Bd. of Commissioners of Roane County vs. Joe Parker E2001-00146-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Frank V. Williams, III
The Plaintiffs acquired a nine-acre tract of land zoned A-1, the General Agricultural District, which was the least restrictive zoning district in Roane County, and soon announced their intention to house a tiger thereon, a permissible use, which motivated the County to amend its Regional Zoning Ordinance by creating a new zoning district, A-2, with the permissible use declared to be the keeping thereon of exotic animals. Within three years the Plaintiffs had fifty or more exotic [Class I] animals on their nine-acre tract. They acquired three additional tracts which they requested be rezoned A-2 in order to expand their exotic animal sanctuary. Rezoning was refused and the Plaintiffs filed suit alleging the refusal was arbitrary and capricious; the County filed suit, seeking to enjoin the Plaintiffs from keeping more than one exotic animal
Roane
Court of Appeals
Dept.of Children's Svcs vs. LaShondra Whaley E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: C. Van Deacon
This appeal from the Juvenile Court of Bradley County questions whether the Trial Court erred in terminating the parental rights of Ms. Whaley. We reverse the judgment of the Trial Court.
Bradley
Court of Appeals
City of Knoxville vs. The Clinch Locust Garage E2001-00297-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
The Trial Court established the respective interests of owners and lessees in sums received in an Eminent Domain Case. On appeal, we affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc. vs. Hugh Hyatt E2001-00434-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
In this consolidated appeal Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc., and Leon Williams, individually and d/b/a Old World Cabinets appeal orders denying their demands for arbitration. We reverse the order of the Chancery Court denying the demand for arbitration filed by Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc. and affirm the order of the Circuit Court denying the demand for arbitration filed by Leon Williams, individually and d/b/a Old World Cabinets.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Stan Mosley vs. Carrie Mosley E2001-01006-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jean A. Stanley
In this divorce case, the husband appealed the classification and division of the parties' marital property and the basis for awarding child support. We affirm the Trial Court's Judgment, as modified.
Washington
Court of Appeals
Stuart Lowenkron vs. Laura Lowenkron E2001-00957-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
The spousal support obligation of the appellant was suspended during his disability, but was ordered to resume when he returned to the practice of medicine. He disfavors the requirement that he must resume alimony payments when he returns to employment. Judgment affirmed.
Hamblen
Court of Appeals
Susan Whiton vs. Alan Whiton E2000-00467-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
State v. John R. Farner, Jr. E1999-00491-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The primary issue presented in this appeal is whether Tennessee law recognizes a co-perpetrator rule which bars the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide on the basis that the victims were co-participants in the drag race. After fully and carefully considering the record in this case in light of the relevant authorities, we conclude that no rule of Tennessee law bars the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide as a matter of law. We hold that causation in criminal cases generally is a question of fact for a properly instructed jury, that a victim's contributory negligence is not a complete defense but may be considered in determining whether or not the defendant's conduct was a proximate cause of death, and that a jury's determination of the causation issue will be reviewed on appeal under the familiar sufficiency of the evidence standard and not disturbed so long as the evidence is sufficient to support the jury's determination. Because the trial court in this case failed to provide the jury with an instruction on proximate causation, an essential element of the offense, and because the jury was erroneously provided an instruction as to criminal responsibility, a theory that the State now concedes is inapplicable, the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide must be reversed.
Sullivan
Supreme Court
Guy Wilson, et al. v. Thompson Const. Co., et al. M2000-03200-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: C. L. Rogers
This is a suit by Guy Wilson and his wife Rhessa, owners of a building in Gallatin, Tennessee, against their general contractor in the construction of an addition to the building and against their electrical subcontractor. The complaint charges negligence in the use of a defective fiberglass ladder that broke as Guy Wilson was climbing on it to inspect the work. The trial court held that the general contractor, Thompson Construction Company, had breached no duty of care to Plaintiffs and that the electrical contractor, Gary R. Boyd, was an independent contractor for whose alleged negligence Thompson Construction Company was not vicariously liable. On such basis, the trial court granted summary judgment to Thompson Construction Company on all issues and, pursuant to Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 54.02, entered final judgment on all issues in favor of Thompson Construction Company. Plaintiffs appeal, and we affirm the trial court.
