01A01-9608-BC-00359
|
Court of Appeals | ||
01A01-9603-CH-00098
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Carl E. Jordan, v. Tennessee Board of Paroles, et al.
An inmate in the custody of the Department of Correction filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to challenge the Parole Board’s refusal to grant him parole. The Chancery Court dismissed the Petition for failure to comply with the time limitations for filing. We affirm the dismissal on the alternate ground of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9606-CH-00256
|
Court of Appeals | ||
01A01-9606-CH-00256
|
Court of Appeals | ||
01A01-9606-CH-00278
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9606-CH-00279
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Seffernick vs. St. Thomas Hospital
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03C01-9604-CC-00156
|
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9604-CC-00156
|
Hamblen | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9512-CH-00453
|
Greene | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9606-CV-00181
|
Washington | Court of Appeals | |
02A01-9507-CV-00156
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Sullivan | Court of Appeals | |
01S01-9603-CV-00049
|
Supreme Court | ||
03C01-9511-CC-00372
|
Campbell | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9602-CR-00072
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9509-CC-00265
|
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03A01-9608-PB-00254
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Michael Morat, Individually, and Morat's Insurance Agency, Inc., a Tennessee Corporation, v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
In this action for malicious prosecution, the Trial Judge granted the defendant summary judgment, and plaintiffs have appealed. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Clyde Tull v. Paul Wilson
In this action the plaintiff sought extraordinary relief to prevent defendant from nterfering with plaintiff's use of a roadway, and for damages for past interference. |
Court of Appeals | ||
Torrence Johnson v. Stephen Dotson, W
|
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9508-CC-00251
|
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Eastera Bell Porter, Individually and as Surviving Spouse and Next Friend of Jasper D. Porter, Deceased, v. Jess McGee, M.D. and Methodis Hospitals of Memphis, Inc., and Mahfuzur Rahman, M.D.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion filed by Appellant, Eastera Bell Porter, individually and as surviving spouse and next friend of Jasper D. Porter, deceased, under Rule 60 T.R.C.P., to set aside the summary judgments entered in favor of the appellees, Jesse McGee, M.D. and Methodist Hospitals of Memphis (Methodist). After review of the record, we find an absence of abuse by the trial court in this regard and affirm. We set forth our reasons below. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
James T. Morris, v. The Board of Education of the Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools - Dissenting
The Metropolitan Nashville Board of Education and the teachers union are attempting to use this case as a vehicle to resolve whether Tenn. Code Ann. § 7-7- 105 (Supp. 1996) permits the board to use administrative law judges in Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-5-512 (1996) hearings concerning the termination of tenured teachers. The court has decided to address this issue on its merits even though the teacher involved in this case is non-tenured and is not entitled to a hearing before the board. I cannot agree that we should decide this question at this time. It would be more appropriate to delay addressing the issue until we are presented with a concrete case or controversy. The doctrine of justiciability prompts the courts to stay their hand in cases that do not involve a genuine and existing controversy requiring the present adjudication of present rights. State ex rel. Lewis v. State, 208 Tenn. 534, 537, 347 S.W.2d 47, 48 (1961); Dockery v. Dockery, 559 S.W.2d 952, 954 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1977). In accordance with the doctrine, our courts routinely decline to render advisory opinions, Super Flea Market of Chattanooga v. Olsen, 677 S.W.2d 449, 451 (Tenn. 1984); Parks v. Alexander, 608 S.W.2d 881, 892 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980), or to decide abstract legal questions. State ex rel. Lewis v. State, 208 Tenn. at 538, 347 S.W.2d at 48-49. |
Court of Appeals |