David Chenault, v. Jeff L. Walker, Jo Bursey, Jack L. Moore, Ocean Inn, Inc., and Dimension III Financial Inc.
This case deals with in personam jurisdiction under the Tennessee Long Arm 1 This Court originally denied the application for interlocutory appeal. The Supreme Court granted the appellant’s T.R.A.P. 11 application for permission to appeal and remanded the case to this Court for a review on the merits. 2 Also named as a defendant is Jeff L. Walker, but he is not involved in this interlocutory appeal. 2 Statute and comes to this Court as a T.R.A.P. interlocutory appeal.1 Defendants, Jo Bursey (Bursey), Jack L. Moore (Moore), Ocean Inn, Inc. (Ocean Inn), and Dimension III Financial, Inc. (Dimension III)2, appeal the order of the trial court denying their motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
David . LeFemine, and David Sanders, v. Phillips & Jordan, Incorporated
This is a suit by Plaintiffs David LeFemine and David Sanders seeking damages for breach of contract against Defendant Phillips & Jordan, Incorporated, which alleges that Defendant Phillips & Jordan failed to provide the Plaintiffs an access road as it had by written contract agreed to do. The Trial Court dismissed the Plaintiff's proof resulting in this appeal which insists the evidence preponderates against the action of the Trial Court. We vacate the Trial Court'sjudgment and remand the case for further proceedings.
|
Washington | Court of Appeals | |
Gerald W. Smith, v. Roane County Circuit Court Harriman Utility Board, Richard A. Hall and the City Harriman, Tennessee
'This is an appeal by Gerald W. Smith (“Plaintiff”) under T.R.A.P. Rule 3 alleging error in the Trial Court’s granting Summary Judgment to Defendants/Appellees, Harriman Utility Board (“HUB”), HUB General Manager Richard A. Hall (“Hall”), and the City of Harriman, Tennessee (“Harriman”). Plaintiff was an employee of HUB, and after his employment was terminated filed suit for breach of contract, procurement of breach of contract in violation of T.C.A. 2 § 47-50-109, retaliatory discharge, and promissory estoppel. The Circuit Court for Roane County entered summary judgment for Defendants on all claims. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment of the Trial Court. |
Roane | Court of Appeals | |
In the Matter of The Liquidation for United American Bank of Knoxville, TN Security Pacific Equipment Leasing, Inc. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
Appellant leased equipment to United American Bank (“UAB”) for a seven year term. Three years into the lease, UAB was closed by the Tennessee Commissioner of Banking and FDIC FILED February 9, 2000 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk 2 was appointed as receiver. Appellant filed a claim with FDIC seeking recovery of the full amount due on the lease. The Trial Court granted summary judgment to FDIC, thus upholding the constitutionality and applicability of T.C.A. § 45-2-1504(b), which provides that lessors can recover a maximum of two months’ lease payments after a Tennessee bank fails and is closed. In this appeal, lessor contends that T.C.A. § 45-2-1504(b) violates the Equal Protection Clauses of the U.S. and Tennessee Constitutions by treating lessors differently from other contract claimants and that the application of the statute results in an unconstitutional taking of its property without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 21 of the Tennessee Constitution. For the reasons herein stated, we affirm the judgment of the Trial Court. |
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Richard Pallmer Jahn, Jr., v. Sheryl June Jahn
This is a third appeal in this divorce action which was filed more than six years ago between plaintiff (“husband”) and defendant (“wife”). |
Court of Appeals | ||
Joe Parker, et al., v. Board of Commissioners of Roane Co., and TN Board of Commissioners of Roane Co., TN, v. Joe Parker, et al.
This an appeal of a Roane Chancery Court order which enjoined Appellants, Joe Parker, Mary Lynn Parker and Tiger Haven, Inc., from maintaining any Class I, wild or exotic animals, on certain parcels of land in Roane Count, and from expanding theoperation of Tiger Haven, Inc., except upon proper applicatin and approval by the County. While not as exactly stated by the parties, the issues raised on appeal aare whether (1) Appellant's refusal to rezone Appellant' property was arbitrary and capricious, (2) Appellants' use of parcel 22.06 is a pre-existing nonconforming use which may be expanded by Appellants, (3) Appellee's affirmative respresentations to Appellants and its failure to enforce its zoning ordinance for over six years estops it from now enforcing the zoning ordinances, (4) the A-2 zoning regulations are unconstitutionally vague and/or overbroad (5) the A-1 zoning regulations and Appellee's actions in not rezoning Parcel 29.01 work an unreasonable discrimination against Appellant's property, and (6) the Trial Court erred in denying Appellant's motion asking that the judgment be altered or amended or a new trial had based on evidence discovered after the trial. For the reasons herein stated, we vacate the judgment of the Trial Court and remand the case to the Trial Court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. |
Roane | Court of Appeals | |
Harley White and William Mack White v. Guy N. Jones and wife, Violet E. Jones
This is a dispute between adjoining property owners over a tract of land which the Chancellor determined was owned by plaintiffs. |
Cocke | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee, v. Male Pit Bull, Dewayne Rogers, Shanie Rogers , Billie Jean Ritchie Jones
This is an appeal from the Hamilton County Criminal Court’s finding of criminal contempt against Dewayne Rogers, Shanie Rogers and Billie Jean Ritchie Jones. Mrs. Jones, Defendant-Appellant, raises the following issue, which we restate: Whether the Appellant was improperly convicted of criminal contempt solely on the basis of the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice? |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Barbara Branum v. Corrine W. Akins, and Melvin L. Akins
This is a suit wherein the Plaintiff Barbara Brunum, inter alia, seeks to set aside a conveyance by her mother, the Defendant Corrine W. Akins--who held certain real property in trust for her--to her brother, Defendant Melvin L. Akins. The basis of the suit is that her mother violated her fiduciary duty by conveying the property to her brother and that he was guilty of fraud and conspiracy in accepting the transfer. The only consideration for the transfer was the assumption and payment of a prior secured indebtedness against the property in the amount of $29,392.25. The Trial Court found in favor of the daughter against the mother, awarded damages in the amount of $34,607.75, plus pre-judgment interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum, beginning April 28, 1998, the date our opinion in a prior appeal of this case was filed. The Chancellor dismissed the claim as to the brother. The daughter appeals insisting the Trial Court was in error in not setting aside the transfer. We are of the opinion that the Trial Judge acted properly and affirm the judgment entered. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Duffy Tool & Stamping, Inc., v. Bosch Automotive Motor Systems, formerly known as BG Automotive Motors, Inc.
This appeal involves a contract dispute between a manufacturer of automobile parts and one of its suppliers. After the manufacturer complained repeatedly about the quality of its parts, the supplier informed the manufacturer that it would no longer supply the parts even though two years remained on its contract. The manufacturer rejected a portion of the supplier’s last shipment of parts and contracted with another supplier to take over the manufacturing of the parts. The original supplier then filed suit against the manufacturer in the Chancery Court for Sumner County for the balance due on its last shipment, and the manufacturer counterclaimed for breach of the supply contract. The trial court heard the case without a jury and determined that the supplier had breached the supply contract but was also entitled to a set-off based on its last delivery of parts. Accordingly, the trial court awarded the manufacturer a $133,542.66 judgment against the supplier. On this appeal, the supplier takes issue with the judgment on three grounds: that the parties modified their original contract; that the manufacturer waived its breach of contract claim; and that the trial court did not employ the proper measure of damages. We have determined that the evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that the supplier breached the contract but that the trial court incorrectly calculated the damages. Accordingly, we reduce the manufacturer’s judgment against the supplier to $18,953. |
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tenessee o/b/o Carol A. Vaughn v. Peter Kaatrude - Concurring
This appeal involves a father’s obligation to pay support for a non-marital child. Fifteen years after the child’s birth, the Tennessee Department of Human Services, acting on behalf of the child’s mother, filed suit in the Montgomery County Juvenile Court seeking to establish paternity and to obtain past and future support from the father. Following a bench trial, the trial court entered an order establishing paternity and ordering the father to pay $542.50 per month in child support. The juvenile court also awarded the mother $50,000 in back child support. The father now takes issue with the amount of the award for back child support. We have concluded that the evidence does not support the amount of the award for back child support and accordingly remand the case for further proceedings. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
Carl Scott and Alma Scott, v. Rogers Group, Inc.
This is a case involving breach of contract. Plaintiffs/appellants, Carl Scott and Alma Scott (referred to herein as “the Scotts”) appeal from the order of the trial court granting summary judgment to defendant/appellee, Rogers Group, Inc. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Barry Stokes and Pamela Stokes v. Torina Arnold
The Chancery Court for Dickson County terminated a mother’s parental rights to three young children and allowed the foster parents to proceed with the adoption of the children. Because we find that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence upon which to base the termination of the mother’s parental rights, we reverse. |
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
Steven B. Dargi and Andrea L. Dargi v. The Terminix International Company, State of Tennessee, et al. - Concurring
The plaintiff repeatedly cursed and insulted the defendant’s attorney during a taped deposition. The attorney played portions of the tape during the trial. The trial court found that the plaintiff’s utterances constituted criminal contempt. We affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In the Matter of: K.E.C.D., a child Under the Age of 18 Years
This appeal involves a dispute over the surname of a child born to unmarried parents. The biological father (“Father”) of the minor child, seeks reversal of the juvenile court’s denial of his motion to change the child’s last name. Over the objections of the mother (“Mother”),1 Father sought to change his son’s last name to his own to reflect his paternity. For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.2 |
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Ferris E. Watson v. Lynn Rose Watson
This case involves a dispute over custody of two children upon their parents’ divorce. The trial court awarded custody to Lynn Rose Watson (“Mother”) with visitation to Ferris E. Watson (“Father”). Father appeals, claiming he is comparatively the better parent. We affirm the award of custody to Mother. |
Stewart | Court of Appeals | |
Robert Bean, Franklin Shaffer, David Autry, Mack Roberts, v. Ned Ray McWherter, Governor of the State of Tennessee, et al.
The appellants have asked the court to rehear this appeal because we did not address the facial conflict between the definitions of Class II and Class III wildlife, leaving the public without any guidance as to what species are in Class II. Since the possession of Class II wildlife without a permit is a crime, and no permit is required for the possession of those species in Class III, the determination of what is included in Class II is the critical determination. And a person of ordinary intelligence must be able to make it. State v. Thomas, 635 S.W.2d 114 (Tenn. 1982). |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Rutherford Co. Bd. of Ed. vs. Rutherford Co. Comm.
|
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
E1999-02098-C)A-R3-CV
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance vs. Brian Howard, et al
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
E1999-02550-COA-R3-CV
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
02525-COA-R3-CV
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
00747-COA-R3-CV
|
Sullivan | Court of Appeals | |
Jeffrey L. Lawson v. University of Tennessee
We granted this Rule 9, T.R.A.P., application to determine whether the defendant University of Tennessee (“the University”) can be sued for a violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. We find that it cannot be sued for such violations under the current state of the law. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying the University’s motion to dismiss. |
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
E1999-02516-COA-R9-CV
|
Knox | Court of Appeals |