Sumner
Court of Appeals
Anthony Myers, et al. v. Allen Bryan, III M2000-03188-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This case originated as a suit against a subdivision developer, W. Allen Bryan, III, ("Bryan"), for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, all predicated on the failure of a subdivision plat plan to reflect an existing drainage easement. Thereafter, Bryan filed a third-party complaint seeking indemnification from the surveyor who prepared the plat plan, Ragan-Smith, Associates, Inc. ("Ragan-Smith"), in the event Bryan was cast in judgment. On this Tenn. R. App. P. 54.02 appeal, we are presented with the issue of whether Bryan's cause of action for failure to reflect the drainage easement on the plat plan is barred by the four-year statute of repose for surveying errors. The court below granted Ragan-Smith summary judgment, finding that Bryan's claim is barred by the aforesaid statute of repose. Bryan appeals, arguing that Ragan-Smith is not entitled to summary judgment because, according to Bryan, the omission of the drainage easement is an engineering error, not a surveying error, and hence, so the argument goes, the subject claim is not barred by the four-year statute of repose for surveying errors. In the alternative, Bryan argues that even if the failure to reflect the drainage easement on the plat plan is a surveying error, his third-party complaint was timely filed. We affirm.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Janet Harper, et al. v. Keith Churn, et al. M2000-02353-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This is a personal injury case arising from a vehicular collision. The plaintiffs, the Harpers, and the defendants, Mr. Churn and Mr. Beard, along with several others, were traveling together in a rented vehicle at the time of the collision. Mr. Churn was the driver of the vehicle; Mr. Beard was the pastor of the parties' church. At trial, the Harpers asserted that Mr. Churn was negligent in his operation of the vehicle. Additionally, the Harpers claimed that Mr. Beard was vicariously liable for their injuries, or in the alternative, that Mr. Beard was liable under the theory of negligent entrustment. The trial court granted Mr. Beard's motion for a directed verdict, and the jury found in favor of Mr. Churn. The Harpers appeal both decisions. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Forrest Cate Motor v. Dealer Computer Services M2001-01577-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
Plaintiff appeals a declaratory judgment wherein the trial judge held that the mandatory arbitration provisions in the contract between the parties controlled and declared accordingly. We affirm.
Charles Hardy, et al. v. Robert Miller, et al. M1998-00940-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This appeal involves a dispute among members of a joint venture regarding their rights under suretyship agreements each member signed to guarantee a loan to the joint venture. After the joint venture defaulted, the bank looked to the members of the joint venture for payment of the debt. After three members of the joint venture paid the bank more than their prorated share of the debt, they filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County against a former member, seeking contribution for the amount they had paid in excess of their prorated share. The former member counterclaimed, seeking to recover the payments he had made to the bank on the joint venture's debt. Following a bench trial, the trial court concluded that the members were co-sureties, awarded the three members a $150,145.10 judgment against the former member, and denied the former member's counterclaim. The former member appealed, arguing that his former co-venturers lost their right to contribution when they expelled him from the joint venture and that he is entitled to be reimbursed for the payments he made to the bank on the joint venture's debt. We have determined that each member of the joint venture agreed to be severally liable to the bank for the joint venture's debt and, therefore, that the members were not entitled to contribution from the former member. We have also concluded that the trial court correctly dismissed the former member's counterclaim.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Jo Anne Hofmeister v. John Hofmeister M2000-00363-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
A series of post-divorce petitions resulted in a hearing on July 22, 1999 in which no witnesses were called nor any sworn testimony offered. Based on the petitions, the answers, and the statements of counsel, the court modified the final decree of divorce with respect to the husband's obligations to pay the wife's medical insurance premiums, medical expenses, and life insurance premiums. The court also denied the wife's petition for post-judgment interest on a payment to the wife that had been ordered in the final decree. The wife appeals on the grounds that (1) there were no pleadings or proof justifying the amendments and (2) the court erred in not granting her petitions. We affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
