Union Planters vs. American Home W2001-01124-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Karen R. Williams
This is an insurance case dealing with a standard loss-payee clause. On September 1, 1980, the appellee insurance company issued an aircraft hull and liability insurance policy to a commercial airline. The policy had an attached breach of warranty endorsement specifying the appellant bank as the loss payee for a particular airplane. In November 1980, the airline cancelled its insurance coverage for the airplane without giving notice to the bank. In December 1980, the airplane was found in Puerto Rico and seized by the United States government as an instrument of drug trafficking. When the airplane was seized, the seats and log books were missing. The bank sought recovery for the loss to the airplane under the breach of warranty endorsement attached to the original insurance policy. The insurance company denied coverage, and the bank sued the insurance company in the trial court below. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurance company. The bank now appeals. We reverse, finding that because notice of the cancellation of the insurance policy was not given to the loss-payee bank, the cancellation was not effective as to the loss-payee.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Stacy Turney vs. Ronald Turney W2001-00492-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
This appeal from a divorce decree raises issues concerning the classification and distribution of the parties' property, and the determination of income for the purposes of setting child support. We modify the distribution of property and remand for determination of child support.
Madison
Court of Appeals
Ishmael Mace vs. Phyllis Mace W2001-00574-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Karen R. Williams
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Ishmael Mace vs. Phyllis Mace W2001-00574-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Karen R. Williams
William Perry vs. Ricki Perry W2001-01350-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield
Tipton
Court of Appeals
William Perry vs. Ricki Perry W2001-01350-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield
Tipton
Court of Appeals
William Perry vs. Ricki Perry W2001-01350-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield
Tipton
Court of Appeals
Ida Douglas, et al. v. William Foster, et al. M2000-03177-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
The appellants, Ida Douglas and Dovie Allen, and appellees, William and Barbara Foster, entered into a contract for the sale of a house. After the buyers had lived in the house for a few years, several problems emerged. The buyers sued the sellers for rescission of the contract. The trial court granted the sellers' motion for involuntary dismissal after the presentation of the buyers' proof at trial. We affirm the decision of the trial court.
Robertson
Court of Appeals
Rhonda Anderson vs. Lester Jarrett & Melinda Benson vs. Herman Harris W2001-00484-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: J. Roland Reid
This is a child support case concerning jurisdiction to review certain administrative decisions rendered by the Department of Human Services. In its order, the juvenile court transferred the case, concluding that section 4-5-322 of the Tennessee Code placed jurisdiction with the "appropriate chancery court." Despite its order transferring the case, the juvenile court also decided the case on the merits and ruled that the State acted in contravention to section 36-5-905 of the Tennessee Code regarding the seizure of an obligor's assets. The court further concluded that section 36-5-905 was unconstitutional. We reverse the trial court regarding its jurisdictional determination and hold that the trial court erred by reaching the constitutional issue
Haywood
Court of Appeals
Paul Nee vs. Big Creek W2001-01482-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown
This is a premises liability action. Plaintiff alleges he was injured in a fall that took place on Defendant's steps. At trial, Plaintiff introduced pictures of the steps into evidence and testified that he heard a "crackling noise" as his "foot began to slide." After considering Plaintiff's evidence, the trial court granted Defendant's motion for a directed verdict. The trial court determined that Plaintiff failed to introduce evidence that the stairs constituted a defective or dangerous condition. Further, the trial court ruled that the jury would be forced to speculate on the cause of Plaintiff's fall. We affirm the decision of the trial court.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Melvin Bonds Jr. vs. Mike Emerson W2001-00812-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Clayburn L. Peeples
This is a personal injury case arising from an automobile accident involving a sixteen-year old driver and a police officer. Officer, who was responding to a backup call, was allegedly driving 99 m.p.h. when driver pulled out of driveway. In a bench trial, the trial court found driver 80% at a fault for the accident and the officer 20% at fault. Driver has appealed. Judgment vacated and remanded.
