Ila Stephens Bertram v. Charles R. Gernt, Estate of Bruno Gernt, Inc. Champion International Corporation, Hood Coal Company, et. al .
The plaintiff filed suit to establish present title to land in Fentress County that had previously belonged to her family. The Chancery Court dismissed her suit on the ground that she lost whatever interest she had in the land through foreclosure. After examining the record and the briefs of the parties, we find that the trial court did not err in dismissing the suit, and we affirm. |
Fentress | Court of Appeals | |
Randall Myers v. Hurst Construction Company, Inc.
The Trial Court and this Court have granted permission to the Hurst Construction Co., Inc., to appeal from an interlocutory order of the Trial Court overruling the motion of Hurst Construction Co., Inc., for summary judgment on grounds of the statute of limitations. |
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
Anthony Lee Eden, v. CherylAnn Eden
The Court, with the concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may affirm, reverse or modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum opinion when a formal opinion would have no precedential value. When a case is decided by memorandum opinion, it shall be designated "MEMORANDUM OPINION," shall not be published, and shall not be cited or relied on for any reason in a subsequent unrelated case. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Robert A. Hewgley, Deane Pritchett, and H. Mel Weaver, v. Jose A. Vivo and wife Peggy M. Vivo
This appeal involves the enforcement of a 47-year-old restrictive covenant in a residential subdivision in Tullahoma. After a physician converted one of the homes in the subdivision into a medical clinic, a group of property owners filed suit in the Chancery Court for Coffee County seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to enforce a restrictive covenant requiring the property in the subdivision to be used for residential purposes. The trial court, sitting without a jury, determined that the restrictive covenant remained enforceable, directed the physician to remove an illuminated exterior sign, and awarded attorney’s fees to the property owners. On this appeal, the physician takes issue with the enforcement of the restrictive covenant and with the award of attorney’s fees. While we affirm the enforcement of the restrictive covenant, we reverse the award of attorney’s fees. |
Coffee | Court of Appeals | |
Smith vs. Duncan
|
Fentress | Court of Appeals | |
Thomas, et. ux. vs. Crockett, et. al.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Thomas, et. ux. vs. Crockett, et. al.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
J. Harold Shankle Co. vs. Bedford Co. Bd.
|
Bedford | Court of Appeals | |
Davis vs. Rose
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State, DHS Assignee of: Stanley vs. Hooper
|
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
Klindt vs. Klindt
|
Wilson | Court of Appeals | |
The Tennessean vs. Electric Power Bd. of Nashville
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Marion | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Brooks vs. Brooks
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Jones vs. Jones
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
State Farm & Casualty vs. Pickral, et. ux.
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9604-CH-00362
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Fisher & Bell vs. Metro Gov't.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Houser vs. Traughber
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Davis vs. Burson
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Overton | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9607-JV-00234
|
Sullivan | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9608-CH-00247
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Knox | Court of Appeals |