Patricia Ridgeway vs. Jimmy Kimball E2001-02577-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
The sole issue for our review in this divorce case is whether the Chancellor erred in ordering the Appellant, Jimmy Clarke Kimball ("Husband") to pay alimony in futuro in the amount of $1,000 per month to the Appellee, Patricia Anne Ridgeway ("Wife"). We find that the Chancellor properly considered the applicable statutory factors and that the evidence does not preponderate against his decision to award alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony. Consequently, we affirm the Chancellor's judgment.
Mary Varner vs. Jason Varner E2001-02917-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: L. Marie Williams
In divorce case the Trial Court divided marital property and debts, awarded alimony and designated debts to be paid by husband as alimony. On appeal, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Phillip Jessee vs. American General Life E2002-00182-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
In this case of alleged age discrimination case from the Chancery Court for Sullivan County the Plaintiffs/Appellants, Phillip Jessee and James O. Morse, argue that the Trial Court erred in refusing to grant their request for a continuance, in its admission and exclusion of certain evidence and in its dismissal of their cause of action against the Defendant/Appellee, American General Life and Accident Insurance Company. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.
Sullivan
Court of Appeals
Gale Emerson vs. Robert Emerson E2001-02835-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Neil Thomas, III
In this post-divorce action, the Trial Court ordered an increase in child support and ordered the father to pay 85% of the son's private school tuition. On appeal, the father insists the Trial Court was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition, and the proof did not support the increases ordered by the Trial Court. We affirm.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Sandor Turucz vs. Betty T. Madewell E2001-03134-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: L. Marie Williams
Sandor Turucz sued Betty T. Madewell seeking to recover for personal injuries and property damage sustained by him in a two-vehicle accident in Hamilton County. The case was tried to a jury, who found both parties 50% at fault. The trial court entered its judgment decreeing that "the plaintiff shall have and recover nothing from the defendant." The plaintiff appeals, arguing that errors were made by the trial court in its charge to the jury and that the verdict of the jury is not supported by material evidence. We affirm.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Christopher Hooven v. Johnnia Hooven M2001-02108-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
The wife appeals from the Trial Court's placing primary custody of the parties' minor children with the father. We affirm.
Giles
Court of Appeals
Julia Wilkes v. Fred's, Inc. W2001-02393-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
Plaintiff slipped and fell on liquid laundry detergent which had spilled in the customer service area in Defendant's store. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant. We affirm
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Julia Wilkes v. Fred's, Inc. W2001-02393-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
Plaintiff slipped and fell on liquid laundry detergent which had spilled in the customer service area in Defendant's store. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant. We affirm
Phillip Burdett vs. Kathy Burdett E2002-01071-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Lawrence H. Puckett
In this divorce action, the issue is whether the division of marital property by the Trial Court is equitable. We affirm.
Monroe
Court of Appeals
Smith, Deceased v. Jerry Smith E2001-03132-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
Joseph Bolinger vs. Sharon Ann Bolinger E2002-00103-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Conrad E. Troutman, Jr.
In this divorce case, the sole issue for our review is whether the Trial Court properly classified three IRAs held by Joseph D. Bolinger ("Husband") as partially marital and partially separate assets. Applying the analysis set forth by the Supreme Court in the case of Langschmidt v. Langschmidt, 81 S.W.3d 741 (Tenn. 2002), we hold that the IRAs, which were funded with premarital assets, should be classified as Husband's separate property. We therefore vacate the Trial Court's judgment that the IRAs are partially marital assets and remand this case.