American Child Care, Inc. v. Dept. of Human Services, et al. M2000-01790-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from the trial court's denial of appellant American Child Care, Inc.'s, request for attorney's fees resulting from an administrative action in which appellant's license was suspended and later reinstated. The trial court later granted appellee summary judgment on all issues, including attorney's fees. We reverse the trial court's decision denying the appellant's application and remand to the trial court to set a reasonable fee for the appellant.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Vandal Doss v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Ins. Co. M2000-01971-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Trial Court Judge: E. Gray
This is an appeal from the Judgment of the Chancellor for Sumner County, Tennessee, dismissing Vondal Doss's Complaint against Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, alleging breach of contract for failure to make payment for medical expenses pursuant to the medical payment coverage contained in two insurance policies and the Defendant's Counter-Complaint for subrogation. Doss had suffered a personal injury as a result of an auto accident which occurred on April 8, 1993 involving a third-party tort-feasor. Plaintiff/Appellant filed a Motion to Appeal on August 2, 2000. The Judgment of the Chancellor is affirmed on all counts. Doss's claim for additional post-settlement medical payments is denied as a result of the execution of the Release and Order of Compromise and Settlement which extinguished Tennessee Farmers' subrogation rights. Tennessee Farmers' claim for reimbursement is denied. Costs of this Appeal are assessed to the Appellant.
This divorce action involves dissolution of the 25 year marriage between Appellant, Cheryl Ann Cupples ("Wife"), and Appellee, Luther Wayne Cupples ("Husband"). Wife filed for divorce in September 1992, citing irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct. Husband counterclaimed for divorce alleging inappropriate marital conduct. Both parties sought custody of their minor son, Jonathan, age 10 at the time of trial.1 On appeal, Wife cites as error the trial court's award of an absolute divorce and custody of the child to Husband, its failure to award her alimony and its division of the marital estate. For reasons hereinafter expressed, we affirm.
This appeal involved judicial review of an administrative decision regarding the denial of petitioner’s application for benefits for care at a nursing home facility. The chancellor granted the motion to dismiss of the Department of Health, Bureau of Medicaid (?respondents” or by name) on the ground that the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction due to the failure of petitioner1 to cause a summons to be properly issued and served on the Department within the sixty (60) day time limit specified in T.C.A. § 4-5-322(b)(1). The sole issue presented for review by this court is whether the chancellor erred in dismissing petitioner’s suit for judicial review for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We find no error and affirm.
Plaintiff, People's Bank of Elk Valley ("People's Bank"), appeals from the trial court's order granting summary judgment to defendant, American Banker's Financial Services, Inc. ("American") and dismissing People's Bank's complaint.
This is a divorce action wherein the appellant, Pamela Dawn Varley (Wife), appeals from the final decree which awarded a divorce and sole custody of the parties’ three minor children to Appellee, William Patrick Varley, Jr. (Husband). The children are Bridget Marie, born December 14, 1988, William Patrick Varley, III, born January 23, 1991 and Sadie Ellen Varley, whose date of birth is June 30, 1992. The decree also fails to award Wife alimony.
The defendant, Jared M. Barnes, was convicted upon his guilty plea for vehicular homicide by recklessness, a Class C felony. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I, standard offender to five years, with ten months, day for day, to be served in the county jail and the remainder of the sentence to be served on probation. In addition, the trial court suspended the defendant's driving privileges for five years and ordered that he complete five hundred hours of community service. The defendant appeals his sentence, contending that the trial court erred in denying him judicial diversion or full probation. We affirm the trial court's denial of judicial diversion and full probation, but hold that the order that the defendant serve his ten-month incarceration day for day does not preclude use of applicable conduct credits.
