Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 1 of 7

IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

BUL GARANG MABIL PLAINTIFF

V. CAUSE NO. G2-2024-429

KARISSA BOWLEY,
MISSISSIPPI CAPITOL POLICE,
MISSISSIPPI STATE CRIME LAB,
JOHN DOE PERSON(S) 1-5,
JOHN DOE ENTITY (IES) 1-5 DEFENDANTS

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT

KARISSA BOWLEY’S MOTION TO CLARIFY, MOTION TO REALIGN THE
PARTIES, AND/OR MOTION TO MODIFY THE INJUNCTION AND
SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW

COMES NOW, Bul Garang Mabil, the Plaintiff, by and through undersigned

counsel of record, and files this his Response in Opposition to Defendant Karissa

Bowley’s Motion to Clarify, Motion to Realign the Parties, and/or Motion to Modify the

Injunction, and would show unto the court the following, to wit:

1. Bul Garang Mabil, the brother of Dau Garang Mabil and the uncle of Dau Garang

Mabil’s minor son, filed a Complaint for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and

Preliminary Injunction on April 17, 2024. Doc. #: 2 and 3. Bul Garang Mabil and his

deceased brother Dau Garang Mabil are two of the “Lost Boys of Sudan.” They resettled

in Jackson, Mississippi 23 years ago after fleeing a civil war between North and South

Sudan.
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 2 of 7

2. In 2018, Dau Garang Mabil, Deceased, became a father. A copy of the minor

child’s birth certificate was presented to the Court on April 18, 2024 during a hearing on

the Complaint for an Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary

Injunction. The minor child’s mother has now joined in the Complaint for Emergency

Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. Doc. #: 12.

3. Bul Garang Mabil filed the matter pro se on April 17, 2024. Doc. #: 2 & 3. Prior

to hiring undersigned counsel, a process server agreed to serve the Complaint. Bul

Garang Mabil, however, was not aware that the clerk was required to issue a Summons

for each defendant and/or that he should have filed a Notice of Hearing. Mississippi Rule

of Civil Procedure 4(a) provides: “[u]pon filing of the complaint, the clerk shall forthwith

issue a summons.” In addition, “[t]he official comment to Mississippi Rule of Civil

Procedure 4 states, `[a]fter an action is commenced, the clerk is required to issue a

separate summons for each defendant except in the case of summons by publication.’”

Fletcher v. Limeco Corp., 996 So. 2d 773, 777 (Miss. 2008). The docket sheet shows the

clerk did not issue summons.

4. Bul Garang Mabil retained counsel on the evening of April 17, 2024 and informed

undersigned counsel a hearing was scheduled for 9 a.m. on April 18, 2024. During

undersigned counsel’s meeting with Bul Garang Mabil, he provided undersigned counsel

with copies of his Complaint for Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and

Preliminary Injunction and Supplement to Complaint for Emergency Temporary

Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. See, Doc. #: 2 and 3. When undersigned

counsel asked if the Complaint had been served, Bul Marang Mabil answered in the

affirmative.

2
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 3 of 7

5. On the morning of April 18, 2024, undersigned counsel appeared in Court with

Bul Garang Mabil. The process server also appeared at the Hinds County Chancery Court

and signed three Proofs of Service before a deputy clerk. Doc. #: 5, 6, & 7. The Proofs of

Service contained the following provision: “I, the undersigned process server, served the

summons and petition upon the person or entity named in the manner set forth below…”

Doc. #: 5, 6, & 7. Undersigned counsel gave the deputy sheriff assigned to your Honor’s

courtroom a copy of same and he delivered them to your Honor’s chambers. Because

undersigned counsel did not file the instant Complaint, undersigned counsel did not know

that the clerk had not issued the Summons with the Complaint and/or that the Complaint

was served without a Summons or a Notice of Hearing.

6. On April 18, 2024, Paloma Wu entered an appearance on behalf of “Mrs. Karissa

Bowley.” Doc. #: 10. Paloma Wu filed a Motion to Clarify, Motion to Realign the

Parties and a Motion to Modify the Preliminary Injunction. Doc. #: 11. In her motion,

Karissa Bowley informed the Court that she did not receive notice of the April 18, 2024

hearing. Doc. #: 11, p. 1 of 4. Karissa Bowley did not seek dismissal based on

insufficient service of process. She stated: “[s]he would have attended had she known.

She would have testified that she embraces the Court’s granted relief to the extent

described below; she would have granted the Plaintiff’s request had he asked.” Doc. #:

11, p. 1 of 4.

7. In the third defense in her Answer, Karissa Bowley states “[u]nder Miss. Code

Ann. § 41-37-25, Karissa Bowley has elected to permit an additional autopsy, subject to

certain parameters.” Doc. #: 13, p. 8 of 11. In her Amended Answer, her counsel wrote:

3
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 4 of 7

“Karissa does now and would previously have authorized this had the Plaintiff asked

her.” Doc. #: 14, p. 1 of 12.