Haywood
Court of Appeals
Lance Morris vs. Collis Foods W2001-00918-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Roger A. Page
This appeal involves a suit against a restaurant for a tort committed by a waitress. The appellant visited the restaurant on a crowded night. After the appellant's first waitress quit, another waitress took appellant's order. Following a long wait for his food, the appellant approached his waitress and words were exchanged. The waitress threw an object at the appellant, which caused injures. The appellant filed suit against both the restaurant and waitress. The relevant portion of the appellant's suit against the restaurant relied on the doctrine of respondeat superior. The court granted a motion for summary judgment filed by the restaurant, holding that the waitress was not acting within the scope of her employment. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Madison
Court of Appeals
Nora/Sylvester Eddings vs. Sears W2001-01107-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
This appeal involves a personal injury and allegations of promissory fraud stemming from a display bed collapsing at the defendant's department store. The plaintiffs spoke with the defendant's claim adjustor following the incident and were allegedly assured that medical bills would be paid by the defendant or that the claim would be "concluded." The plaintiffs, however, were informed by the defendant's claims adjustor approximately one year after the accident that the defendant held no liability due to the lapse of the statute of limitation. The plaintiffs sued the defendant for both personal injury and promissory fraud. Both claims were eventually defeated before a trial could be held and the plaintiffs appealed. We affirm.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Johnson vs. CCA W2001-00595-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This is an appeal from an order of the trial court granting a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We reverse in part and affirm in part.
Hardeman
Court of Appeals
Terry Hicks v. Donal Campbell M2001-00280-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
This appeal involves a prisoner disciplinary proceeding at the Hardeman County Correctional Facility. A prisoner filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking judicial review of a prison disciplinary board's finding that he was guilty of "conspiracy to violate state law." Two of the seven respondents named in the petition filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6) motion to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion, and the prisoner perfected this appeal. We have determined that the appeal should be dismissed because the order being appealed from is not final and does not comply with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 58.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
In The Matter Of: S.G.S. M2001-00649-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Clara W. Byrd
The trial court terminated the parental rights of the biological father on the ground of abandonment, and granted the adoption petition of the stepfather. The biological father argues on appeal that he did not abandon his child. We affirm the trial court.
Wilson
Court of Appeals
State v. Tamberley Daniels M2001-00624-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Smith
The non-custodial parent of two minor girls appeals the decision of the Juvenile Court of Hickman County terminating her parental rights on the grounds of willful abandonment. We affirm the action of the trial court.
Hickman
Court of Appeals
First Union National Bank v. Donald Abercrombie M2001-01379-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This appeal involves a dispute stemming from a defaulted note. The lender filed suit against the purported borrower in the Chancery Court for Williamson County asserting that he was liable for $57,778.20. The defendant moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that he was not personally liable on the note because he was simply an officer of the corporation named as the borrower on the note and because he was not a guarantor of the corporation's debts. Thereafter, the lender moved for a default judgment, and the purported borrower then filed an answer denying liability on the note and a counterclaim against the lender for compensatory and punitive damages. The trial court granted the lender a default judgment for $57,778.20 without addressing the pending motion to dismiss or the answer and counterclaim. We have determined that the trial court erred by granting the default judgment and, accordingly, reverse the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
In the Matter of: D.D.V. M2001-02282-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Barry Tatum
The State filed a petition to terminate parental rights to a four-year-old boy. Only the mother contested the action. The trial court granted the petition, terminating the mother's parental rights on multiple grounds, including abandonment and failure to comply with a plan of care. We reverse as to the mother, because we do not believe any of the grounds were proven against her by clear and convincing evidence, as is required by statute.
03-98-005-CC 03-98-005-CC
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson
Dickson
Court of Appeals
Sears Roebuck vs. William Riley W2001-01981-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Rita L. Stotts
This appeal arises from the filing of a civil warrant by the Appellee against the Appellant in the General Sessions Court of Shelby County. The Appellee alleged that the Appellant owed on an account in the amount of $3,345.56. The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the Appellee. The Appellant appealed the judgment of the general sessions court to the Circuit Court of Shelby County. The Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment. At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment, the Appellant stated that he did not oppose the motion for summary judgment. The trial court entered an order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee. The Appellant appeals the order of the Circuit Court of Shelby County granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellee. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court's decision.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Michael Casby vs. Theresa Hazlerig W2001-02073-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
This appeal involves a custody and visitation dispute brought by divorced parents having joint custody of their two children. Following the submission of numerous filings by the parties, the court held a hearing to determine whether or not to alter the custody arrangement set out in the court's final decree. As a result of the hearing, the court issued an opinion and permanent parenting plan which altered the previous visitation agreement by naming the father primary custodial parent and granting the mother limited visitation rights. The court further ordered the mother to pay child support in accordance with the guidelines. The mother appealed and, for the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
