Vicky Jones et al. v. Kindred Healthcare Opertaing, Inc. et al.
We here review a trial court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Each defendant is alleged to have been involved in the ownership and operation of a nursing home facility at which the mother of the plaintiff was a resident prior to her death. The mother had, several years earlier, executed a general durable power of attorney naming one of her daughters as her attorney-infact. Later that daughter signed a letter purporting to give another of the mother’s daughters certain powers. This daughter then secured the admission of their mother to the nursing facility in question here and in the admissions process signed an arbitration agreement. The defendants contend that her signature is effective to require arbitration of the claims raised in this suit. We conclude that the signing daughter did not possess the requisite authority to enter into a binding arbitration agreement. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s decision and remand for further proceedings. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Jeanne W. Fickle v. James Edward Fickle
In this divorce action, Husband appeals the trial court’s valuation of his closely held stock and the classification of its appreciation as marital property; the $75,000 award of alimony in solido to Wife to account for her interest in the appreciation of that stock; the award of $1,500 per month in transitional alimony for 60 months; and the award to Wife of $25,000 in attorney’s fees incurred through trial and of $1,500 in attorney’s fees incurred in defending against husband’s motion to alter or amend the judgment. We affirm. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Bobby E. White and Ann H. White v. Pulaski Electric System
Bobby E. White and Ann H. White sought judgment granting them title to a small portion of property that they claim to own by deed, adverse possession and by payment of taxes. The trial court granted Pulaski Electric System, a public electric company, summary judgment. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Giles | Court of Appeals | |
Elizabeth Bailey v. Mary Taylor, et al. and Mary Taylor v. Elizabeth Bailey, et al.
These consolidated appeals arise out of two forcible entry and detainer suits filed in general sessions court and appealed to circuit court. For the following reasons, we have determined that one appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final order, and one appeal must be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Ford Motor Credit Company v. Kurt F. Luna
This appeal arises from the dismissal of an appeal from a general sessions judgment. The appellant purchaser defaulted on a loan from the appellee finance company for the purchase of a vehicle. The finance company then filed an action to recover possession of the vehicle. The general sessions court entered a judgment in favor of the finance company. The purchaser appealed the judgment to the circuit court. The finance company moved to dismiss the appeal for failure to file the required bond. The circuit court found that the purchaser was not indigent and granted the motion to dismiss. The purchaser appeals, challenging the circuit court’s finding that he was not indigent. We find that an appeal bond was not required under Tennessee caselaw. Therefore, we reverse the decision of the circuit court and remand for further proceedings. |
Marshall | Court of Appeals | |
Ronnie Berke vs. Chubb Group of Insurance Companies and Pacific Indemnity Company
This action was filed on October 3, 1996 in the Chancery Court. The Final Judgment was entered in the Trial Court on September 13, 2007. On appeal, we vacate and remand for a new trial inter alia due to the unreasonable delay by the Trial Court in rendering judgment. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee Department of Children's Services v. J.C. et al.
The State of Tennessee Department of Children’s Services (“DCS”) filed a petition seeking to terminate the parental rights of J.C. (“Father”) and B.C. (“Mother”) to the minor children S.A.C., K.O.C., and J.S.C. (“the Children”). After trial, the Juvenile Court entered an order finding and holding, inter alia, that clear and convincing evidence existed to terminate Father’s and Mother’s parental rights under Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 36-1-113(g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3), and that termination was in the best interests of the Children. Father and Mother appeal to this Court. We affirm. |
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
Roy S. Lawrence, et al. v. HCA Health Services of Tennessee, Inc. d/b/a Summit Medical Center; and Holladay Property Services, Inc.
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, filed this premises liability action for personal injuries sustained by the elderly husband who was injured when automatic doors at the entrance to a medical office building struck him causing him to fall. In the premises liability action that followed, Plaintiffs alleged that the major tenant of the office building and the property management company failed to exercise the required due care in the maintenance, inspection, and repair of the doors and/or to properly warn Plaintiffs of the dangers existing at the office building. The trial court summarily dismissed the claims against both defendants. We have determined the major tenant owed no duty to Plaintiffs and thus was entitled to summary judgment. We have also determined that the property management company did not create the alleged dangerous or defective condition, and it did not have actual or constructive knowledge that a dangerous or defective condition existed. Accordingly, we affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Rodolfo Castro v. Peace Officer Standards And Training Commission, et al.
The Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission (“POST Commission”) decertified an officer previously given preliminary certification pending a background check based upon a plea of guilty and nolo contendere to felonies that were entered and set aside in California decades ago. In decertifying the officer, the POST Commission relied upon the position that it had no discretion under its own rules, and that decertification was required. The Chancery Court reversed the POST Commission for failing to give full faith and credit to the California judgment. We hold that the POST Commission failed to adopt criteria for exceptions and waivers as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 38-8-106. For reasons other than those used by the trial court, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, but modify the judgment to vacate the POST Commission’s decision to decertify and remand the matter to the POST Commission to reconsider the officer’s decertification in accordance with statutory directives. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Smith County Regional Planning Commission v. Hiwassee Village Mobile Home Park, LLC
County regional planning commission brought suit seeking civil penalties and injunctive relief against a mobile home park alleged to be in violation of a private act regulating mobile home parks in the county. The trial court found that the mobile home park was not protected by a grandfather provision and ordered injunctive relief to bring the mobile home park into compliance with the private act. We affirm the result reached by the trial court. |
Smith | Court of Appeals | |
Linda Kay Edwards v. Ronald Dell Edwards
After sixteen years of marriage, Linda Kay Edwards (“Wife”) sued Ronald Dell Edwards (“Husband”) for divorce. After the trial, the Trial Court entered an order, inter alia, granting the parties a divorce, distributing the marital property, and ordering Husband to pay Wife transitional alimony in the amount of $2,600 per month for twelve months. Wife appeals raising issues regarding the distribution of marital property and alimony. We modify the Trial Court’s Final Decree to order that Husband is to pay Wife alimony in futuro in the amount of $1,000 per month after the transitional alimony ends, and we affirm as modified. |
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
Devonna Taylor v. Brandicus McKinnie
This appeal involves modification of a parent’s status as primary residential parent. The mother and the father never married, and the mother was the children’s primary residential parent. The father filed a petition to modify, requesting to be named the primary residential parent. As a material change in circumstances, he alleged that the children had been living primarily with him for the past several months. After a hearing, the juvenile court established the father as the primary residential parent, gave the mother alternate parenting time, and set child support payments for the mother. The mother appeals, arguing that she never received proper notice of the father’s petition to modify, that there had been no material change in circumstances, and that the evidence did not support a finding that designating the father as the primary residential parent was in the children’s best interest. We affirm, finding that the mother waived her challenge to the sufficiency of service of process, and that the evidence supports the designation of the father as the primary residential parent. |
Gibson | Court of Appeals | |
Jeanette Tacker v. Michael Davidson
This appeal concerns a contempt proceeding arising from the alleged failure of the appellant to pay child support and other expenses as required by a prior court order. Neither the appellant nor counsel for the appellant appeared at the hearing below held on the issue of his contempt. The trial court found the appellant to be in contempt for nonpayment of his court-ordered obligations; the appellant was also taxed with attorney’s fees for the appellee. Because the trial court failed to find that the appellant possessed the present ability to pay and also failed to find that he was in willful noncompliance with the court’s prior order, we reverse that part of the decision below finding the appellant to be in contempt as well as awarding attorney’s fees, and we remand for further proceedings. We leave undisturbed the trial court’s finding that the appellant was in arrears on his obligations to the appellee. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Robert T. Hogan v. Illinois Central Railroad Company
Plaintiff failed to comply with the trial court’s discovery order to produce two witnesses for deposition within forty-five days, and Defendant moved to dismiss under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 37.02. Plaintiff appeals, asserting the trial court abused its discretion where there was no evidence of willful or dilatory conduct by Plaintiff. We vacate and remand. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Bobby C. (Clark) King v. Sevier County Election Commission, et al.
This case arises from an election for Gatlinburg City Commission in May 2007. Six candidates were on the ballot; the top three finishers were elected. Bobby C. (Clark) King received 210 votes and finished fifth, 304 votes behind the third-place finisher. Mr. King now seeks to have the election declared void, and a new election ordered, on the basis of several alleged procedural errors that he says render the election results invalid. After a bench trial, the court rejected Mr. King’s arguments, declaring some of his accusations factually lacking and holding that others, even if true, were not sufficiently serious to justify voiding the election. Mr. King appeals. We affirm. |
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Phyllis T. Craighead v. Bluecross Blueshield Of Tennessee, Inc., et al.
We reverse the trial court’s finding that the immunity granted in the second sentence of Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-53-110 applied only where there was proof that actual malice was absent. With regard to the statute of limitations governing claims related to diminution in value to a business, where the gravamen of the complaint is for breach of contract, the six-year period of Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-109 governs, but where the gravamen of the complaint is for injury to property, the three-year period of Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-105 governs. |
Wilson | Court of Appeals | |
Cannon County Board of Education v. Goldy Wade And Cannon County Education Association
Plaintiff’s employment contract as a probationary teacher was not renewed. He filed a grievance under the agreement existing between the local board of education and the local professional employees’ association. As the last step in the grievance procedure, the teacher sought binding arbitration. The board filed an action seeking a declaratory judgment that it was not required to arbitrate the former employee’s grievance. The trial court dismissed that action, and on appeal this court reversed and remanded for further consideration by the trial court. The trial court then ruled that the issues raised by the teacher were subject to arbitration, and the board again appealed to this court. We hold that a locally negotiated agreement cannot be interpreted to delegate to an arbitrator the decision of whether to renew a probationary teacher’s contract because state statutes clearly give that decision to local school officials. Consequently, we reverse the trial court. |
Cannon | Court of Appeals | |
Yellow Transportation, Inc. v. Larry Ward
Employer appeals the trial court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Employee. The parties entered into a settlement agreement on Employee’s workers’ compensation claim. The agreement included language that Employee would not seek further employment with Employer. In granting partial summary judgment to Employee, the trial court found that the disputed language of the agreement did not create a contractual obligation on the part of Employee. We reverse and grant summary judgment in favor of Employer. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Mildred Louise Campbell v. Chester Eugene Campbell
This appeal involves the trial court’s classification and division of marital assets upon the parties’ divorce. The wife contends that the trial court incorrectly classified improvements made to the husband’s home with monies taken from the parties’ joint account as the husband’s separate property. Only the wife filed a brief, and we do not have a transcript of the proceedings or a statement of the evidence. We affirm the trial court’s ruling. |
Crockett | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: G.N.S., d/o/b 10/09/03
In this appeal, a mother and father challenge an order terminating their parental rights. We affirm the order as it pertains to the mother, and we reverse as to the father. |
Madison | Court of Appeals | |
Theresa L. Caldwell v. Canada Trace, Inc.
This is an appeal from a damage award. In the underlying litigation, the plaintiff owner of a mobile home sued the defendant owner of the mobile home park in which the mobile home was located, over the defendant’s eviction of the plaintiff and alleged conversion and trespass, resulting in damages to the mobile home. The trial court held in favor of the defendant mobile home park owner, and the plaintiff appealed. The trial court’s decision was reversed on appeal, and the case was remanded for the determination of the damages to the plaintiff mobile home owner. The trial court awarded compensatory damages to the plaintiff mobile home owner, who now appeals again, arguing that she should have received consequential and punitive damages. We affirm. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Kenneth Pettitt, et al. v. Curtis Williamson d/b/a Williamson Construction, et al.
Finding that the home purchasers created genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendant facilitated the home sale for the contractor/seller, we reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment. |
Coffee | Court of Appeals | |
Doris P. Williams v. Jimmy D. Williams
This is a divorce case. During the course of the parties’ long-term marriage, the wife retired from her job as a teacher because of multiple health problems. In the divorce decree, the wife was awarded alimony in futuro. The husband filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment, which was denied. The husband appeals the award of alimony in futuro, and the denial of his motion to alter or amend. The wife asserts that this is a frivolous appeal. We affirm and find that this is a frivolous appeal. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Stanley A. Dumbaugh, et al. v. Dr. George E. Thomas, Individually and as an Employee of Transouth Healthcare, P.C., et al.
In this medical malpractice action, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant doctor because the plaintiff had not personally served the defendant doctor; was put on notice of this insufficiency in the defendant’s answer; and took no action to re-issue the summons and serve the doctor. Following entry of summary judgment, the plaintiff sought relief from this judgment pursuant to Rule 60.02 (1), arguing that the statements of the trial court and the actions of the parties implied that service was proper and led his counsel to believe there was no need to reserve the defendant doctor. The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. |
Madison | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Wallace Sherrod v. Tennessee Department of Human Service, et al.
The circuit court affirmed a final administrative order of the Tennessee Department of Human Services establishing a divorced father’s child support arrearage, directing that support be paid to the Central Child Support Receipting Unit, and issuing tax refund intercept notices. On appeal, the father contends that he did not owe the arrearage assessed against him, making the intercept notices invalid, that there were numerous irregularities in the administrative proceedings, and that |
Robertson | Court of Appeals |
