Linda Green, M.D. and Steve Ferguson, M.D. vs. United Services Automobile Association and Principal Mutual Life Insurance Company E2000-02713-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
Linda Green, M.D., and Steve Ferguson, M.D. ("Plaintiffs"), who are married, filed a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment ("Complaint") against their automobile insurance carrier, United States Automobile Association, or USAA, regarding a dispute over the terms of their insurance policy ("Policy"). Plaintiff Green claimed coverage under their Policy's uninsured/underinsured motorist liability section for her physical injuries, medical expenses, and loss of income resulting from an automobile accident. Plaintiff Ferguson claimed coverage for loss of consortium. Defendant contends that the Policy limits Plaintiff Ferguson's loss of consortium claim to the $300,000 each person coverage already extended to Plaintiff Green. After Plaintiffs filed suit disputing this interpretation of the Policy, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which was granted by the trial court. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.
Lisa Hughes, et vir vs. Wilma Effler, et al E2000-03147-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Dale Young
Plaintiffs alleged that defendant appraiser's negligence in making an appraisal resulted in their damage. The Trial Court granted defendant summary judgment. Plaintiffs appeal the refusal of the Trial Judge to grant them additional time to defend the summary judgment motion. We affirm.
Blount
Court of Appeals
Dana Allanmore Smith vs. Angela Childress Smith M2000-02186-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
In this post-divorce proceeding, wife filed petition to modify the prior decree as to child support, custody, and visitation. The trial court modified a previous consent order and set husband's child support with an upward deviation from the guidelines. Husband appeals, and both parties present issues for review. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
John Cappello vs. Hazel Albert M2000-02104-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
A corrections officer with the Tennessee Department of Correction, after being discharged for allegedly purchasing a television from an inmate at the institution where he serves, was denied unemployment benefits. The officer's petition for certiorari to the chancery court was dismissed, and the officer has appealed. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Yona Boyd, et al. v. Prime Focus, Inc., et al. M2000-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This case began as a dispute between the plaintiffs and their employers. The defendant was awarded summary judgment, and plaintiffs were sanctioned by the court pursuant to Rule 11 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffs now appeal this sanction. We affirm sanctions but modify the order.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Laurence Kandel v. Urological Treatment and Research , Ralph Benson, Dean Knoll & Institute for Urological Research M2000-02128-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This is a breach of contract case. The plaintiff physician entered into an employment contract with the defendant physician's group. The contract provided that the physician would work for the group for one year, and that the parties would then "negotiate in good faith" to give the employee physician the opportunity to purchase stock in the group. At the end of the physician's first year of employment, the parties negotiated, but reached an impasse. Subsequently, negotiations ceased, and the physician's employment was terminated. He filed suit against the group, alleging that the defendants breached the contract to "negotiate in good faith," and that the defendants committed promissory fraud in inducing him into signing the employment agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on both counts. The physician now appeals. We affirm. Even if Tennessee recognizes a cause of action for breach of an agreement to negotiate in good faith, the evidence does not demonstrate such a breach, and does not establish promissory fraud.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Dennis Armoneit vs. Elliott Crane Service, Inc., et al M1998-00988-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This appeal arises from an accident involving a crane rented by the plaintiff's employer to aid in a construction project. The plaintiff was helping to attach trusses being lifted by the crane to the roof of a house when the crane's allegedly negligent operation caused him to fall from the roof. The plaintiff filed suit against the owner of the crane in the Circuit Court for Davidson County, alleging that the owner was vicariously liable for the crane operator's actions. The owner of the crane, relying on its standard rental agreement form, sought indemnity from the plaintiff's employer. On the plaintiff's employer's motion for partial summary judgment, the trial court held that the owner of the crane was vicariously liable for the crane operator's alleged negligence and that the indemnity agreement was void as contrary to public policy. The owner of the crane has appealed. We hold that the trial court erred by granting partial summary judgment on the employer's respondeat superior claim but that the trial court properly determined that the indemnity provision in the crane owner's rental agreement is void.
Frances Luna, et al vs. Michael Breeding, et al M2000-01932-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull
Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their suit for personal injuries and damages. Defendants then filed a motion for discretionary costs with accompanying affidavit as to reasonableness and necessity. The motion was denied and Defendants appeal, contending the trial court abused its discretion in disallowing their motion. We find it did not and affirm.
