COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Perkins vs. Dept. of Employment Security & Sports Belle, Inc.
03A01-9903-CH-00106

Knox Court of Appeals

Mark Matlock D/B/A MSM Development vs. Lenoir City Board of Zoning
03A01-9904-CV-00132

Loudon Court of Appeals

03A01-9903-CH-00120
03A01-9903-CH-00120

Court of Appeals

Kim Nuchols (Walker) vs. Benny Nuchols
03A01-9901-GS-00007

Court of Appeals

03A01-9902-CH-00045
03A01-9902-CH-00045

Anderson Court of Appeals

Continental Land Co. vs. Investment Properties Co.
M1998-00431-COA-R3-CV

Marion Court of Appeals

Slate vs. State
M1998-00434-COA-R3-CV

Court of Appeals

White (Deerman) vs. White
M1999-00005-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace

Cheatham Court of Appeals

15th Jud. Dist. Unified Bar Assoc. vs. Glasgow
M1996-00020-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith

Wilson Court of Appeals

Davis vs. Dept. of Employment Security
M1996-00021-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Brandt

Davidson Court of Appeals

Davis vs. Dept. of Employment Security
M1996-00021-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Brandt

Davidson Court of Appeals

Moore vs. Moore
M1999-01680-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Davidson Court of Appeals

Westside Health and Raquet Club, Inc., v. Jefferson Financial Services, Inc.
E1998-00412-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Thomas R. Frierson

Westside Health & Racquet Club, Inc. (“Westside”) filed this action against Jefferson Financial Services, Inc. (“ Jefferson”). Westside’s theory of its claim -- which theory was adopted by the trial court -- is that Westside’s transfer to Jefferson, over time, of some 495 installment sales
contracts was, in each case, part and parcel of a usurious loan made by Jefferson to Westside, rather than a sale of the contract. The trial court awarded Westside damages of $68,519.71 for usurious interest, which was enhanced by a further award of pre-judgment interest pursuant to T.C.A. § 47-14-123 (1995)1. Jefferson appeals, raising several issues. The issue that we will focus on can be stated thusly: Does the Retail Installment Sales Act, T.C.A. § 47-11-101, et seq., (“ the Act”) operate to exempt the dealings between these parties from Tennessee’s usury statutes?

Hamblen Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee, et al., Coretta Scott King, v. Lloyd Jowers
W1999-00984-COA-R10-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge James F. Swearengen

On December 1, 1999, the State of Tennessee on behalf of the appellants Judge James Beasley, Judge Robert T. Dwyer and Mark Glankler, filed a Rule 10 T.R.A.P. application for Page 1 extraordinary appeal. Specifically, the State sought to set aside the trial court’s order denying the State’s motion to quash the subpoenas served on the aforementioned appellants.

Court of Appeals

Randy Hill, v. Tennessee Board of Paroles, et al.
M1997-00065-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This appeal involves a state prisoner’s efforts to be paroled from an eight-year sentence for aggravated child abuse. After the Tennessee Board of Paroles declined to parole him, the prisoner filed a certiorari petition in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking judicial review of the Board’s decision. The trial court dismissed the petition on the grounds that it was not timely filed. We affirm the trial court in accordance with Tenn. Ct. App. R. 10(b).1

Davidson Court of Appeals

Terry Compton v. Tennessee Department of Correction and Nashville Community Service Center
M1997-00066-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

This appeal involves a state prisoner’s efforts to obtain judicial review of a disciplinary action taken by the Nashville Community Service Center. After the Commissioner of Correction upheld the finding that he been drinking while on work release, the prisoner filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Circuit Court for Davidson County. The trial court clerk refused to file the petition and required the prisoner to file a second petition because the pauper’s oath accompanying the first petition was not on the proper form and had not been notarized. Thereafter, the trial court granted the Department of Correction’s motion to dismiss the second petition because it was not timely filed. We have determined that the trial court clerk exceeded his authority when he declined to accept and file the prisoner’ petition and, therefore, that the trial court erred by dismissing the petition.

