COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Michael King v. TFE, Inc.
01A01-9711-CV-00624
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jim T. Hamilton

In this action filed against TFE, Inc. (hereafter “TFE”), Michael King appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to TFE as related to King’s claims for breach of an alleged employment contract. The trial court granted TFE’s motion for summary judgment based on the court’s conclusion that an employee handbook distributed by TFE did not constitute an employment contract. For the reasons hereafter stated, we affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment.

Tim Taylor v. Robert L. Morris and Terry Muncey - Concurring
01A01-9804-CH-00211
Authoring Judge: Judge Farmer

Defendant Terry Muncey appeals, and Plaintiff Tim Taylor cross-appeals, the trial court’s judgment awarding Muncey $1000 in damages on his counterclaim for wrongful injunction against Taylor. We reverse the trial court’s judgment based upon our conclusion that Muncey failed to meet his burden of proving the elements of his claim for wrongful injunction.

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.

William H. Thompson, Jr., v. Department of Codes Administration, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County
01A01-9808-CH-00438
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. McCoy

This case involves the refusal of the Metropolitan Department of Codes Administration ("the Department") to issue building permits to the petitioner/appellant landowner. Planning to divide and sell his land, the petitioner made preparations to subdivide this land pursuant to the Department's advice on how to avoid regulation by the Metropolitan Planning Commission ("MPC"). However, due to a new interpretation of existing statutory law, the petitioner's preparations, once completed, were no longer adequate and the Department deemed that the land must undergo review before the MPC as a subdivision. Consequently, the zoning administrator of the Department denied the petitioner the building permits and the petitioner brought suit claiming first that the division of land was not a "subdivision" as that term is defined by statute. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the zoning administrator's application of the newly-interpreted law to him violated his constitutional rights to equal protection and due process and effected against him the application of a retrospective law. In addition, the appellant claimed that the Department should be equitably estopped from refusing to issue the building permits. The trial court granted the Department's motion for involuntary dismissal of the petitioner's case. We affirm the decision of the trial court on all issues.

Terry David Mackie v. Sarah Catheine Mackie
01A01-9810-CV-00536
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bobby H. Capers

This case represents an appeal from the grant of divorce upon stipulation of grounds pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-4-129. The parties to this action, Terry David Mackie ("Husband"), and Sarah Catherine Campbell Mackie ("Wife") were married on November 6, 1984. Husband filed a complaint in Williamson County Circuit Court on March 6, 1997, seeking divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct and irreconcilable differences. On March 20, 1997, Wife answered and counterclaimed. In her answer, Wife admitted the ground of irreconcilable differences and alleged inappropriate marital conduct on the part of the Husband. Over the next 14 months the parties participated in successive proceedings regarding pendente lite custody of their severely ill minor child. The case was originally set for trial on June 3, 1997. Both parties agreed to continue the case; each sought a scheduling order for the sequence of discovery. The parties were ordered to attend mediation on February 23, 1998. On May 18, 1998, Husband moved to change pendente lite custody and to compel discovery. This motion was to be heard on June 3, 1998. At the June 3, hearing, in an admittedly unorthodox proceeding, the parties stipulated under oath that each had grounds for divorce. At this point in the hearing, both parties were sent into an antechamber to provide for the division of the marital estate and custody of the child. These negotiations are documented in handwritten notes, signed by the parties and their counsel, and appearing in the record.

Linda Layne, individually and as the surviving spouse of James T. Lane, v. Pioneer Life Insurance Company of Illinois
01A01-9809-CH-00457
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor James L. Weatherford

This is a suit in chancery for declaratory judgment relative to a policy of insurance. The primary question presented is whether or not participation by the insured in a motorbike event known as an "enduro" constitutes "racing" within the meaning of an exclusion in the policy. After the insured died from injuries he received while participatingin an "enduro," the defendant insurance company denied coverage. The lower court found that the particular loss in this case was excluded from coverage. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

Allison Cooke Battles and Leslie Cooke Jones v. First Union Bank, Peggy Smith, Beverly G. Pitt, Leigh Ann Howard, and Exchange Insurance Co - Concurring
01-A-01-9809-CH-00497
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tom E. Gray

Two of the beneficiaries of a will sued the witnesses and a notary public because the will was not properly executed. The plaintiffs also sued a bank, the witnesses’ employer, for not training its employees on how to properly witness wills.  The Chancery Court of Sumner County granted the defendants summary judgment.  We affirm.

Southwest Progressive Ent., Inc. v. Shri-Hari Hospitality, LLC and Trans Financial Bank of Tennessee - Concurring
01-A-01-9810-CH-00542
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert E. Corlew, III

A construction company sued a hotelkeeper for payment of the balance due on their contract. The trial court ordered the hotelkeeper to pay the balance, as well as pre-judgment interest and attorney fees. We affirm the award of pre-judgment interest, but we reverse the award of attorney fees. We also reverse a $500 offset the trial court granted to the defendant for the plaintiff’s alleged failure to complete a punch list.

Grei S. Hinsen, v. Mark E. Meadors, Individually and D/B/A MEM Contractors, and Hailey Brown
01A01-9811-CH-00583
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. McCoy

This is an action by a homeowner against a remodeling contractor and a painter for the failure of the paint inside the house. The Chancery Court of Davidson County dismissed the homeowner’s claims. We affirm.

Michael Keith Newcomb and wife Caroline Newcomb, Darden E. Davis and wife, Ann J. Davis, v, William Gonser, and wife Lois Gonser and Christopher Gonser, and wife Lisa Gonser, and Shirley Zeitlin & Company
01A01-9705-CH-00220
Authoring Judge: Judge Walter W. Bussart
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs/appellants, Michael and Caroline Newcomb and Darden and Ann Davis, from the decision of the Davidson County Chancery Court granting the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants/appellees William and Lois Gonser. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows

James R. Tully, Jr. v. USA Wireless, Inc., PMT Investments, Inc. and Patrick M. Thompson et. al.
01A01-9707-CH-00332
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

The Chancellor granted summary judgment to the defendant on the plaintiff’s fraud claim. Because we believe the plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to make out a claim of fraud, and the defendant has been unable to negate those allegations, we find the fraud claim inappropriate for summary judgment, and we reverse. We also find that the plaintiff has not waived his contract claim, and we remand this case to the trial court for the resolution of both claims.

Edwin Elam vs. Martha Elam
02A01-9812-CH-00362
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton

02A01-9908-CH-00237
02A01-9908-CH-00237

Tire Shredders vs. ERM
02A01-9803-CV-00058
Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell

Lee Simmons vs. City of Lexington
02A01-9810-CH-00282
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris

James Cozart vs. Lynn Cozart
02A01-9810-CV-00285
Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell

Gipson vs. Taylor
01A01-9811-CH-00611

Curtis vs. Curtis
01A01-9810-CV-00566
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Kesterson vs. Dept. of Safety
01A01-9805-CH-00256

Wilson vs. Dept. of Corrections
01A01-9806-CH-00302

Doe vs. HCA Health Services of TN
01A01-9806-CV-00306
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.

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.

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.

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.

Nationsbank, N.A. vs. FormPak, Inc. & Ron Campbell
03A01-9808-CH-00279