COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

County

Authoring Judge

Originating Judge

Date Filter

Case Number

Case Name

Keyword Search

Sort by

Order

Dorothy and Roger Smith v. Maury County - Concurring 01-A-01-9804-CH-00207 Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell Trial Court Judge: Judge William B. Cain The plaintiffs, a mother and her son owning adjoining farms on a rural road in Maury County, sued the county for a nuisance created when the county improved the road. The county argued that the exclusive remedy was for inverse condemnation, and that the one year statute of limitations barred the action. On appeal the county asserts, in addition to its original defense, that the damages awarded were beyond the range of reasonableness. We reverse the judgment below and remand for a new trial.	Maury	Court of Appeals	09/01/99
Tire Shredders vs. ERM 02A01-9803-CV-00058 Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/30/99
Edwin Elam vs. Martha Elam 02A01-9812-CH-00362 Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton	McNairy	Court of Appeals	08/30/99
02A01-9908-CH-00237 02A01-9908-CH-00237		Court of Appeals	08/30/99
Kesterson vs. Dept. of Safety 01A01-9805-CH-00256	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Wilson vs. Dept. of Corrections 01A01-9806-CH-00302	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Curtis vs. Curtis 01A01-9810-CV-00566 Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Gipson vs. Taylor 01A01-9811-CH-00611	Wilson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Doe vs. HCA Health Services of TN 01A01-9806-CV-00306 Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Lee Simmons vs. City of Lexington 02A01-9810-CH-00282 Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris	Henderson	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
James Cozart vs. Lynn Cozart 02A01-9810-CV-00285 Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/27/99
Victoria Robbins vs. Bill Wolfenbarger, D/B/A Wolf's Motors and Sam Horne E1999-02012-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks Trial Court Judge: W. Dale Young Plaintiff Robbins filed a complaint for damages against Wolfenbarger and Horne, alleging breach of contract, intentional misrepresentation and negligence, per se. On August 26, 1999, an Order of Compromise and Dismissal was entered as to Wolfenbarger individually and d/b/a Wolf Motors. Horne did not file an answer during the time allowed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, and Robbins filed a motion for default judgment on July 9, 1999. Horne wrote a letter to the plaintiff's attorney in response to the complaint and summons, postmarked July 16, 1999. The letter was forwarded to the Clerk of the Court for filing by plaintiff's counsel's letter dated July 30, 1999. On August 27, Robbins' Motion for Default Judgment was heard, but Horne who had notice did not attend. A default judgment was entered against Horne and the Trial Court subsequently overruled Horne's Motion to Set Aside the Default. Horne has appealed. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.	Blount	Court of Appeals	08/26/99
Nationsbank, N.A. vs. FormPak, Inc. & Ron Campbell 03A01-9808-CH-00279		Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Nationsbank, N.A. vs. FormPak, Inc. & Ron Campbell 03A01-9808-CH-00279		Court of Appeals	08/25/99
William Terry Wyatt vs. Billie Carey 03A01-9809-CV-00307	Cumberland	Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Saul T. Mallen (Sports-Wear Mills, Inc.) vs. PI, Inc. 03A01-9811-CH-00364		Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Gregory B. Hinton vs. City of Chattanooga 03A01-9901-CV-00013	Hamilton	Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Begley Lumber Company, Inc. vs. Wendell Trammell 03A01-9902-CH-00047		Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Robert Odom v. Mary Odom M1999-02811-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr. Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace This appeal involves a bitter custody dispute over three children between the ages of nine and fourteen. During the divorce proceeding in the Chancery Court for Dickson County, the parties agreed that the mother would have custody of the children and also agreed on visitation arrangements that accommodated the mother's planned move to another state. Several months after the entry of the divorce decree, the father petitioned to change custody and to hold the mother in contempt for interfering with his relationship with the children. During the ensuing three years, the parties traded allegations of sexual and physical abuse of the children and other misconduct. Following a bench trial in December 1998, the trial court found that there had been a material change in the children's circumstances and granted the father custody of the children. On this appeal, the mother asserts that she was denied due process by the trial court's refusal to require the parties and their children to undergo a psychological examination and that the trial court unlawfully delegated its judicial authority to a psychologist who had been counseling the children. We have determined that the mother received an essentially fair hearing on this custody dispute and, therefore, affirm the trial court.	Dickson	Court of Appeals	08/25/99
John Seals vs. James Bowlen, Warden, et al M1999-00997-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle Petitioner, a state inmate, filed the underlying pro se petition for a writ of certiorari to challenge the result of a disciplinary proceeding against him. The trial court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim. We reverse the dismissal of all parties except the Department of Correction and affirm the dismissal for failure to state a claim.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/25/99
Tammy Kemp vs. Thomas Michael Hale 03A01-9809-PB-00284	Cumberland	Court of Appeals	08/24/99
Martha L. Carter, et al vs. Billy L. King 03A01-9810-CV-00327		Court of Appeals	08/24/99
Doris Sanders v. Samuel Sanders, Jr. M1998-00978-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr. Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley This appeal involves a former spouse's right to post-judgment interest on an award of alimony in solido. After her former husband failed to pay the alimony in solido required by the final divorce decree, the former wife filed a petition in the Circuit Court for Davidson County seeking $9,847.68 in post-judgment interest. The trial court recognized that the post-judgment interest had accrued but decided not to award the interest to the former wife unless her former husband failed to make his future periodic alimony payments in a timely manner. When her former husband began to pay his alimony payments late, the former wife renewed her request for the post-judgment interest. The trial court found that the former husband had been delinquent in his alimony payments but again declined to order the former husband to pay the post-judgment interest if he prepaid the remaining balance of his periodic alimony. The former wife has appealed from the trial court's repeated refusal to award her the post-judgment interest on her alimony in solido award. We have determined that the former wife was entitled to post-judgment interest as a matter of law and, therefore, that the trial court erred by failing to award her $9,847.68 for post-judgment interest.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/24/99
Boardwalk Regency Corp. v. Roy Patterson and Trump Taj Mahal Assoc. v. Roy Patterson M1999-02805-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr. Trial Court Judge: Vernon Neal This appeal involves the efforts of two Atlantic City casinos to collect the gambling debts of a Tennessee resident. After obtaining default judgments against the Tennessee resident in New Jersey, the casinos twice attempted to file their judgments in the Chancery Court for Putnam County in accordance with the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act. On both occasions, the trial court declined to file the judgments after finding that they were irregular and that they were not properly authenticated. On the second occasion, the trial court also concluded that its refusal to file the first set of judgments precluded the casinos from filing the second set of judgments. The casinos have appealed. We have determined that the second set of judgments meet the requirements for filing and enforcement under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act and that the casinos' unsuccessful efforts to file the first set of judgments does not prevent them from filing the second set of judgments. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order denying the application to enforce the foreign judgments.	Putnam	Court of Appeals	08/24/99
Ronnie Bradfield vs. City of Memphis 02A01-9808-CV-00220 Trial Court Judge: Karen R. Williams	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/24/99