In Re Quentin G.
This appeal arises from a petition to terminate parental rights. The trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that one ground for termination existed as to the father based on a prior adjudication of severe child abuse and that termination was in the best interest of the child. The father appeals. We affirm the trial court’s decision and remand. |
Court of Appeals | ||
Tino C. Sutton v. State of Tennessee
This is an interlocutory appeal as of right, pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B, from the trial court’s orders denying the petitioner’s two pro se motions to recuse the trial court judge in the underlying restoration of citizenship action. The petitioner based his first motion to recuse in the instant case entirely upon actions and rulings made by the trial court judge in a previous civil case. He based his second motion to recuse on the same actions and rulings plus two additional orders, one entered by the trial court judge while the petitioner’s appeal of the first recusal denial was pending. Discerning no reversible error in the trial court judge’s denial of the motions to recuse, we affirm. |
Bedford | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Antonio P. et al.
The trial court terminated a mother’s parental rights to two of her minor children on the grounds of abandonment by failure to visit, substantial noncompliance with the permanency plans, persistent conditions, and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody or financial responsibility of the children. We affirm the trial court’s ruling on all grounds. We also conclude that terminating the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests and affirm the trial court’s ultimate ruling. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Teofila H. Mocny v. Ronald G. Mocny
This is an appeal of a divorce case. Although we affirm in part and reverse in part, we also vacate several aspects of the trial court’s judgment for the reasons stated herein and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. |
Lawrence | Court of Appeals | |
Christine Christopher v. Walmart Associates, Inc.
A plaintiff sued a grocery store for premises liability, and the case was tried by a jury in June of 2023. The jury |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Rimon Abdou v. Wesley Ben Clark Et Al.
In this legal-malpractice case, the trial court granted Appellees’/Attorneys’ Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Appellant/Client appeals. Discerning no error, we affirm and remand. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
F. W. White & Associates, LLC Et Al. v. John R. Chilton Et Al.
This appeal arises from a business relationship that deteriorated. F.W. White & Associates, LLC (“FWA”), through Fenton W. White, Jr. (“White”) (“Appellees,” collectively), sued John R. Chilton (“Chilton”), Centennial |
Court of Appeals | ||
Brett Thomas Ferguson v. Lucy Maria Traughber
The trial court granted Appellee/Father’s petition to change his son’s surname from Appellant/Mother’s surname to Father’s. Mother appeals. Because Father did not carry his burden of proof to demonstrate that changing the child’s name is in the child’s best interest, we reverse and remand. |
Robertson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Estate of William Rucker
Following the Decedent’s death, no original will could be found. One of his daughters filed a petition to administer a copy of a lost will, which the trial court granted. We reverse, concluding the evidence does not overcome the strong presumption in favor of revocation of the lost will. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Tina M. Vasudeva v. Kathie Barker
The trial court granted Appellee’s motion for extension of an order of protection against |
Warren | Court of Appeals | |
Kathleen Nell Snapp v. Timothy Alva Snapp
In this divorce appeal, the husband challenges the trial court’s classification of real estate as marital property and |
Sullivan | Court of Appeals | |
Rebecca Byrd v. Clarksville-Montgomery County School System
A tenured teacher sought judicial review of her reprimand and one-day suspension. The chancery court modified the discipline imposed by the director of schools. Because we conclude that the teacher did not timely petition for judicial review, we vacate the judgment with instructions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
James R. Tarwater v. Hardik Patel Et Al.
Because the order from which the appellant has filed an appeal does not constitute a final appealable judgment, |
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Christopher Hinds Et Al. v. Patsy Selman Oliver Et Al.
This case involves a dispute over recovery under the Tennessee uninsured/underinsured motorist statutory scheme. The plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit against the defendant driver and served notice on their own insurance carrier. The plaintiffs also served notice on the insurance carrier covering the borrowed vehicle that the plaintiffs had been utilizing when the accident occurred. The plaintiffs’ insurer entered into a settlement with the plaintiffs for $50,000 each, an amount that equaled the policy limit of the uninsured motorist coverage provided in the policy covering the borrowed vehicle. The defendant driver’s insurer also entered into a settlement with the plaintiffs, paying them $30,000 each. The uninsured motorist carrier covering the borrowed vehicle filed a motion for summary judgment. Following a hearing, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurance carrier upon concluding that Tennessee Code Annotated § 56-7-1201(b)(3)(D) and the policy covering the borrowed vehicle limited the plaintiffs’ recovery via judgment to an amount no greater than the policy providing the highest limits of uninsured motorist coverage. Plaintiffs have appealed. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Loring Justice v. Kim Nelson Et Al.
Loring Justice (“Justice”) filed a complaint against Kim Nelson (“Nelson”); David Valone (“Valone”) and the Law |
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Rodney N. Washington v. Music City Autoplex, LLC
This is an appeal from a trial court’s dismissal of a complaint for race discrimination for failure to state a claim. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the circuit court. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Delvon Paden v. Kyrstyen Davison
The trial court entered a permanent parenting plan in 2014 that governed the parties’ custody arrangement for nine years. In 2022, the child’s father petitioned the juvenile court for a modification of the parenting plan. During the pendency of the modification petition, he also filed a motion for a restraining order to prevent the child’s mother from removing the parties’ daughter from his custody, which was granted. After a hearing on the modification petition, the court found a material change in circumstances had occurred warranting modification and that modification of the custody arrangement was in the child’s best interest. We affirm. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
Hope Federal Credit Union v. Jenifer Griffin v. Allstate Corporation ET AL.
This appeal concerns a dispute over insurance coverage. After a fire loss, the insured brought a breach of contract claim against her insurer. The insurer subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court awarded summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the insured was not entitled to coverage for additional living expenses because she did not have an insurable interest in the property and that the insured’s contents coverage claim was precluded under the doctrine of judicial estoppel. The insured appeals. We reverse and remand. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Remington C., Et Al.
In this parental termination case, the paternal grandparents filed a petition to terminate the |
Warren | Court of Appeals | |
John David Ruff v. Vanderbilt University Medical Center
The plaintiff filed a health care liability action without a certificate of good faith. When the defendant moved to dismiss, the plaintiff asserted that the certificate was unnecessary because the common knowledge exception applied. He also contended that his noncompliance should be excused based on the defendant’s failure to timely provide medical records and/or for extraordinary cause. The trial court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments and dismissed the action with prejudice. We affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Donald Douglas Wright v. Angel Sims Wright
In this post-divorce dispute over child support, the mother has appealed an order striking her pleadings and granting the father a default judgment as to his counter-petition. Because the order appealed does not resolve all the claims between the parties, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Frisbey Et Al. v. Salem Pointe Capital, LLC Et Al.
The company holding developer’s rights to a subdivision and the company’s principal member used the developer’s rights to unilaterally remove a board member from the board of the subdivision’s homeowners’ association. The aggrieved board member and his wife filed suit, asking for an injunction allowing the plaintiff to remain a board member. The trial court granted the plaintiff’s request for a temporary injunction and later held that the defendant company lacked the authority to remove the plaintiff as a board member. The trial court reasoned that the bylaw on which the company relied in removing the board member was contrary to state law and improper. Defendants appealed to this Court. We reverse in part and affirm in part, affirming the trial court’s ultimate ruling that the plaintiff is entitled to his seat on the homeowners’ association board. |
Monroe | Court of Appeals | |
Roger Glen Vincent v. Deborah Lynn Vincent
In this divorce action, the wife contends that the trial court inequitably divided the parties’ |
Robertson | Court of Appeals | |
Angel Aguilar ET AL v. Eads Auto Sales
In an appeal from a general sessions court judgment, the trial court awarded the plaintiffs compensatory damages for a misrepresentation by a car dealer, declined to award treble damages, and awarded the plaintiffs only a portion of their attorney’s fees. Both parties appeal. We vacate the denial of treble damages, but otherwise affirm the decision of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
James V. Holleman v. Barbara J. Holleman
After many years of contentious post-divorce litigation, the trial court ordered the court clerk’s office to distribute property-sale proceeds to the parties. The trial court also ordered that the wife’s portion of the sale proceeds be taxed in an amount sufficient to satisfy a previous sanctions award against the wife and an award of attorney’s fees to the husband. The wife appeals to this Court. Discerning no error, we affirm. |
Knox | Court of Appeals |