APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

Darryl Jones (hereafter “Plaintiff”) filed suit in the Circuit Court of Shelby County against Dana A. Watson and Sheree Watson (hereafter “Defendants”) to recover damages for the wrongful death of his wife, Goldie Jones, as a result of a motor vehicle accident. Defendants were insured by Allstate Insurance Company ( hereafter “Allstate”). Allstate ultimately entered into a settlement agreement with plaintiff and pursuant thereto issued not one but two consecutive settlement checks to plaintiff. Because the son of the deceased wife incorrectly filed a wrongful death action on his own behalf, plaintiff was prevented from consummating the settlem ent agreement with
Allstate. Some three years after plaintiff’s suit had been filed, defendants filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiff had failed to comply with Rules 3 and 4 T.R.C.P. in that defendants had not been served with process, nor had an alias summons been issued, nor had the action been  recommenced within one year of the date of the issuance of the original process, thus plaintiff’s claim was barred by the one year statute of limitations. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The sole issue presented by plaintiff on appeal is whether the trial court erred in so doing. We find that it did and reverse.

The petition was filed in accordance with T.C.A. § 36-6-301 which states: Grandparents’ visitation rights. -- (a) The natural or legal grandparents of an unmarried minor child may be granted reasonable visitation rights to the child during such child’s minority by a court of competent jurisdiction upon a finding that such visitation rights would be in the best interests of the minor child. Lois Smith and Cecil Smith appeal from the trial court’s denial of their petition seeking visitation rights with their grandson, Jonathon Allen Smith, pursuant to T.C.A. § 36-6-301.1 The appellants are the parents of Roger Allen Smith whose marriage to Bethel Marie Smith (now Schneider) ended in divorce in April 1990. Jonathon Allen Smith was born to that marriage and was age 7 at the time of the hearing which is the subject of this appeal. Custody of Jonathon was awarded to his mother.

This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(b) of the Rules of the
Court of Appeals of Tennessee. The plaintiffs/appellants in this cause, Nancy Buchanan, et al., (“Buchanan”) appeal the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants/appellees, Hardeman County, Tennessee, et al., (“Hardeman County”). After a serious automobile accident on Minnie Hill Road in Hardeman County, Buchanan filed suit against Hardeman County for wrongful death, alleging that the road was not properly maintained by the County. Buchanan alleged that the accident would not have occurred had a lower speed limit been posted, a warning sign been erected, the curve properly delineated by road markings, and guardrails been installed. Buchanan argues that the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not apply to Hardeman County in this case and that the road was unsafe, dangerous, and defective under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-203(a).

This appeal is from the dismissal of the separate, but consolidated, suits of a mother and daughter for their personal injuries sustained while guest-passengers in a vehicle owned by Gayle (Amy) Schall and operated by Kimberly J. Quam Davis (hereafter "Ms. Davis"). Allstate Insurance Company (hereafter "Allstate") was served with process as an uninsured motorist insurer.

An inmate in a Tennessee prison operated by Corrections Corporation of America filed a complaint which alleged that prison guards employed by the corrections company had converted his personal property. The chancery court dismissed his complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We reverse and reinstate the complaint.

I concur with the court’s conclusion that the increase during the marriage of the equity in Ms. Selby’s six Glaze Court duplexes is marital property. However, I have prepared this separate opinion to address an issue concerning the valuation of this marital property that is not addressed in the main opinion. Since the trial court undervalued this interest, I would remand the case for further proceedings.

This is an appeal by defendant/appellant, Landon Selby, from a decision of the chancery court which granted appellant and plaintiff/appellee, Dixie Millburn Selby, a divorce and distributed the parties' marital and separate assets. The facts out of which this case arose are as follows.

I concur with the court’s conclusion that the increase during the marriage of the equity in Ms. Selby’s six Glaze Court duplexes is marital property. However, I have prepared this separate opinion to address an issue concerning the valuation of this marital property that is not addressed in the main opinion. Since the trial court undervalued this interest, I would remand the case for further proceedings.

The captioned plaintiffs have appealed from a summary judgment dismissing their suit against the captioned defendants.

In this case, Defendant Billy Azbell (Azbell) appeals the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff Knott’s Wholesale Foods, Inc. (Knott’s), finding that Azbell breached his fiduciary duty of loyalty as an employee. The trial court issued injunctive relief against Azbell and subsequently found that Azbell and defendant J & R Foods (J & R) engaged in a civil conspiracy to circumvent the injunction. Injunctive relief was issued against Azbell and J & R, and both defendants were held liable for compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. Azbell and J & R appeal. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

This is an appeal by plaintiff/appellant, Colemill Enterprises, Inc. ("Colemill"), from a decision of the chancery court which affirmed the determination of defendant/appellee, Joe Huddleston, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Revenue ("Commissioner"), that Colemill owed certain state and local sales and use taxes. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows.

This is an appeal by defendant/appellant, Joseph L. Mercer, III, from a decision of the Chancery Court for Williamson County awarding plaintiff/appellee, Cynthia Albright, attorney's fees of $1,000.00.

This appeal involves over $45,000 seized during the search of a house in Memphis for illegal drugs. After the Commissioner of Safety ordered the forfeiture of the money, the person claiming the funds filed a petition for review in the Chancery Court for Davidson County asserting that the forfeiture statutes deprived him of his constitutional right to a jury trial and violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the United States and Tennessee Constitutions. The trial court upheld the forfeiture statutes and the forfeiture, and this appeal followed. We have determined that Tennessee’s forfeiture statutes are constitutional and that the record contains substantial and material evidence supporting the commissioner’s forfeiture order. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs/appellants, Allen D. Curtis and his wife, Carolyn June Curtis, from a decision of the chancery court which dissolved the partnership formed between Curtis and defendant/appellee, William M. Rice, and which distributed the partnership's assets.1 The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows.

This appeal involves a provision in a marital dissolution agreement requiring the father to prepay his child support. Upon discovering that one of his children had decided not to complete high school, the father stopped paying the agreed amount of child support and filed a petition to terminate his child support obligation on the ground that the prepayment agreement was premised on the children’s continued enrollment in high school. The Chancery Court for Williamson County denied the petition, and the father perfected this appeal. We have determined that the trial court correctly enforced the amended marital dissolution agreement and accordingly affirm the judgment as modified herein.

This is a divorce case in which the trial court awarded custody of the parties’ minor children
to Plaintiff/Appellee, Sandra Garfinkel (Wife), with standard visitation to Defendant/Appellant,
Charles Garfinkel (Husband). Husband was ordered to pay child support and rehabilitative alimony for a period of one year. The trial court also held that Wife had not established any appreciation in the value of Husband’s separate property during the course of the marriage. Husband appeals the trial court’s rulings on child custody, child support and alimony. Wife appeals the trial court’s decision regarding Husband’s separate property. We affirm on all issues.