Reagan vs. Troy Malone, Sandra Malone and Dan Connelly E1999-01846-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III
On a Rule 60, T.R.C.P. motion of plaintiff, the Chancellor combined judgments and added interest as one judgment. On appeal, the combined judgment was vacated.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Willard Hawk, Jr., et al vs. Chattanooga Orthopaedic Group, P.,C., et al E1999-00687-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
This is a medical malpractice case. We granted the plaintiffs' Tenn. R. App. P. 9 application for an interlocutory appeal in order to review an order of the trial court dismissing the amendments to the plaintiffs' original complaint and granting the defendants' motion in limine pertaining to evidence of a disabling hand condition of the defendant surgeon, Dr. David M. O'Neal. We reverse.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Knoxville's Community Development Corp. vs. Woodfam Investments, L. P., E1999-02317-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
Plaintiff sued to reform or void release of deed restrictions on property owned by defendant. The Trial Court ruled plaintiff failed to establish a basis for relief by clear and convincing evidence. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Investments, Inc. vs. Hackney Petroleum, Inc. E1999-02665-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jacqueline E. Schulten
In a dispute over the meaning of a notice of termination provision in the Lease, the Trial Judge ruled the notice given did not comply with the Lease and awarded damages for breach. We reverse.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Vowell Ventures vs. City of Martin W1999-01445-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree
Vowell Ventures, a partnership, sued the City of Martin alleging that the City denied Vowell Ventures' application for a building permit due to the fact that there was a sewer line and storm drain crossing the property. The complaint alleged that the denial of the application for the building permit constituted a taking of property without just compensation and sought judgment against the City for the taking. The trial court granted the City of Martin's Motion To Dismiss Or For Summary Judgment and we affirm.
Weakley
Court of Appeals
Dempsey vs. Dempsey M1998-00972-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell
This appeal involves the award of alimony and the division of one particular piece of marital property at the dissolution of a nineteen year marriage. Mr. Dempsey appeals the award of alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony, the amount of alimony as beyond his ability to pay, and the award of a tax refund for the year of the divorce to Ms. Dempsey. We modify the award of alimony in futuro to an award of rehabilitative alimony and affirm the distribution of marital property.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
In re: K.A.H. M1999-02079-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Wayne C. Shelton
This case involves the termination of parental rights regarding a child who was removed from the mother's home by the Department of Children's Services in 1996 and placed in foster care. DCS devised a Plan of Care for the mother, which, among other things, required her to address her drug and alcohol addictions. During the two years between the removal from the home and the filing by DCS of the petition to terminate parental rights, the mother made some efforts to improve her situation, but her substance abuse continued. The trial court terminated the mother's parental rights on grounds (1) that the conditions that led to the child's removal continued to persist with little likelihood of remedy and (2) that the mother failed to comply with the Statement of Responsibilities as provided in the Plan of Care. Because DCS has established grounds for termination and has established that termination is in the best interest of the child, we affirm.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Metropolitan Development & Housing Agency vs. Trinity Marine Nashville, Inc . M1999-02162-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
In this eminent domain condemnation proceeding, the Trial Court granted partial summary judgment to the condemnor on the amount of relocation expenses to be awarded the property owner as incidental damages based upon deposition testimony of an officer of the property owner. The property owner argues on appeal that summary judgment is improper in condemnation proceedings, and that the Trial Court erred in excluding from incidental damages amounts for a "burden rate" the property owner added to its actual hourly labor costs incurred in relocating from the condemned property. As the issue is a question of law and there are no questions of disputed material fact, summary judgment is appropriate. As the "burden rate" claimed by the property owner is not recoverable under the applicable statute, the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
R. David Ashley and E. Diana Ashley vs. Thomas A. Snapp E1999-00908-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
This appeal arises from a grant of summary judgment in the Knox County Circuit Court. On appeal, R. David Ashley and E. Diana Ashley, the Appellants, argue that there are genuine issues of material fact with respect to their suit for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against Thomas A. Snapp and Robin Gratigny, the Appellees, and thus, the Trial Court erred in granting summary judgment. We vacate the Circuit Court's grant of summary judgment on the issue of malicious prosecution and remand to the Trial Court on that issue, and we affirm the Trial Court's grant of summary judgment on the issue of abuse of process.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Larry Simpson vs. Donal Campbell, Commissioner, et al M2000-00218-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Larry Simpson, a prison inmate, appeals the dismissal by the trial court of his Petition for Declaratory Judgment asserting that he was entitled to mandatory parole under former Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-3614 and Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-20-115. We affirm the trial court.
