Jody Higgins v. Corecivic, Inc. Et Al.
This appeal concerns an inmate’s lawsuit over injuries he sustained from falling off a top |
Court of Appeals | ||
Jason M. Peterson v. Jodi L. Carey
Jason M. Peterson (“Plaintiff”) was the passenger in a vehicle driven by Jodi L. Carey |
Court of Appeals | ||
In Re Aaliyah P.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights on the grounds of abandonment by failure to support; abandonment by failure to provide a suitable home; substantial noncompliance with the permanency plans; persistent conditions; and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody of the children. The mother also appeals the trial court’s finding that termination of her parental rights was in the best interest of the children. We reverse the trial court’s finding on the ground of substantial noncompliance with the permanency plans because the initial permanency plan does not appear in the record, but we affirm the trial court in all other respects. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
John H. Packard, IV v. Jonathan R. Bentley Et Al.
The plaintiff, John H. Packard, IV (“Plaintiff”) was struck by a vehicle driven by Jonathan |
Court of Appeals | ||
Dustin Balch v. Brittanie Cilley
A mother appeals from the judgment holding her in criminal contempt of court, denying her motion to dissolve an ex parte no-contact order entered against her, and denying her motion to transfer the case to another county. Upon a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment. Due to the passage of time and the position taken by the parties and by the trial court when issuing its ruling, we remand for a new evidentiary hearing on the ex parte order suspending the mother’s contact with the children. |
Fentress | Court of Appeals | |
Raymond D. Barnes, Jr. v. Marion L. Barnes
After a long-term marriage, the parties divorced. The trial court, which found the husband’s testimony not to be credible, set the value of the marital property, divided the marital property, and awarded alimony in futuro to the wife. The husband appeals, challenging the credibility finding, the trial court’s valuation of the marital property, the division of property, and the alimony award. We affirm the trial court’s valuation and distribution of the marital property, but we vacate the trial court’s alimony award, remanding for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. $133,429 In U.S. Currency Seized From Joni Assefa Kilenton, ET AL
This appeal arises from a forfeiture action regarding funds seized during a traffic stop. In |
Fayette | Court of Appeals | |
Jeffrey Swinghold, et al. v. The Farm at Clovercroft Homeowners Association, Inc., et al.
The plaintiffs filed this breach of contract action against their homeowners association for failure to rectify alleged violations of the neighborhood restrictions. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment establishing that the issues complained of were actual violations of the restrictions. The trial court dismissed the action in favor of the homeowners association and the plaintiffs’ neighbors who joined as interested parties. We affirm. |
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
James Paul Burkhart v. Kathryn Jean Burkhart
In this accelerated interlocutory appeal, Appellant seeks to appeal from the denial of three separate motions to recuse the trial judge. As to the first motion, we affirm the trial court’s denial of that motion on the basis of Appellant’s failure to comply with Rule 10B of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Tennessee. As the second and third recusal motion, we dismiss this appeal, as no effective order denying those motions has yet been entered by the trial court. |
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Dianne Hamilton, et al. v. Methodist Healthcare Memphis Hospitals
This appeal arises from a health care liability action filed in circuit court by a conservator |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Meredith Garrett v. Hidden Valley Homes, LLC et al.
In this breach of implied warranty of good workmanship and materials case, the trial court awarded Appellee $77,494.36 in damages. Although the parties agree that the proper measure of damages is the cost to repair the defects, the parties dispute the method of repair and its cost. In determining Appellee’s damages, the trial court relied on testimony from Appellee’s expert contractor. Discerning no error, we affirm the trial court’s order. The parties’ respective requests for appellate attorney’s fees are denied. |
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Lieselotte H. Rogoish Revocable Living Trust
This appeal arises from a petition filed by a beneficiary of a trust seeking an accounting and removal of the trustee. The trustee asserted the affirmative defense that the beneficiary violated the no-contest clause in the settlor’s trust. The trustee served the beneficiary with requests for admissions, to which the beneficiary responded with objections to the majority of the requests. After the trial court granted his motion for the requests for admissions to be admitted, the trustee filed a motion for partial summary judgment based on the no-contest clauses in the trust and will of the settlor. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the beneficiary’s petition with prejudice. The beneficiary appealed. We reverse and remand for further proceedings. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Preston H. (Concurring)
I concur in the result reached by the Court and in its analysis in all but one respect. In considering whether the father of Preston H., Christopher W. (“Father”), established an affirmative defense to the claim that he abandoned his child by failure to support, the Court reasons that it is unnecessary to determine “whether willfulness [of Father’s failure to support] presents a question of law, fact, or a mixed question of fact and law.” In my view, the outcome of the appeal depends on that determination. |
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
Akrem Hasan v. Jim Burrow et al.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for relief under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02. Because the appellant did not file his notice of appeal within thirty days after entry of the order as required by Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a), we dismiss the appeal. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Preston H.
Courts in both Florida and Ohio denied petitions to terminate Father’s parental rights in favor of the Prospective Adoptive Parents. While Florida courts were still exercising jurisdiction over the transition of the child from his Prospective Adoptive Parents to his Mother and Father, the Prospective Adoptive Parents sought for the third time to have a court terminate Father’s parental rights, asserting willful failure to support in Tennessee. The juvenile court dismissed the petition, finding that Father’s failure to support was not willful because the failure to support was tied to the Prospective Adoptive Parents’ representations that they would no longer pursue custody, to Father’s financial outlays related to preparing his home for a transition of custody, and to the complex, multi-jurisdictional nature of the litigation, in which Florida courts were expressly exercising jurisdiction for many months after the filing of the Tennessee petition and during the entirety of the period of non-payment. The Prospective Adoptive Parents appeal, asserting that the ground for termination was established by clear and convincing evidence, that termination is in the child’s best interest, and that the court erred in assessing fees for the guardian ad litem. We affirm the judgment of the juvenile court. |
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
Jacob Thomas Cook Et Al v. Jefferson County, Tennessee Et Al
This case involves an accident between a motor vehicle and a school bus that occurred on |
Jefferson | Court of Appeals | |
Ashley Denson Ex Rel. Bobbie J. Denson v. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge Et Al.
This appeal arises from a health care liability action following the death of Ashley Denson |
Court of Appeals | ||
Ashley Denson Ex Rel. Bobbie J. Denson v. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge Et Al. - DISSENT
I agree with the majority’s secondary conclusion that Grandmother held standing to |
Court of Appeals | ||
Virgie Lee Parker v. Paul J. Parker
In this post-divorce action, the trial court denied the husband’s petition for contempt upon |
Bradley | Court of Appeals | |
Jeremy Nathaniel Greene v. Laura E. Greene et al.
This is a divorce case. Husband appeals the trial court’s valuation and division of marital property and its award of attorney’s fees as alimony in solido to Wife. We affirm the trial court’s valuation and division of marital property. We vacate the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to wife as alimony in solido based on the lack of findings in the trial court’s order. Tenn. R. Civ. P. 52.01. The case is remanded for findings on the issue of whether an award of attorney’s fees is appropriate under the factors prescribed in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-5-121 and, if so, whether the amount of attorney’s fees is reasonable. |
Bedford | Court of Appeals | |
Victor Lee Hyatt v. Suzanne Lee Hyatt
This appeal arises from a post-divorce petition for contempt. Because we conclude that the trial court’s order failed to resolve all the issues before the court, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Skylith F. et al.
This appeal concerns the termination of a mother’s parental rights. Step-grandparents Joe K. and Lois K. (“Petitioners”) filed a petition in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County (“the Trial Court”) seeking to terminate the parental rights of Vernetta G. (“Mother”) to her minor children, Skylith F., Zelda F., and Celeste G. (“the Children”). After a hearing, the Trial Court entered an order terminating Mother’s parental rights on the grounds of abandonment by failure to support, abandonment by failure to visit, and persistent conditions. Mother appeals. Mother argues, among other things, that she was thwarted by Petitioners from visiting the Children more often than she did. We find by clear and convincing evidence, as did the Trial Court, that Petitioners proved three grounds for termination of Mother’s parental rights. We find further by clear and convincing evidence, as did the Trial Court, that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the Children’s best interest. We affirm. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Skylith F. et al. (Concurring)
I concur in the majority’s thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion, but I write separately to reflect a variance of view with the majority’s determination as to the appropriate four-month statutory time period for assessing the ground for termination for abandonment by failure to support. In assessing abandonment, the General Assembly has directed Tennessee courts to consider “a period of four (4) consecutive months immediately preceding the filing of a proceeding, pleading, petition, or any amended petition to terminate the parental rights . . . .” Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-102(1)(A)(i) (West July 1, 2021 to May 8, 2022). The majority concludes that the correct four-month period to examine for the ground of abandonment by failure to support in this case is the four months prior to the granting of the motion to amend, running from July 18, 2021, to November 17, 2021, rather than the four months prior to the time the amended petition was filed on September 24, 2021. I do not necessarily disagree with the majority on this point. Where I respectfully diverge is that I do not think it is necessary to decide between these two time periods in this case and would reserve doing so for a more appropriate case. |
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
Loring Justice Et Al. v. Kim Nelson Et Al.
This appeal is the latest development in a protracted custody and visitation dispute between |
Court of Appeals | ||
RAMA, Inc. d/b/a Discount Liquor v. City of Chattanooga, Tennessee, City Council
The appellant applied for a special exception permit allowing it to operate a liquor store in |
Court of Appeals |