Dept of Children's Srvcs, vs. TLC E2002-00699-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey
The Trial Court terminated the mother's parental rights on statutory grounds. On appeal, we affirm the Trial Court's Judgment.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
E2002-00442-COA-R3-JV E2002-00442-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Thomas J. Wright
Greene
Court of Appeals
Terry Hardin v. Teresa Hardin M2001-01845-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: C. L. Rogers
In this divorce action, the Trial Court classified monthly benefits paid to husband as marital property. On appeal, husband contends payments are disability benefits. We affirm.
Sumner
Court of Appeals
Renee Griffith v. James Griffith M2001-02369-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Michael R. Jones
Renee Shelby Griffith ("Mother") and James Alden Griffith ("Father") were divorced in 1995. Mother originally was awarded primary physical custody of the parties' two minor children. Father later sought a change of custody. The Trial Court granted Father's motion to modify custody, finding that a material change in circumstances had occurred and that a change of custody would serve the best interests of the children. Mother appeals. We affirm, in part, and vacate, in part, and remand.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Joe Burton v. Warren Farmers Cooperative M1999-00486-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.
This appeal involves a dispute between a farmer and a co-op over a disappointing soybean crop. The farmer filed suit against the co-op in the Circuit Court for Warren County, alleging that his crop had been damaged by the manner in which the co-op had sprayed herbicide on his fields early in the growing season. At the close of the farmer's proof, the trial court granted the co-op's motion for involuntary dismissal under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 41.02(2) after concluding that he had failed to prove his breach of contract and negligence claims. The farmer asserts on this appeal that the trial court erred by dismissing his lawsuit. We have determined that the trial court properly dismissed the farmer's complaint at the close of his proof.
Warren
Court of Appeals
Insura Property & Casualty Ins. v. Terry Ashe M2002-00374-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith
This is a declaratory judgment action wherein Plaintiff insurance company seeks a declaration as to coverage under its commercial general liability insurance policy issued to Lineberry Properties, Inc. Defendant, Dewey Lineberry, and his wholly owned corporate entities, Defendants Lineberry Properties, Inc. and Lawdog Communications, LLC, sought defense and indemnity from Plaintiff insurance company relative to a defamation, libel, slander, and outrageous conduct complaint previously filed against them in the Circuit Court for Wilson County, Tennessee by Defendants, Terry and Judy Ashe. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurance company holding that the general commercial liability policy provided no coverage as to the underlying action. We affirm the trial court.
Wilson
Court of Appeals
Vanderbilt University v. Charles Haynes M2001-02688-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
The Circuit Court of Davidson County dismissed an appeal from the General Sessions Court because the appeal was not perfected within ten days of the date of the General Sessions judgment. The appellant contends that Rules 6.01 and 6.05 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure extended the time for filing the appeal to the date it was actually perfected. Because the Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply to the General Sessions Court, we affirm the Circuit Court's judgment.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Randy Hensley v. Department of Corrections M2001-02721-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
An inmate who was allowed to commence and proceed in forma pauperis in this litigation, but who was unsuccessful and had costs taxed against him, appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to quash execution on his trust fund account to collect the costs. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Russell Wellington v. State M2002-01090-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
Inmate appeals the trial court's order dismissing his lawsuit for failure to prosecute. Because the State had been granted a transfer of this case from the Claims Commission for the purpose of consolidating it with another case pending in the trial court, but took the position in this appeal that no consolidation had occurred, we vacate the dismissal and remand.
Gregory Hedges v. TDOC M2002-00140-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Tyrone Sterling v. Lolita Williams M2002-00352-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Michael R. Jones
The Chancery Court of Montgomery County awarded Tyrone Sterling a divorce from Lolita R. Sterling and custody of the parties' minor child. Ms. Sterling asserts on appeal that the division of the marital property violated the automatic stay issued in her bankruptcy proceeding, and that the court erred in granting Mr. Sterling the divorce and custody of the child. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Plaintiff, provider of a tax preparation service, sued defendants, a tax preparation service and individual former employees of plaintiff, for damages and injunctive relief resulting from procurement of breach of contract by defendant tax preparation service and for breach of noncompetition contracts by former employees. The trial court found that the plaintiff had no right to relief from the defendants and entered judgment for all defendants. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.
