COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Narrowly Tailored To Withstand Strict Scrutiny Under United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
02273-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Michael R. Jones

Wylie B. Dowlen v. Gary Matthews
M2001-03160-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Stella L. Hargrove
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
This appeal arises from a police officer's lawsuit against a Clarksville resident for assault, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress after the officer responded to a noise complaint at the resident's home. The trial judge directed a verdict for the defendant. We affirm the trial court.

Emmerick vs. Mountain Valley Chapel Business Trust
E2002-01453-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: O. Duane Slone
The trial court dismissed the complaint of Marc D. Emmerick ("the plaintiff") and awarded one of the defendants, Mountain Valley Chapel Business Trust, a judgment on its counterclaim against the plaintiff for $1,416. The plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Rick Williams vs. Angela Williams
E2002-01995-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: James W. Mckenzie
The Trial Court in this divorce action, granted the parties a divorce and divided marital property. The husband appeals, seeking additional marital property. We affirm.

James Kyzer vs. Patty Blackburn
E2002-02254-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: C. Van Deacon
This is a custody dispute between James Christopher Kyzer, the father of Haleigh Sharee Kyzer, d.o.b. 10/6/93, and the child's maternal grandmother, Patti Blackburn, which arose after Haleigh's mother, the ex-wife of Mr. Kyzer, was killed in an automobile accident. The Trial Judge awarded custody to the father upon his finding that "there has been no showing of substantial risk of harm to the child." We affirm.

Carolyn Mitchell Brown vs. John Hilyee Watson, Jr.
E2004-01229-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
The Trial Court annulled Brown's marriage at the insistence of her conservator. On appeal, we affirm.

Charles Head v. James Gibson
M1999-00656-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
This is an appeal from a judgment granting a motion for summary judgment in favor of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. that the uninsured motorist coverage offered to the plaintiffs was not implicated under the circumstances of this litigation. We affirm.

Carlos Castillion vs. Sarah Castillion
E2002-01310-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
In this divorce case, the husband questions on appeal the valuation of marital property and distribution made by the Trial Court. We affirm the Trial Court.

Hoover, Inc. v. Metro Nashville Board of Zoning Appeals
M2001-00924-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This is the fourth appeal from a zoning board's denial of a conditional use permit. In April 1992, the petitioner stone processing company filed an application with the respondent zoning board for a conditional use permit to operate a rock quarry. After years of litigation, the board issued findings of fact and denied the petitioner's application. The application was denied in part because the reclamation plan in the petitioner's proposal used water as fill material, contrary to the specification in the applicable ordinance that solids be used as fill material. The petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, arguing that the board's decision was arbitrary and capricious because reclamation plans using water as fill material had been approved in the past. The trial court denied the writ and upheld the board's decision. The stone processing company appealed. We affirm, finding that the board's decision was not arbitrary or capricious, and that material evidence supported the board's decision.

Mill Creek Associates v. Jackson Foundation
M2001-02811-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin
This is an unjust enrichment case. The plaintiff design firm was contacted by the defendant foundation to develop designs and a budget for the construction of a science theater. The chief designer of the firm worked on the project and presented a proposal to the foundation. The foundation neither accepted nor rejected the design firm's proposal. Instead, the foundation hired the design firm's chief designer. Part of the designer's duties with the foundation was to work on the science theater project "in house." The foundation refused to pay the design firm a fee for its work on the project. The design firm then sued the foundation on a theory of unjust enrichment for the work performed on the project while the chief designer was still at the firm. The trial court found that since the project was never completed, the preliminary designs did not confer a value on the foundation and, consequently, the foundation had not been unjustly enriched. The design firm now appeals. We reverse, finding that the work performed by the design firm constituted a benefit to the foundation, and that it would be unjust for the foundation to retain that benefit without paying the design firm for the value of the benefit.

David Norman v. Melissa Norman
M2002-01084-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This extraordinary appeal arises from the trial court's denial of Husband's petition to reduce child support and alimony. The trial court found there was no significant variance of fifteen percent (15%) to modify child support. The trial court also determined that there was no justification for a decrease in alimony payments. The trial court reserved the issues relating to unclean hands and attorney fees. The parties raise multiple issues on appeal. For the following reasons, we vacate in part, reverse in part and remand.

Jeffrey Camporal v. Richard Ford
M2002-01409-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Graham
This case involves a dispute arising from a Promissory Note executed by and between the Appellant/Maker and Appellee/Payee. Specifically, Appellant asserts that he signed the Note in a representative capacity and, therefore, he is not personally liable on the Note. The Circuit Court of Franklin County granted Appellee's Motion for Summary Judgment, entering a Judgment against Appellant for principal, interest, and costs. Appellant appeals from this Judgment. We affirm.

Is, As Stated In The Opinion, And As It Is Stated In Ray v. Ray, 83 S.W.2D 726 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
05-00-024-CC
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

Is, As Stated In The Opinion, And As It Is Stated In Ray v. Ray, 83 S.W.2D 726 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
05-00-024-CC
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

05-00-024-CC
05-00-024-CC
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

Robert Pirtle v. Tennessee Board of Paroles, et al.
M1998-00454-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. McCoy

This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Tennessee Board of Paroles regarding the revocation of his parole. After exhausting his administrative remedies, the prisoner filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County asserting that he did not commit the crime that triggered the revocation of his parole. The trial court eventually dismissed the petition on the ground that it was not timely filed, and the prisoner has appealed. While his appeal was pending, the prisoner was released from the Department of Correction. Accordingly, because this appeal is now moot, we vacate the trial court's order and remand the case with directions to dismiss the prisoner's petition.

John David Rhoades, II, et al. v. Michael L. Taylor, et al.
M2001-00643-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tom E. Gray

This appeal involves a conflict between neighbors over whether the Taylors have a right to use a gravel driveway located on property owned by the Rhoades to access their property. The trial court found that an implied easement was proved. The Rhoades appeal that judgment to this court arguing that the Taylors failed to prove two elements necessary for a finding of an implied easement. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Jerry T. Beech Concrete Contractor, Inc., v. Larry Powell Builders, Inc., et al.
M2001-02709-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle

In this appeal from the trial court's award of attorneys fees, Appellant seeks review of the trial court's refusal to award the full amount of fees sought. We modify the trial court's findings and affirm as to the amount of the award.

American Indemnity Company, v. Iron City Lumber & Pallet, Inc., et al.
M2002-00650-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert L. Holloway

This case involves an insurance company's appeal of the trial court's decision that the company has a duty to defend its insured under a commercial general liability policy. Applying Texas law, we find that no such duty exists and, accordingly, reverse the decision of the trial court.

William A. Dalton, et al. v. Gerald W. Dale, et al.
M2002-01205-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

Defendant appeals adverse summary judgment as to diminution in value of a 1995 Jaguar XJ6 automobile based upon alleged undisputed expert testimony. Judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.

In Re: T.L.R and A.W.R., the State of Tennessee, Department of Childrens Svcs v. Sandra Jane Riley
M2002-01101-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Max D. Fagan

This case involves the termination of parental rights. The mother of the two young children at issue had a history of cocaine and marijuana abuse. In September 1999, the state department of children's services obtained custody of the children and placed them in a foster home. While the children were in foster care, the mother participated in drug rehabilitation programs and attempted to obtain permanent employment. The mother made some progress, but repeatedly relapsed back into drug and alcohol use, and failed to procure a permanent job or a permanent residence. In August 2001, the State filed a petition to terminate the mother's parental rights. The trial court granted the State's petition. The mother now appeals. We affirm, finding clear and convincing evidence that the mother had failed to comply with the permanency plan, that conditions that prevented the children's safe return still persisted, and that termination of the mother's parental rights is in the children's best interest.

Smith County v. Dave Enoch
M1999-00063-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Charles K. Smith
Smith County filed this action to enjoin the maintenance of an automobile junkyard within one thousand (1,000) feet of a county road pursuant to the authority of Private Acts. The defendant admitted his violation of the Private Acts, but pleaded (1) the asserted lack of standing of the County to file the action, and (2) the asserted unconstitutionality of the Acts. The Chancellor sustained both defenses. We reverse.

Rebecca McMurry v. Metro Government of Nashville
M2000-02902-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This appeal is brought by an employee of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County who slipped and fell while working and, as a result, injured her knee. The employee brought suit pursuant to the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act to recover damages for her lost earning capacity, pain and suffering, and expenses. Prior to this suit, Metro paid the employee's medical expenses and compensated her for the work that she missed during her recovery. The trial judge awarded the employee $24,000, finding that Metro was at fault, but that the employee's injury was merely the exacerbation of a previous knee injury. The trial court also awarded the employee $2,858.30 in discretionary costs, but disallowed a $900 charge for the trial preparation fee of the employee's expert. The employee appeals the trial court's final order. We affirm the trial court in all respects.

Michael Harrington v. Grant Smith
M2002-00840-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Defendant appeals a grant of summary judgment against him on a promissory note and an additional judgment against him for breach of contract. We affirm the action of the trial court.

Paul Rector v. Elizabeth Halliburton
M1999-02802-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
The residence owned by Mrs. Halliburton had no access owing to highway construction. She acquired a driveway easement from the adjoining landowner, who later sold the property to Mr. Rector. An electric service line extended across the front of Mr. Rector's property which was relocated. Mr. Rector's efforts to purchase the Halliburton property were unavailing, and he began a policy of harassment presumably to acquire the property. He claimed, inter alia, that the easement terminated because it was improperly maintained, and that NES moved the service line without his permission and hence was guilty of trespass. Mrs. Halliburton filed a counterclaim for damages, charging Mr. Rector with trespass and outrageous conduct. Mr. Rector's suit was dismissed, and the counterclaim of Mrs. Halliburton was sustained. The dismissal of Mr. Rector's suit is affirmed; the award of attorney fees to Mrs. Halliburton is reversed; the case is remanded for a determination of the damages sustained by Mrs. Halliburton, including punitive damages.