State of Tennessee o.b.o., Linda C. Britton, v. Robert Eugene Kyer
This cause commenced when plaintiff Linda Britton filed a petition to establish paternity and for child support in West Virginia, pursuant to that state's Uniform Reciprocal Support Act (URESA). The petition was forwarded to the Circuit Court for Coffee County, Tennessee for prosecution. |
Coffee | Court of Appeals | |
01C01-9402-CR-00067
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03A01-9506-CV-00195
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9508-CH-00257
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9508-CH-00258
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
03C01-9304-CR-00136
|
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9304-CR-00136
|
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
01C01-9503-CC-00057
|
Stewart | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
01C01-9504-CR-00107
|
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03C01-9503-CR-00086
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
02C01-9501-CC-00019
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
02C01-9503-CC-00077
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Cyril v. Fraser
|
Dyer | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
02C01-9502-CR-00030
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
02A01-9411-PB-00250
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
02A01-9405-CV-00106
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
02A01-9312-BC-00267
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03C01-9410-CR-00382
|
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9501-CR-00014
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
IN RE: Estate of Odell P. Bradley, Deceased; Edith Steward and Barbara Ramsey v. Christian F. Hofstetter Executor, et al. - Concurring
Contestants (“appellants”) have appealed from a dismissal of a will contest suit filed by them in the Davidson County Probate Court. Following a bench trial, the Honorable Joe P. Binkley, Sr., Special Judge, found that no proof had been presented to establish that the decedent was unduly influenced or that he was of unsound mind, and that the will was in fact his proper Last Will and Testament. The contestants' complaint was dismissed. One of the contestants below has appealed pro se. Appellant's brief fails to comply with T.R.A.P. 27(a) in several ways, one of them being an absence of the statement of the issues. In order to properly dispose of this case, we conclude that the issue presented is whether the evidence preponderates against the judgment of the trial court. We find that it does not and affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals |