First, let me say that, being from Tennessee, I'm no stranger to the strange things that "happen" in Mississippi, but we may have a cake-taker...
It may be the first time a majority of the justices voted to prohibit a colleague from publishing a dissent in a case.
In other words, Presiding Justice Oliver Diaz of Ocean Springs disagreed with a court decision and wanted to write about it. His fellow judges said, no, he couldn't and they apparently stopped the court clerk from filing Diaz's statement into the record.
Let that sink in a moment.
Here's the link so you can see I'm not just making shit up.
Apparently, the more conservative wing of the Mississippi Supreme Court (there's a cheerful thought) decided that the Statute of Limitations for any Wrongful Death claim starts the day the injury happens rather than when the death actually takes place, which is absurd on its face, but when Justice Diaz disagreed, they voted to not allow him to even publish a dissenting opinion.
Given the opportunity, this is how conservatives want everything to work.
[Update] Per Christian Dem in NC in the Comments:
JACKSON - A dissenting opinion barred from disclosure Thursday by a majority of the Mississippi Supreme Court is public now.
Clerk Jack Pool e-mailed to the Daily Journal a copy of the dissent by Presiding Justice Oliver Diaz, which the justice wrote earlier this week related to an En Banc decision to dismiss a wrongful death case appeal.