COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

County

Authoring Judge

Originating Judge

Date Filter

Case Number

Case Name

Keyword Search

Dispositive Order?

Sort by

Order

02A01-9601-CH-00008 02A01-9601-CH-00008 Trial Court Judge: John Hill Chisolm	Hardeman	Court of Appeals	03/18/97
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	03/18/97
03A01-9609-CH-00300 03A01-9609-CH-00300	Hamilton	Court of Appeals	03/18/97
03A01-9611-CV-00345 03A01-9611-CV-00345		Court of Appeals	03/18/97
03A01-9608-CV-00251 03A01-9608-CV-00251	Washington	Court of Appeals	03/18/97
03A01-9605-CV-00166 03A01-9605-CV-00166	Sevier	Court of Appeals	03/14/97
02A01-9511-CV-00253 02A01-9511-CV-00253 Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley	Benton	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
02A01-9512-CH-00269 02A01-9512-CH-00269		Court of Appeals	03/12/97
02A01-9601-CV-00009 02A01-9601-CV-00009 Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio	Shelby	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
02A01-9601-CV-00009 02A01-9601-CV-00009		Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Jackson vs. Corrections Corp. of America 01A01-9606-CH-00276 Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Jackson vs. Corrections Corp. of America 01A01-9606-CH-00276 Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Young vs. Young 01A01-9609-CV-00415 Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Samson vs. Hartsville Hospital 01A01-9609-CH-00430 Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith	Trousdale	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Loria vs. Loria 01A01-9609-CH-00441 Trial Court Judge: Cornelia A. Clark	Williamson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Livingston, et. al. vs. Upper Cumberland Human 01A01-9609-CV-00391 Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull	DeKalb	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Terry vs. Niblack 01A01-9609-CV-00447 Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Thomas v. White 01A01-9609-CH-00442 Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Brandt	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Garrett vs. McDougle 01A01-9609-CH-00443 Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith	Wilson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
Frank Rudy Heirs Assoc. vs. Moore & Assoc . 01A01-9607-CH-00315 Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle	Davidson	Court of Appeals	03/12/97
02A01-9606-CH-00144 02A01-9606-CH-00144	Obion	Court of Appeals	03/11/97
02a01-9605-CH-00101 02a01-9605-CH-00101 Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos	Shelby	Court of Appeals	03/11/97
03A01-9609-CV-00289 03A01-9609-CV-00289	Knox	Court of Appeals	03/10/97
Lue Ann Smith, v. Winchester City Council, et. al. 01A01-9609-CV-00419 Authoring Judge: Judge Samuel L. Lewis Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Curtis Smith This is an appeal by petitioner/appellant, Lue Ann Smith, from an order of the Franklin County Circuit Court quashing her writ of certiorari. The writ suspended the decisions of respondent/appellee, the Winchester City Council (“the Council”), allowing intervening petitioner, Karl Smith, permission and denying Appellant permission to sell fire works within the City of Winchester. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows.	Franklin	Court of Appeals	03/08/97
Robert A. Hewgley, Deane Pritchett, and H. Mel Weaver, v. Jose A. Vivo and wife Peggy M. Vivo 01A01-9506-CH-00266 Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr. Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins This appeal involves the enforcement of a 47-year-old restrictive covenant in a residential subdivision in Tullahoma. After a physician converted one of the homes in the subdivision into a medical clinic, a group of property owners filed suit in the Chancery Court for Coffee County seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to enforce a restrictive covenant requiring the property in the subdivision to be used for residential purposes. The trial court, sitting without a jury, determined that the restrictive covenant remained enforceable, directed the physician to remove an illuminated exterior sign, and awarded attorney’s fees to the property owners. On this appeal, the physician takes issue with the enforcement of the restrictive covenant and with the award of attorney’s fees. While we affirm the enforcement of the restrictive covenant, we reverse the award of attorney’s fees.	Coffee	Court of Appeals	03/05/97