Davidson Court of Appeals

Bellevue Properties, LLC., v. United Retail Incorporate, et al.
M1999-01480-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This case concerns the burden placed on a commercial landlord in mitigating damages caused by a commercial tenant’s abandonment of the leased property. Although our courts heretofore have required a landlord who suffers breach to use reasonable commercial methods to reduce his damages, this tenant-in-breach would read two additional duties into those reasonable commercial methods. First, the tenant would require that the abandoned property be marketed specially and apart from the landlord’s other commercial space inventory. Second, the landlord would be required to market the property at the original contract rental rather than its going market value. Under the facts as established in the record and according to the common law of this jurisdiction, we disagree.

Davidson Court of Appeals

Robert Bean, Franklin Shaffer, David Autrey, Mack Roberts, Kevin Antle, Tom NIchols, Tammie P. Beasley, and Roxanne Luce, v. Ned Ray McWherter, Governor, State of Tennessee et al.
M1999-01493-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This is a constitutional challenge to an Act of the legislature regulating the possession and sale of animals. Owners, dealers, and licensed propagators of various wildlife species challenged the Act on grounds that it is vague, overbroad, and a burden on interstate commerce. The Chancery Court of Davidson County rejected the constitutional challenge. We affirm the decision on the vagueness and overbreadth charge. We think, however, that there are disputed facts bearing on the question of whether parts of the Act impermissibly burden interstate commerce. We, therefore,  remand for further proceedings on that issue.

Davidson Court of Appeals

Lori Ann Parr v. Miiddle Tennessee State University and Treyton Williams
M1999-01442-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge James L. Weatherford

Lori Ann Parr, proceeding pro se, has appealed the trial court’s dismissal of this invasion of privacy, breach of confidentiality, and civil rights intimidation via malicious harassment1 action that was brought against Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU), Treyton Williams (Williams) and other unnamed individuals. Based upon the following, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal.

Rutherford Court of Appeals

Estate of Effie S. Hooker, Deceased and Harold E. Matheny, Administrator, C.T.A. of the Estate of Effie S. Hooker, Deceased, v. Suntrust Bank of Nashville, Bank of Nashville, N.A. et al.
M1999-01479-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Russell Heldman

This case concerns a claim filed by SunTrust Bank, Nashville, N.A.(hereinafter SunTrust) against the estate of Effie S. Hooker, the second wife of famed Middle Tennessee lawyer John J. Hooker, Sr. Mr. Hooker died on Christmas Eve of 1970, leaving the majority of his estate to his widow. According to the prevailing probate practice of the day, a portion of Mr. Hooker’s estate was placed
in a trust for the benefit of Mrs. Hooker during her life, the remainder to the children of Mr. Hooker’s first marriage.

Williamson Court of Appeals

Steven R. Linn, Susan D. Linn, David L. Linn, Wilma R. Linn, v. Vera E. Elrod, and Olin D. Elrod, v. Anna Lee Leinart Gross, Trustee of the Anne Lee Leinart Gross Trust
03A01-9903-CH-00080
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Billy Joe White

The suit presently on appeal originated by Steven R. Linn and his son, David L. Linn, and their wives filing suit against Vera E. Elrod and Olin D. Elrod, seeking a mandatory injunction requiring removal of a fence erected upon property the Linns claim to be owned by them. Upon the filing of an answer and the counter-complaint by the Elrods and the adding of a third-party, Anna Lee Leinart Gross, as a Defendant, it resolved itself into a property line dispute.

Campbell Court of Appeals

03A01-9810-CH-00320
03A01-9810-CH-00320

Hamilton Court of Appeals

03A01-9812-CH-00415
03A01-9812-CH-00415

Court of Appeals

03A01-9901-CH-00070
03A01-9901-CH-00070

Court of Appeals

03A01-9902-CH-00041
03A01-9902-CH-00041

Hamilton Court of Appeals