Overton
Court of Appeals
Larry Williams v. TDOC M2000-02905-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Eric Woodruff v. TDOC M2001-00494-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Petitioner, an inmate in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction, filed the underlying pro se petition for common law writ of certiorari, seeking review of a prison disciplinary board decision and resulting sanctions that he alleges were made in violation of his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the laws. Specifically, Petitioner alleges that the disciplinary board violated Department policies by not providing the Petitioner with an adequate statement of reasons prior to his placement in administrative segregation. The trial court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case to the trial court with the direction that the trial court issue the writ.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Larry Williams v. TDOC M2000-02905-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: William C. Koch
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Eileen Smith v. Robert Smith M2001-02164-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
This is a divorce case. Acting upon the stipulation of the parties, the trial declared the parties divorced. The court determined that the appreciation of Husband's premarital Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) was marital property. The court also ruled that a bond account that Husband received from his mother and later titled jointly between the parties remained Husband's separate property. Finally, the court addressed marital debt and alimony. Both parties raise issues regarding the trial court's disposition of the case. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case to the trial court.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Estate of Nan Francis, Pat Libby, Admin v. Karl Francis M2001-02707-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin
In this second appeal in this matter, the estate seeks a re-determination of an issue decided previously by the trial court and by this court: distribution of proceeds from a certificate of deposit. Because our prior opinion is the law of the case on this issue, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the estate's motion for post-appellate relief which sought to modify the prior rulings.
Cheatham
Court of Appeals
State v. Roger D. Haywood M2000-01400-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: J. Russ Heldman
The Trial Court held that National City Mortgage Company ("National"), which services the mortgage on the property at issue, and its attorneys violated Tenn. R. Civ. P. 11.02 and imposed sanctions against them in this condemnation proceeding. National and its attorneys appeal the Trial Court's Rule 11.02 sanctions. We reverse and remand.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
HGI Assoc. vs. Mactronics W2002-00011-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
Plaintiff was awarded a judgment for breach of contract and incidental damages in the amount of $18,356. The breach occurred when Defendant (Seller) was unable to deliver 500 computers which Plaintiff (Buyer) had contracted to purchase. Plaintiff appeals contending that the damages awarded by the trial court were inadequate. We affirm.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
State of TN Dept. of Transportation vs. Tommie/Arlene Goodwin W2002-00391-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Clayburn L. Peeples
This is a condemnation case. The State filed a petition to condemn a portion of property owned by the defendants for the improvement of a highway. The defendants did not challenge the State's right to condemn the property, but they asserted that the amount proffered by the State as payment for the property was inadequate. After a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of $13,500. The defendants moved for a new trial or, in the alternative, for an additur. The trial court concluded that the jury's verdict did not adequately compensate the defendants for either their financial loss or the loss to their business resulting from the condemnation, so it granted the motion for an additur, suggesting an additur of $12,000. The State accepted the additur under protest and now appeals. We affirm, finding that the trial court's suggested additur did not constitute an impermissible award for lost profits.
Gibson
Court of Appeals
Robert Burton Sr. vs. Kent Gearin W2002-00537-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree
The plaintiff, a prisoner, sued the defendant who had been appointed to represent the plaintiff in his petition for post-conviction relief. The prisoner, proceeding pro se, filed a motion asking the trial court to hold this matter in abeyance until his release from prison. The motion was denied. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment supported by an un-refuted affidavit which was granted. The prisoner appealed the trial court's denial of the motion for abeyance and we affirm.
Weakley
Court of Appeals
Christmas Lumber vs. Robert Valiga E2001-02444-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
After experiencing significant problems with the construction of a house he was having built, Robert E. Valiga ("Valiga") sued Robert H. Waddell ("Waddell") and John Graves ("Graves") (collectively referred to as "Defendants") seeking damages for the poor construction. Although the construction contract was between Valiga and R.H. Waddell Construction, Inc., no corporate charter had been filed when the contract was signed. The Trial Court concluded Waddell and Graves were partners and entered judgment against them individually for $80,045.79. After judgment was entered, Defendants filed motions seeking to amend their answers to assert a statute of limitations defense. These motions were denied by the Trial Court. Graves and Waddell appeal, challenging the Trial Court's conclusion that they were partners and subject to individual liability, the denial of their motions seeking to amend their answers to assert a statute of limitations defense, and the Trial Court's award of prejudgment interest to Valiga. We affirm.