Campbell
Court of Appeals
Wallace Forsythe v. Timothy Gibbs M2001-02055-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
A laborer injured on the job during horseplay initiated by his employer claimed that he was entitled to damages in tort for his employer's actions. The trial court dismissed the suit, ruling that the plaintiff was bound by the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers' Compensation Statute. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Cooper Mgmt. vs. Performa Entertainment. W2001-01134-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
This appeal involves a chancery court's decision to hold an enjoined party in both civil and criminal contempt for failing to abide by an injunction. The injunction required the enjoined party to remove a tent structure from certain property within a reasonable time. The enjoined party was also ordered to refrain from placing further encroachments on the property. Following a petition for contempt, the court found that the enjoined party had failed to remove the tent structure within a reasonable time and had, instead, placed more items on the property. Accordingly, the court found the enjoined party in civil and criminal contempt. Under the civil contempt charge, the enjoined party was sentenced to jail until he complied with the court's order. For the criminal contempt charge, the court ordered the party to serve seven days in jail. Five days into the enjoined party's sentence, he complied with the court's order and was released on bond. He now appeals the remaining two days on his sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this case to the chancery court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Debra Bolin v. Carl Bolin M2001-02168-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
Wife filed for divorce soon after Husband was sentenced to four years in prison for causing the death of Son. The trial court granted Wife the divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct. The court also determined that section 31-1-106 of the Tennessee Code prohibited Husband from collecting his portion of Son's life insurance policy. We affirm the decision of the trial court.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Ronnie Sykes v. Robbie Richardson M2001-02097-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash
Tenured teacher filed a petition for review of board of education action discharging him from his teaching position. The trial court, the Honorable Don R. Ash, presiding by interchange, upheld the decision by the board of education. Petitioner appeals. We affirm.
Smith
Court of Appeals
James Cone, dec. by next friend Tim Cone v. State M2001-02242-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
After his father was killed while crossing railroad tracks located in Sumner County, Tim Cone ("Plaintiff"), as next friend and on behalf of his father James R. Cone, sued the State of Tennessee ("Defendant") in the Claims Commission. Plaintiff claimed Defendant exercised control over the railroad crossing and was responsible for the dangerous condition at that crossing. Plaintiff also claimed Defendant negligently deprived James R. Cone of certain statutory rights. The Claims Commission granted Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted holding it did not have jurisdiction over Plaintiff's three claims. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this case to the Claims Commission.
Sumner
Court of Appeals
Eugene/Mark Selker vs. Russell Savory W2001-00823-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This appeal involves a dismissed claim for malicious prosecution. The plaintiffs in the present action filed their complaint one year and thirty days after a final judgment was issued in the underlying suit. The defendants responded by filing separate motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The trial court sustained the defendants' motions, holding that the plaintiffs' claim was barred by the one year statute of limitations. The plaintiffs appealed and now argue that the statute of limitations on their claim did not begin to run until the applicable period for appeal in the underlying litigation expired. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
This case arises from commercial property leases. The defendants operated a late night dance club on premises leased from the plaintiff. The plaintiff landlord unilaterally terminated the leases, changed the locks, and filed suit to recover for damage to the premises. While several pretrial motions were pending, the trial court scheduled the final hearing. The trial court found that the defendant tenants had a week-to-week oral lease and that the tenants violated the lease by engaging in illegal activity on the premises. On appeal, the defendant tenants argue that they were not given sufficient notice prior to the final hearing. We affirm, because the record does not show that the issues raised on appeal were presented to the trial court.
This appeal involves a will contest coupled with a suit to construe the same will. The trial court granted summary judgment to the proponent on the will contest and summary judgment to the contestants on the will construction issues. We hold that the issues cannot be resolved on summary judgment and reverse the trial court.
Elizabeth Ann Baker ("Plaintiff") is a school teacher. Plaintiff sued Steve Shepard, the principal of her school, and Sheila Pryor, another teacher. Plaintiff also sued Merrol Hyde, the director of Sumner County Schools, and Jeff Helbig, the school system's assistant director. Plaintiff claimed the four defendants ("Defendants") were liable for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. In addition to her Answer, Pryor filed a Counter-Complaint against Plaintiff for slander. All four Defendants filed Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6) Motions to Dismiss. The Trial Court granted Defendants' Motions to Dismiss but did not address Pryor's pending Counter-Complaint. Plaintiff appeals. Because the judgment appealed from is not a final judgment under Tenn. R. App. P. 3, we dismiss and remand.