The Bogatin Law Firm vs. Hallum Motors W2000-00409-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
Appellee, an Arkansas corporation, and Appellant, a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in Arkansas and Tennessee, entered into an asset sales agreement for the sale and purchase of assets relating to an automobile dealership in West Memphis, Arkansas. Earnest money was placed in escrow with the Bogatin Law Firm, PLC in Memphis, Tennessee. Dispute concerning the asset sales agreement arose, and both parties made claim to the earnest money. The Bogatin Law Firm filed a complaint for interpleader in Shelby County, Tennessee. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss based upon improper venue which the trial court granted. We reverse, finding that venue in Shelby County was proper and that Appellee submitted to jurisdiction in Shelby County, Tennessee.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Michael Youmans vs. Samuel Coleman W2000-00150-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
This is a construction case. The general contractor sued the homeowner for failing to make payment under the contract and for failing to pay for "extras" not contained in the original contract. The homeowner asserted that the general contractor failed to make certain corrections to the home, and that he did not agree to pay for "extras." After a bench trial, the trial court held for the homeowner. The general contractor appeals. We affirm, finding that the trial court's decision was based on its determination of the credibility of the witnesses.
Carroll
Court of Appeals
Beech vs. Hibbett M1997-00239-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This appeal involves a dispute over the proceeds from the Department of Transportation's condemnation of a portion of a tract of real property on Harding Road in Davidson County. When the condemnation took place, a life tenant was occupying the property with a vested remainder interest being held by the life tenant's stepdaughter. Following a disagreement over who should receive the condemnation proceeds, the life tenant's stepdaughter filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County. After the State paid the proceeds into court, the trial court awarded the proceeds to the stepdaughter on the condition that she invest them and share the investment income equally with her stepmother for the duration of the life tenancy. The life tenant has appealed. We have determined that the trial court erred by awarding the condemnation proceeds to the life tenant's stepdaughter and, therefore, reverse the judgment.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Frazier vs. Whisman M1997-00225-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This appeal arises from the efforts of an inmate of the Tennessee Department of Correction to have his sentence recalculated. The prisoner initially wrote to an employee of the department requesting the recalculation. Ten months after receiving the department's letter denying his request, the prisoner filed a petition for a declaratory judgment in the Chancery Court for Davidson County. The trial court dismissed the petition, and the prisoner appeals. We affirm the trial court because the prisoner did not file his petition within sixty days of the department's decision.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Davis vs. TN Bd. of Paroles M2000-00668-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This is another in a series of cases filed by a certain prison inmate, Ronald L. Davis, this time seeking the issuance of a common law writ of certiorari on the basis that the Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole improperly refused to grant him early release. The board cited the seriousness of the offense for which he was convicted as the basis for its decision and moved for dismissal of the petition or alternatively for summary judgment. The trial court held this suit to be barred by Tennessee Code Annotated section 41-21-812 which prohibits the filing of subsequent lawsuits by inmates who have unpaid costs related to previous suits. The trial court dismissed this case under Tennessee Code Annotated section 41-21-812 and on the basis that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
State ex rel Graham vs. Cherry M1999-01623-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
669. The trial court granted child support from the time of the filing of the petition. However, the court denied retroactive support on the basis of the delay of the State of Tennessee in filing the petition finding that such a judgment would be burdensome to the respondent, David R. Cherry, Jr., the father of the children. The State of Tennessee appeals, and we reverse and remand on the issue of retroactive child support.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Kelly vs. So. Central Corr. Facility Disciplinary Bd. M1999-02083-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones
Petitioner, Henderson Kelly, appeals the action of the trial court in granting a Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6) motion to dismiss his petition for a writ of certiorari requesting review of an agency decision. We affirm the action of the trial judge.
Wayne
Court of Appeals
Donna Martin vs. Mary Coleman, et al M1999-02238-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace
This is a dispute over real property which was the subject of an installment land sales contract between the parties and over the proceeds of an insurance policy after the dwelling on the property burned. The trial court ordered that the title to the property be divested from the Seller and be vested in the Buyer and that the remaining proceeds of the insurance policy be awarded to Buyer after all overdue payments of taxes and insurance and the incurred clean up costs were deducted. The Seller appeals on the grounds that the evidence was contrary to the judgment and that the plaintiff had breached the contract and is entitled to neither the property nor the insurance proceeds. For the reasons below, we affirm the judgment as modified.
Humphreys
Court of Appeals
Tarif vs. Bullion, et al M1999-00475-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
Petitioner, a state prisoner, appeals the action of the trial court in dismissing under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(6) his civil rights complaint. We affirm.
First Utility District of Knox County vs. Eleanor Jo Jarnigan-Bodden E1999-01674-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
The property owner objected to service of process and asserted due process violations relating to a utility district easement condemnation. Service of process by publication was proper notice to the non-resident Cayman Islands resident, there was no showing that the condemnation for public purpose was not necessary, and there was no right for the property owner to demand a jury of view to determine the proper easement for a water line. Judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the case remanded for determination of the compensation due the property owner for the taking.
The property owner objected to service of process and asserted due process violations relating to a utility district easement condemnation. Service of process by publication was proper notice to the non-resident Cayman Islands resident, there was no showing that the condemnation for public purpose was not necessary, and there was no right for the property owner to demand a jury of view to determine the proper easement for a water line. Judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the case remanded for determination of the compensation due the property owner for the taking.