White
Court of Appeals
Douglas O'Connell v. YMCA of Middle Tennessee M2000-02099-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
This is a breach of contract case. The plaintiff entered into an agreement to become a member of the defendant health club. The plaintiff became dissatisfied with the the health club and regularly voiced his complaints to the management. Despite the actions of the health club's managers, the plaintiff's complaints continued. Eventually, the plaintiff was told that his membership with the health club was being terminated. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract and seeking compensatory and punitive damages as well as injunctive relief. On the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the trial court held that the parties' contract was terminable at will and granted the health club's motion. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a motion for the trial judge to recuse himself. The case was reassigned and the reassigned trial judge heard the plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the prior order granting summary judgment. The plaintiff's motion to alter or amend was denied. We affirm, finding that the contract was terminable at will.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Yolannda Solomon vs. Brad Hager, et al E2000-02586-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
This lawsuit finds its genesis in the construction of a residence. The plaintiff, Yolanda Solomon, filed suit against Allstate Insurance Company, alleging breach of contract and seeking damages and a bad faith penalty for Allstate's failure to pay her claim under a builder's risk policy covering her under-construction residence. Solomon later amended her complaint to seek additional damages under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. By way of a special verdict, the jury found (1) that the insurance policy provided coverage for Solomon's loss; (2) that Allstate had acted in bad faith in denying her claim; and (3) that Allstate had violated the Consumer Protection Act. As modified by the trial court, Allstate was ordered to pay $101,098, the full amount of the plaintiff's coverage less the deductible; a 25% bad faith penalty; $1,500 under the Consumer Protection Act; attorney's fees; discretionary costs; and prejudgment interest. Allstate appeals, challenging, among other things, the jury's finding of coverage, the assessment of the bad faith penalty, evidentiary and jury instruction rulings, and the amount of damages. We affirm.
Hamblen
Court of Appeals
E2001-00069-COA-R3-CV E2001-00069-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
Knox
Court of Appeals
Ruth Wilson v. Landon Snapp, Jr. E2001-00172-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Richard E. Ladd
In this suit the Trial Court held a purported deed from Ruth N. Wilson to Landon Haynes Snapp, Jr., and Gene L. Snapp was champertous and void. The Snapps appeal, contending this holding was in error. We affirm.
Alvin Bates vs. Dr. Joseph Metcalf E2001-00358-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
Anderson
Court of Appeals
Alvin Bates vs. Dr. Joseph Metcalf E2001-00358-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
Anderson
Court of Appeals
Alvin Bates vs. Dr. Joseph Metcalf E2001-00358-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
Anderson
Court of Appeals
Gerald Williams vs. Cora Williams E2000-02782-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Steven C. Douglas
In this divorce action, Gerald B. Williams ("Plaintiff") appeals the Trial Court's award of alimony in futuro in the amount of $800 per month to Cora Rita Williams ("Defendant"). The parties were married thirty-eight years. While Plaintiff earns approximately $32,000 per year, Defendant's income is substantially less at approximately $11,220. The Trial Court specifically found that Defendant could not be rehabilitated. Plaintiff contends on appeal that the Trial Court erred in awarding any alimony to Defendant because the proof at trial did not establish Defendant's need for financial support and Plaintiff's ability to pay alimony. Plaintiff also argues that if the award of alimony is appropriate, the amount is excessive. We modify the alimony from $800 to $600 per month, and affirm the judgment as modified.
Cumberland
Court of Appeals
Shelton vs. Tidwell E2000-02913-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
Defendants sold plaintiff equipment which had been stolen. The Trial Court entered a Judgment for plaintiff for the purchase money. On appeal, we affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
James Jones vs. Pierce Garrett, a/k/a Perry Garrett E2000-00196-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Kindall T. Lawson
This is a suit wherein James Lee Jones, III, and his wife seek a determination that Pierce Brandon Garrett, a/k/a Perry Garrett, has abandoned his son so that they may adopt him. The Trial Judge found by clear and convincing evidence that abandonment had occurred, but did not make any finding as to the best interest of the child. We affirm the finding as to abandonment and remand the case for a determination as to best interest.
Drawer of checks and Bank failed to exercise ordinary care in transactions under Tenn. Code Ann. §47-3-406. Drawer was assessed 80% of fault and Bank 20%. Drawer appeals. We affirm, as modified.
I concur in so much of the majority opinion as holds that Citizens is precluded from raising an issue on appeal as to the dismissal of First Tennessee Bank. I disagree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that the facts do not preponderate against the trial court’s finding that Citizens was 80% at fault for the loss occasioned by Frieda Gray’s forgery. In my judgment, Citizens did not engage in negligent conduct that substantially contributed to the forgery, as that concept is embodied in T.C.A. § 47-3-406. Accordingly, I would hold that the Bank, who was clearly negligent in allowing checks made payable to a business to be deposited directly into an individual’s bank account, was 100% at fault for the loss.
The buyers of a new residence filed this action against the builder and their realtor after discovering that the house was defective. The claims against the realtor alleged negligent misrepresentation and violations of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act based in part on the agent's representation that the builder was licensed. The jury, using a jury verdict form, found that the realtor had committed a deceptive act or practice prohibited by the Consumer Protection Act, but determined that the buyers had suffered no loss therefrom. The jury also found the realtor liable for negligent misrepresentation, calculated the damages resulting from the realtor's negligent misrepresentation, and apportioned fault at 10% to the buyers, 10% to the realtor, and 80% to the builder, a nonparty. On appeal, the buyers argue that the verdict was inconsistent and challenge the assessment of costs and the failure to award attorney fees. We affirm the verdict, the denial of attorney's fees, and the apportionment of court costs. We vacate the denial of discretionary costs and remand for determination of that issue.
