APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

Please enter some keywords to search.
John Wolfe vs. First American Corp.

02A01-9510-CV-00212

Originating Judge:Whit A. Lafon
Madison County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Mattie Bedford vs. Margaret Culpepper, et al

02A01-9604-CH-00085

Originating Judge:C. Neal Small
Shelby County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
State Farm Ins. vs. Gill

01A01-9701-CV-00010

Originating Judge:Tyrus H. Cobb
Bedford County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Albert Milam/Tina Milam vs. Franklin Wilson

02A01-9607-CV-00167
Shelby County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Nickolas Price, et al vs. Christian Price

02A01-9609-CH-00228

Originating Judge:Floyd Peete, Jr.
Shelby County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Bobbie & Willie Byrd vs. First Tennessee Bank

02A01-9610-CV-00252
Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Robins vs. Flagship Airlines, Inc. & AMR Corp

01A01-9612-CV-00550

Originating Judge:Walter C. Kurtz
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
Turtle Creek Apts. vs. Polk

01A01-9608-CV-00382

Originating Judge:Walter C. Kurtz
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/20/97
The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.

01A01-9612-CH-00571

Originating Judge:Tom E. Gray
Sumner County Court of Appeals 06/18/97
Hunter vs. Anderson

01A01-9701-CV-00024

Originating Judge:Thomas Goodall
Sumner County Court of Appeals 06/18/97
The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.

01A01-9612-CH-00571
Court of Appeals 06/18/97
Tomlinson vs. Traughber

01A01-9703-CH-00143

Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/18/97
Ruff vs. Traughber

01A01-9702-CH-00074

Originating Judge:Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/18/97
Flowers vs. Metro Baptist Schools

01A01-9705-CH-00219

Originating Judge:Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/18/97
Marles Flowers vs. Memphis Housing Authority

02A01-9610-CV-00240

Originating Judge:Wyeth Chandler
Shelby County Court of Appeals 06/17/97
Gates, Duncan & Vancamp Co., et al vs. Richard Levantino

02A01-9605-CH-00095
Shelby County Court of Appeals 06/17/97
Susan Turner v. Jeffrey Purvis

M2002-00023-COA-R3-CV
Mother appeals from a trial court modification of the custody and visitation arrangement which had been in place since the divorce in 1997. The previous arrangement gave Mother primary residential custody, and Father was to have liberal visitation as agreed upon by the parties. After declining to adopt the parenting plan submitted by either Mother or Father, the trial court devised a plan establishing a specific residential schedule. Mother argues that there was not a material change of circumstances that warranted the trial court's decision. Because we determine that a material change in circumstances occurred and because the modification of the custody arrangement was in the best interests of the children, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Michael R. Jones
Montgomery County Court of Appeals 06/13/97
Jammi vs. Conley

01A01-9609-CH-00425

Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
Henderson vs. Harlan, d/b/a: Lodge Quarters

01A01-9610-CV-00463

Originating Judge:Walter C. Kurtz
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
Aghili vs. Saadatnejadi

01A01-9605-CV-00214

Originating Judge:Muriel Robinson
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
Coffee County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
Bain vs. City of Murfreesboro

01A01-9611-CV-00510

Originating Judge:Robert E. Corlew, III
Rutherford County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
Wood vs. Prosser, et. al.

01A01-9510-CV-00468

Originating Judge:Marietta M. Shipley
Davidson County Court of Appeals 06/11/97
Than Those Articulated By The Majority. The Majority Relies Upon State v. Marshall,

03C01-9602-CC-00066

Originating Judge:R. Steven Bebb
McMinn County Court of Appeals 06/10/97
Pacific Properties, v. Home Federal Bank of Tennessee, v. Michael S. Stalcup

03A01-9701-CV-00020

This action for conversion was submitted to a jury which returned a general verdict for the plaintiff, thereby implicitly finding that the fact-driven principal defense of the Statute of Limitations was not well-taken. Home Federal appeals and presents for review issues which, as paraphrased, question the propriety of the submission of the case to the jury, whether the defense of Statute of Limitations was well-taken, as a matter of law, whether requested jury instructions should have been given and whether the drawer of a check adequately instructed the drawee Bank as to its disposition. Pacific Properties

Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Originating Judge:Judge William R. Holt, Jr.
Court of Appeals 06/09/97