8. There is no question that “[t]he courts have generally agreed that the primary and

paramount rights to possession of the body of a decedent and to control of the burial or

other legal disposition of the body are in the surviving spouse. The right of a surviving

spouse to the custody of the dead body for purposes of burial is not an absolute right, but

one which, while normally observed, is nonetheless subject to judicial control.” Spanich

v. Reichelder, 90 Ohio App. 3d 148, 152 (COA 1993). “Furthermore, the surviving

spouse’s right to control the burial or disposal of the decedent’s body is dependent upon

the peculiar circumstances of each case, and may be waived by consent or otherwise.”

Id. (citing 22A American Jurisprudence 2d (1988), Dead Bodies, Section 21).

9. Because Karissa Bowley conceded in her motion to clarify, Answer and

Amended Answer,” this Court should not disturb its April 18, 2024 Order which

authorized Bul Harang Mabil to obtain an independent autopsy and should not impose the

restrictions listed below on Bul Harang Mabil’s independent autopsy:

“1. The additional autopsy that the Plaintiff requests may only occur after all
law enforcement entities which are or which will be, in the future,
investigating Dau’s death have completed all aspects of their investigation
which may require access to Dau’s remains;

2. The additional autopsy that the Plaintiff requests may only be conducted
by a pathologist who is at least as qualified as is generally required of
pathologists conducting autopsies for the State of Mississippi, specifically,
he or she must be (1) “an M.D. or D.O. who is certified in anatomic
pathology by the American Board of Pathology,” and (2) “a competent
pathologist who is designated by the State Medical Examiner of the
Department of Public Safety as a pathologist qualified to perform
postmortem examinations and autopsies;

4
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 5 of 7

3. The additional autopsy that the Plaintiff requests must be completed

within one month after the last law enforcement entity investigating Dau’s
death has completed its investigation.”

10. Bul Harang Mabil sought relief from this Court after Capitol Police officials

refused to tell him whether an autopsy would be performed before Dau Harang Mabil’s

body was released to Karissa Bowley. Doc. #: 2 and 3. Although Capitol Police would

not divulge whether the law enforcement agency would conduct an autopsy, they asked

Bul Garang Mabil to submit to DNA testing. Bul Garang Mabil submitted to DNA

testing on April 15, 2024 two days after Dau Garang Mabil’s body was found floating in

the Pearl River.

11. The Jackson Police Department is investigating Dau Bul Harang’s disappearance

and death. Bul Harang Mabil has asked the Department of Justice to take over the

investigation. Time is of the essence. Dau Harang Mabil’s presence in the Pearl River

already may have compromised efforts to determine what caused his death. With Karissa

Bowley waiving her objections to the independent autopsy, Bul Harang Mabil should not

be forced to wait until all law enforcement entities complete their investigations before

the independent autopsy ordered by this Court is performed.

12. Karissa Bowley also urged this Court to require the pathologist selected by Bul

Harang Mabil to be as qualified as pathologists who conduct autopsies for the State of

Mississippi. Doc#: 11. Suffice it to say, the pathologist has “a MD and is certified in

anatomic pathology by the American Board of Pathology. While the pathologist has

never been “designated by the State Medical Examiner of the Department of Public

Safety as a pathologist qualified to perform postmortem examinations and autopsies in

Mississippi,” there is no Mississippi law which requires such. Furthermore, if the State

5
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 6 of 7

Medical Examiner of the Department of Public Safety is allowed to designate the

pathologist to perform an independent autopsy of Dau Harang Mabil, Bul Harang Mabil’s

request would be pointless. Consequently, this Court should deny Karissa Bowley’s

request to require the pathologist to be “designated by the State Medical Examiner of the

Department of Public Safety as a pathologist qualified to perform postmortem

examinations and autopsies in Mississippi.”

13. Karissa Bowley also asks this Court to remove Bul Harang Mabil as the Plaintiff

and to name her as the Plaintiff. As the surviving spouse of Dau Harang Mabil, Karissa

Bowley could have opposed Bul Harang Mabil’s request for an independent autopsy.

Campaign for Southern Equal. v. Bryant, 64 F. Supp. 3d 906 (S.D. Miss. Nov. 25, 2014),

(stating that Miss. Code Ann. § 41-37-25 provides “that surviving spouses are among the

individuals authorized to consent to the performance of an autopsy).” Consequently, it

was proper for Bul Harang Mabil to name Karissa Bowley as a defendant in this action.

Since Karissa Bowley failed to lodge an objection, embraced this Court’s Order and

elected to permit an independent autopsy, this Court should deny her request to remove

Bul Harang Mabil as a Plaintiff and/or to name her as a Plaintiff in his stead.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, for the reasons stated above, Bul

Harang Mabil prays that this Court will enter an Order denying Karissa Bowley’s Motion

to Clarify, Motion to Realign the Parties, and/or Motion to Modify the Injunction.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this is the 22nd day of April 2024.

//s// Lisa M. Ross

Lisa M. Ross (MSB#9755)
Post Office Box 11264
Jackson, MS 39283-1264
(Telephone) 601-981-7900
lross@lmrossatlaw.com

6
Case: 25CH1:24-cv-00429 Document #: 15 Filed: 04/22/2024 Page 7 of 7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Lisa M. Ross, undersigned counsel for Plaintiff do hereby certify that I have

this day electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the system

MEC, which sent notification of such filing to all counsel of record.

This is the 22nd day of April 2024.

/s/ Lisa M. Ross

Lisa M. Ross