COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Pratt vs. Smart
03A01-9701-CV-00024

03A01-9704-CH-00133
03A01-9704-CH-00133

Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co. v. Lexington Ins. Co.
M2002-01752-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
On November 16, 1997, a fire destroyed a Chili's Restaurant ("Chili's") in Nashville, Tennessee. At the time of the fire, the premises were owned and operated by RMR Investments and Gower Center, Ltd. ("RMR/Gower") and leased to Chili's. Under a 20-year lease agreement, Chili's agreed to insure the improvements against loss or damage by fire and other casualties and to insure against property damage and public liability arising out of occurrences on the premises. RMR/Gower was to be named as a loss payee or additional insured under the insurance policies obtained by Chili's. According to the lease, in the event the premises and/or the improvements were destroyed by fire or other casualty, Chili's had the option to terminate the lease, and all insurance proceeds were to be paid to RMR/Gower, except for the portion payable to Chili's for loss of personal property. Pursuant to the lease agreement, Chili's obtained insurance coverage through Lexington Insurance Company ("Lexington"). The certificate of insurance dated December 5, 1997 listed RMR/Gower as certificate holder and named RMR/Gower as additional insured. After the fire, Chili's elected to terminate the lease agreement due to the condition of the premises. Lexington paid the proceeds for the loss of the building to RMR/Gower, less amounts paid to Chili's for loss of personal property. RMR/Gower submitted an additional claim for damages it incurred for the loss of rental income and other charges it would have otherwise collected from Chili's. This claim was denied by Lexington. RMR/Gower then submitted a claim to its insurer Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company ("Charter Oak") for the loss of rental income, which Charter Oak paid. After Lexington refused to reimburse Charter Oak for the amounts it paid RMR/Gower for the loss of rental income, Charter Oak filed suit against Lexington for breach of contract under the theory of third party beneficiary. Parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. On June 26, 2002, the trial court granted Lexington's summary judgment motion and denied Charter Oak's motion. Notice of this appeal soon followed. For the reasons set forth below, the order of the trial court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.

Kitsie Hendrix vs. James Cox, et al
02A01-9510-CV-00233
Trial Court Judge: Wyeth Chandler

O.W. Winsett v. Paul Orr and Mary Orr
02A01-9605-CH-00100
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Floyd Peete, Jr.

This case involves the alleged breach of an oral contract for the construction of a home. The trial court granted the builder summary judgment. Because some genuine issues of material fact exist, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

Kenneth Rudstrom, et al vs. Ronald Terry Construction
02A01-9605-PB-00098
Trial Court Judge: Leonard D. Pierotti

Walter Wills vs. Ray Gill
02A01-9607-CH-00150
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos

City of Memphis vs. Civil serv. Comm., et al
02A01-9607-CH-00158
Trial Court Judge: C. Neal Small

Mississippi Farm Mutual vs. Latonia & Thomas Jones
02A01-9607-CV-00151
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown

William Boyle vs. Virginia Thomas
02A01-9601-CV-00022
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier

Susie Buchanan vs. Memphis Light, etc.
02A01-9610-CV-00245
Trial Court Judge: James E. Swearengen

Harris Hughes Jr. vs. TN Seeds, et al
02A01-9611-CV-00290
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

03A01-9704-CV-00111
03A01-9704-CV-00111

Holloway vs. Collier, Jr.
01A01-9704-CV-00153
Trial Court Judge: William C. Koch

Holloway vs. Collier, Jr.
01A01-9704-CV-00153
Trial Court Judge: William B. Cain

Thomas v. White
01A01-9610-CH-00479
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

American Color vs. Innovo
01A01-9703-CH-00120
Trial Court Judge: Alex W. Darnell

Jones vs. Rudolph
01A01-9611-CH-00513
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy

American Color vs. Innovo
01A01-9703-CH-00120
Trial Court Judge: William C. Koch

Wolf vs. The University of TN.
01A01-9611-CH-00514
Trial Court Judge: William M. Dender

Fetterolf vs. Fetterolf
01A01-9704-JV-00171
Trial Court Judge: John P. Hudson

State of Tennessee Department of Human Services, v. Sylvia Fetterolf Ford, and Stanley Fetterolf
01A01-9704-JV-00171
Authoring Judge: Judge Walter W. Bussart
Trial Court Judge: Judge John Hudson

This is an appeal by respondents/appellants, Stanley Fetterolf and Sylvia Fetterolf Ford, from a decision of the Putnam County Juvenile Court terminating their parental rights. Ms. Ford argues petitioner/appellee, State of Tennessee Department of Human Services (“Department”), filed its petition for termination of parental rights in the wrong court and contends the proper venue was the Overton County Juvenile Court which had handled the initial custody proceedings.1 The pertinent facts are as follows.

Nelson vs. The Application Group
01A01-9703-CV-00137

Nelson vs. The Application Group
01A01-9703-CV-00137
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX