COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

County

Authoring Judge

Originating Judge

Date Filter

Case Number

Case Name

Keyword Search

Sort by

Order

Ramond Gregory v. Laura Sue Gregory - Concurring 01A01-9508-CH-00357 Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tyrus H. Cobb This appeal involves a suit to determine ownership of an 18.5 acre tract of land located in Lincoln County, Tennessee. The facts are as follows.	Lincoln	Court of Appeals	02/07/96
Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims 02A01-9411-CH-00252 Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard Trial Court Judge: Chancellor George R. Ellis This case came to be considered by the Court upon a grant of a Rule 9 application for permission to appeal an interlocutory Order of the trial court.	Crockett	Court of Appeals	02/06/96
Wanda Sharp, Individually and as Next Friend of Joseph Riggs v. Anderson County and Anderson School Board of Education 03A01-9508-CV-00282 Authoring Judge: Judge John T. McMurray Trial Court Judge: Judge James B. Scott, Jr. This is an appeal from a judgment granting a motion for summary judgment in favorof the defendants - appellees and dismissing the plaintiff's complaint. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.	Anderson	Court of Appeals	02/05/96
Carl Nelson v. Harold Eugene Martin & Jack W. Gammon - Concurring 02A01-9403-CV-00043 Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers Trial Court Judge: Judge James M. Tharpe This case arises from the termination of appellant, Carl Nelson, as employee, officer and director of B & M Printing Company. The pertinent facts are as follows: In 1968, Nelson, together with appellees, Harold E. Martin and Jack W. Gammon, formed a partnership named B & M Printing Company for the purpose of engaging in the commercial printing business. In 1969, the three partners converted the partnership into a corporation and were issued 100 shares each of the corporation's stock. There were no other shareholders in the corporation. Nelson, Gammon and Martin were all employed by the corporation and acted as the corporation's only officers and directors. The presidency of the corporation was initially rotated between the three parties every year, but at the time of Nelson's termination, Martin was the president and had been for several years. The parties received no compensation for their duties as officers and directors, but did receive salaries, commissions based on individual sales, and bonuses as employees of the corporation. In addition, the parties received rent money from the corporation through their partnership, BCJ Enterprises, which owned the property on which B & M Printing Company was located	Shelby	Court of Appeals	02/01/96
01A01-9507-CH-00316 01A01-9507-CH-00316 Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	01/31/96
01A01-9508-CV-00378 01A01-9508-CV-00378 Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell	Williamson	Court of Appeals	01/31/96
01A01-9509-CV-00405 01A01-9509-CV-00405 Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz	Davidson	Court of Appeals	01/31/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	01/31/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	01/31/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	01/31/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX	Hamilton	Court of Appeals	01/31/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	01/31/96
Roy Baines vs. Wilson County M2000-00830-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith This appeal involves a suit for retaliatory discharge brought by the plaintiff against Wilson County, Wilson Emergency Management Agency and the plaintiff's supervisor. The plaintiff asserts that he was fired in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's claim because, it held, Wilson County and Wilson Emergency Management Agency were both immune pursuant to the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act. Further, it held that the plaintiff did not allege a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge against his supervisor because his supervisor was not his employer. We agree and, therefore, affirm the holdings of the trial court.	Wilson	Court of Appeals	01/29/96
03A01-9507-JV-00246 03A01-9507-JV-00246	Hamblen	Court of Appeals	01/29/96
03A01-9508-CH-00293 03A01-9508-CH-00293		Court of Appeals	01/29/96
03A01-9509-CH-00314 03A01-9509-CH-00314		Court of Appeals	01/29/96
03A01-9510-CH-00357 03A01-9510-CH-00357 Trial Court Judge: Inman		Court of Appeals	01/29/96
03A01-9510-CV-00365 03A01-9510-CV-00365 Trial Court Judge: Inman		Court of Appeals	01/29/96
02A01-9410-CH-00230 02A01-9410-CH-00230 Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos	Shelby	Court of Appeals	01/29/96
02A01-9410-CH-00230 02A01-9410-CH-00230 Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos	Shelby	Court of Appeals	01/29/96
Jane Doe and Mother A., Jane Doe C and Father C., v. Coffee County Board of Education, Joe Brandon, Bobby Cummings, Nelson Johnson, Marianne Brandon 01A01-9506-CV-00252 Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford Trial Court Judge: Judge Gerald L. Ewell, Sr. This is a suit by two high school students and their parents seeking damages resulting from alleged assaults by a high school coach.	Coffee	Court of Appeals	01/26/96
Penny Campbell, et al., v. Don Sundquist, Governor of the State of Tennessee, et al. 01A01-9507-CV-00321 Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz This appeal involves a constitutional challenge under the Tennessee Constitution to Tennessee's Homosexual Practices Act, T.C.A. § 39-13-510 (1991). On May 26, 1993, plaintiffs Penny Campbell, John Doe, Jane Doe, James Tallent, and Christopher Simien,1 filed a "Verified Petition for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief" in the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee, against defendants Don Sundquist, Governor of the State of Tennessee,2 Charles W. Burson, Attorney General of the State of Tennessee, and Victor S. Johnson, III, District Attorney General for Davidson County, each in his official capacity. The complaint, as amended, seeks a declaratory judgment pursuant to T.C.A. § 29-14-101, et seq., (1980) that the Homosexual Practices Act (HPA),acriminal law, violates plaintiffs' right to privacy under Article I, Sections 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 19, and 27 of the Tennessee Constitution and their right to equal protection of the laws under Article I, Section 8 of the Tennessee Constitution. Plaintiffs also seek to enjoin the enforcement of the HPA.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	01/26/96
03A01-9508-CV-00252 03A01-9508-CV-00252	Loudon	Court of Appeals	01/26/96
03A01-9508-CV-00256 03A01-9508-CV-00256	Knox	Court of Appeals	01/26/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX	Greene	Court of Appeals	01/26/96