Leslie Moore v. James DeVault M2001-02225-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Landowners sought declaratory judgment against neighboring landowners to terminate an easement over their property. The trial court granted summary judgment to the neighbors holding that the easement was an express easement appurtenant, that necessity was not a required element, and that mere nonuse was insufficient to establish abandonment of the easement. We agree with the trial court and affirm.
J.C. Bradford v. Douglas Kitchen M2002-00576-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
The principal issue in this case is whether the defendant, a member or partner of J.C. Bradford, Inc., waived his right to the arbitration of his claim for damages against the defendants allegedly resulting from various machinations involving fraud and deceit and the violation of Federal and State Securities Laws, by joining a plaintiff class in an action for damages in the U.S. District Court which was voluntarily dismissed after pending four months. The Chancellor held that the defendant filed the District Court action with full knowledge of the facts and thus made an election of remedies, thereby waiving his right of arbitration. We disagree, and reverse the judgment granting an injunction against arbitration.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Eilene Copenhagen v. Roger Copenhagen M2002-00217-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
Appellant, former wife of Appellee, filed a Petition seeking to convert alleged rehabilitative alimony into permanent alimony in futuro and requesting certain other relief, including all accrued and vested benefits in her former husband's retirement plan. The trial court dismissed the Petition in its entirety holding the alimony previously awarded to be alimony in solido. We reverse the finding as to the character of the alimony previously awarded and affirm as to all other relief sought. The case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
This dispute arises out of a personal guaranty executed by the defendants securing a loan. Following a trial by jury, the court below awarded the plaintiff $68,330 in damages plus attorney's fees and costs. On appeal, the defendants contend that the court below erred in applying the parol evidence rule to evidence which would show mistake and in not permitting the defendants to amend their answer. We reverse the judgment entered below and remand for a new trial.
Thomas Dyer has filed a respectful and timely Petition to Rehear. He states that our opinion mistakenly asserted that he failed to petition the Department for a Declaratory Order. Upon further examination of the record, we are obligated to conclude that he is correct. The record shows that he indeed filed a Petition for Declaratory Order, and that the petition was denied. Thus, we were mistaken to conclude that we lacked jurisdiction to consider his Petition for a Declaratory Judgment under the UAPA.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Larry Parrish vs. Robert Marquis E2004-00875-COA-RM-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this malicious prosecution case the Appellants, Larry E. Parrish and Larry E. Parrish, P.C., contend that the Knox County Circuit Court erred in granting motions for summary judgment filed by the Appellees, Robert S. Marquis and Ronald C. Koksal. We reverse the Circuit Court's judgment of dismissal as to Mr. Koksal and we affirm the Circuit Court's judgment of dismissal as to Mr. Marquis on alternative grounds.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Floyd Woody vs. Joy Woody E2001-02078-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
In this case from the Chancery Court of Hamblen County the Appellant, Floyd Michael Woody contends that the Trial Court erred in amending a final judgment for divorce to include one half of his pension fund as part of the marital property to be awarded the Appellee, Joy Darlene Woody. The judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed as modified.
Hamblen
Court of Appeals
Dept. of Children's Srvcs vs. T.M.K. E2000-02840-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: John B. Hagler, Jr.
The State of Tennessee, through the Department of Children's Services, seeks to terminate the parental rights of T.M.K. and G.L.K., as to their children, E.K. (d.o.b. 1/3/88), C.K. (d.o.b. 1/17/90), and twin daughters, A.K. and E.K. (d.o.b. 5/4/92). The Trial Court found the State had carried the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence as to grounds for termination, as well as the best interest of the children. We affirm.
Bradley
Court of Appeals
Larry Parrish vs. Robert Marquis E2002-01131-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County the Appellants, Larry E. Parrish and Larry E. Parrish, P.C., contend that the Trial Court erred in dismissing their cause of action upon grounds that it was not timely filed under T.C.A. 28-1-105(a). We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.
Knox
Court of Appeals
State vs. Steven Arrington E2002-00249-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: James E. Beckner
In this case from the Greene County Criminal Court the Appellant, Steven Keith Arrington, a juvenile, contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that he was guilty of aggravated kidnaping. Mr. Arrington also asserts that, assuming his conviction was proper, the Trial Court erred in failing to sentence him to an indeterminate commitment. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court and remand.
Greene
Court of Appeals
Alvin Mays vs. Helen Mays E2001-02630-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
In post-divorce action, the Trial Court changed from the mother to the father, the role as primary custodian of the minor child. On appeal, we affirm.
Hawkins
Court of Appeals
William Duty vs. Joseph Daugherty E2001-02861-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
In this boundary line dispute, the Trial Court established the boundary line between the parties' properties based on testimony that prior owners had agreed on the location of the boundary, which altered the boundary established by an accurate survey. We reverse.
Scott
Court of Appeals
Billy Allan Braswell, et ux vs. AC and S, Inc., et al E2002-00093-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
The trial court allowed plaintiff to add seller as party to products liability action more than one year after injury and denied seller summary judgment on defense of the statute of limitations. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
The Oceanics Schools vs. Clifford Barbour, Jr. E2002-00181-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
This matter is before us on the petition of the plaintiff for a rehearing pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 39.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Kelso Oil vs. East West Truck Stop E2001-02090-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
This main issue in this appeal involves an Unconditional Guaranty signed by Frank Webb ("Webb"), the president and owner of East West Truck Stop, Inc. In this document, Webb guaranteed the debt of the "buyer", which was identified as "Frank Webb d/b/a East West Truck Stop." The "buyer", however, was the corporate entity, East West Truck Stop, Inc. The Trial Court concluded the parties intended for the document to state the "buyer" was the corporate entity and entered judgment against Webb personally. Webb appeals, claiming the Trial Court improperly used parol evidence to supply an essential term of the Unconditional Guaranty (i.e. the identity of the "buyer") in violation of the Statute of Frauds. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
State ex Rel. Dorothy Phillips vs. James Phillips E2001-02081-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
This is a post-divorce case involving child support issues. James Daniel Phillips ("Father") appeals the order below, in which the trial court held that it lacked the authority to reduce the child support arrearage due Father's former spouse, Dorothy Ellen Phillips ("Mother"). Father argued below that he had recently discovered that one of his "children" is not actually his biological child. He contends that this entitles him to the requested relief. Father further challenges the trial court's refusal to declare his 1990 divorce judgment invalid on the ground that it was not signed by Father who was then proceeding pro se. We affirm.
Scott
Court of Appeals
E2001-02326-COA-R3-CV E2001-02326-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
Claiborne
Court of Appeals
State ex rel. Anne Pope vs. United States Fire E2002-01092-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III
This is a suit by the State of Tennessee, ex rel. Anne B. Pope, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance, against the following Defendants: United States Fire Insurance Company; United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company; Employers Reinsurance Corporation; Utica Mutual Insurance Company; Insurance Company of North America; and Safeco Insurance Company of America. The suit seeks to require the Defendant Corporations to deposit with a Receiver approved by the Chancery Court the principal amount of the last rider to a bond that they had executed to ensure payment of worker's compensation benefits that might be owed by North American Royalties, Inc., and its subsidiaries, Wheland Holding Company, Inc., Wheland Manufacturing Company, Inc., and Wheland Foundry, LLC. The suit was initiated because North American Realties, Inc., which sought bankruptcy protection, was self-insured pursuant to T.C.A. 50-6-405. A number of employees who contended they were entitled to benefits under the Worker's Compensation Statute intervened, insisting that the Companies which had executed the bonds were liable for the aggregate amount thereof, rather than the amount shown on the last rider issued as to the bonds in question. The Trial Court found in favor of the Insurance Companies. We affirm.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Floyd Gabriel vs. Anna Hubbs E2001-03102-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
This is a will contest. Floyd Gabriel ("the contestant") filed this action contesting the validity of the purported last will and testament of his grandfather, Floyd A. Harmon ("the decedent") on the grounds of incapacity and undue influence. Following a bench trial, the court below declared the will invalid. Anna Faye Hubbs ("Hubbs"), the decedent's caretaker and the primary beneficiary under the will, appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that she exercised undue influence over the decedent. In the alternative, Hubbs argues that any presumption of undue influence arising out of her relationship with the decedent was overcome by the clear and convincing proof that the decedent received independent advice before executing his will. We affirm.
Union
Court of Appeals
Steven Belford vs. J & J Plastering E2001-02575-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Jacqueline E. Schulten
Steven R. Belford (Plaintiff") sued Danny W. Cox ("Cox") and J & J Plastering, Inc., ("Company") after he was rear-ended by a vehicle owned by the Company and driven by Cox. The jury returned a verdict for $9,000 in favor of Plaintiff. Plaintiff appealed to this Court without first filing a motion for new trial. Plaintiff raises four issues on appeal, all of which center around the exclusion or admission of evidence at trial. Because Plaintiff did not raise these issues in a motion for new trial, we deem them to be waived and dismiss this appeal.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Kenneth Nelson v. Metric Realty M2000-03204-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Plaintiffs appeal the action of the trial court in converting a T.R.C.P. Rule 12.02 motion of those referred to as "affiliated defendants" into a T.R.C.P. Rule 56 motion and then granting it, and in sustaining a motion for summary judgment in favor of those described as "advisor defendants." The action against all Defendants asserted tortious interference with contract. Defendants appeal the trial court action in overruling their motion for summary judgment based upon the statute of limitations. We affirm the action of the Chancellor in granting summary judgment to the "affiliated defendants" and in granting the motion for summary judgment of the "advisor defendants." We further hold that the statute of limitations had expired as to all defendants. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Paul Summers v. Cherokee Children & Family Services M2001-00880-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
In this appeal, the Attorney General filed suit to dissolve two nonprofit public benefit corporations. Both the Attorney General and the nonprofit corporations filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment for the Attorney General finding that the nonprofit corporations had abandoned their charitable purposes and devoted themselves to private purposes. The trial court ordered the appointment of a receiver to marshal and preserve the remaining assets. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Matthew Poliak v. James Adcock M2000-02325-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This appeal involves a dispute between a father and his adult daughter's live-in boyfriend. The boyfriend filed a personal injury suit against his girlfriend's father in the Circuit Court for Davidson County after the father assaulted him with a piece of two-by-four. The father admitted that he had assaulted his daughter's boyfriend but asserted the defenses of self-defense, provocation, and defense of property. In response to the boyfriend's motion for partial summary judgment, the trial court determined that the father had failed to produce evidence to substantiate any of these defenses. The father perfected this appeal after the trial court certified its order as final in accordance with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 54.02. We have determined that the trial court was correct when it determined that the father's evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the assault could not, as a matter of law, support his affirmative defenses. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court.
