Tennessee Supreme Court To Hear Oral Arguments For February 2024 Docket In Nashville

The Tennessee Supreme Court has two cases set for its February 21, 2024 docket. The two cases will be heard in Nashville, Tennessee, beginning at 9:00 a.m. CST.  The cases will be livestreamed to the TNCourts YouTube page at:  www.youtube.com/@TNCourts/featured.  The details of the cases are as follows:

  • Robert E. Lee Flade v. City of Shelbyville – Plaintiff-Appellee Robert E. Lee Flade filed this action against multiple defendants, including Defendants-Appellants Stephanie Isaacs and the Bedford County Listening Project (“BCLP”).  Mr. Flade alleged that Ms. Isaacs, acting on behalf of BCLP, helped coordinate a public campaign to harass him regarding the condition of a rental house he owned.  The complaint asserted that this conduct “amounted to libel per se, intentional interference with business, intentional infliction of emotional distress, stalking and harassment.”  In response to the complaint, Ms. Isaacs and BCLP filed petitions to dismiss pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (“TPPA”).  Before the petitions were heard, Mr. Flade filed a notice of voluntary dismissal.  Defendants filed notices of intent to proceed with their petitions despite the dismissal.  The trial court declined to adjudicate the TPPA petitions in light of the nonsuit, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.  The Tennessee Supreme Court granted review to address whether a defendant’s TPPA petition survives a plaintiff’s nonsuit.    


  • Annie Jones, by and through her Conservatorship, Joyce Sons a/k/a Calisa Joyce Sons v. Life Care Centers of America d/b/a Life Care Center of Tullahoma – Annie Jones was a resident of Life Care Center of Tullahoma.  A Life Care employee was assisting Ms. Jones with taking a shower when the employee received a video call from her incarcerated boyfriend.  When the employee answered the video call, Ms. Jones’s nude body was visible to the caller.  Ms. Jones’s daughter, acting as Ms. Jones’s conservator, initiated this action against Life Care alleging that that “[a]s a direct and proximate result of the grossly negligent, willful, wanton, reckless, malicious and/or intentional misconduct of defendant, plaintiff’s privacy and dignity were violated.”  While the action was pending, Ms. Jones died.  Life Care moved for summary judgment, asserting a lack of injury and damages.  The trial court granted Life Care’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the Plaintiff could not prove the existence of any cognizable injury or damages.  Plaintiff appealed.  The Court of Appeals instructed the parties to file additional briefing addressing whether an action for invasion of privacy can be maintained after the death of the individual whose privacy was invaded.  After each party filed briefs on the issue, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the issue of injury and damages and further held that the claim for invasion of privacy based on intrusion upon seclusion survived the death of Ms. Jones.  The Tennessee Supreme Court granted Life Care’s application for permission to appeal to address the issue of whether a claim for invasion of privacy for intrusion upon seclusion survives the death of the individual whose privacy was invaded. 

Media members planning to attend oral arguments should review Supreme Court Rule 30 and file any required requests.