses that exclude
consequential damages.  Instead, the AG's office could not find any
statutory authority that allows a public officer to contractually limit a
private vendor's liability to the State entity.  Although the AG did not
state that such clauses are prohibited, the AG held that it could not
affirmatively sanction such clauses in the absence of statutory authority.

                    Confidentiality Notice
This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer.  It is intended 
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  This 
communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or 
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure.  If you are not the 
named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or 
disseminate this message or any part of it.  If you have received this 
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete 
all copies of the message.