I fully concur with all aspects of the Court’s well reasoned majority opinion. Nevertheless, I wish to address the scurrilous, unfounded and unprofessional personal attacks made by Appellee against the person holding the position of and the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Tennessee. Unfounded and unwarranted accusations such as those cast by Appellee accomplish little but to reflect adversely on the one casting. This jurist enjoys a heated exchange of differing opinions and an aggressive analysis of legal theories and principles. Moreover, I find such exchanges often productive, enabling the tribunal to get to the intellectually honest assessment of the case; however, scurrilous and unfounded personal attacks serve no legitimate purpose and have no place in the dispute resolution arena.
Case Number
M2004-02185-COA-R3-CV
Originating Judge
Chancellor Ellen H. Lyle
Case Name
John Jay Hooker v. Phil Bredesen, et al. - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version
hookerj2CON.pdf9.76 KB