James Garrett vs. Isiah Roswer W1999-02369-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This is a dispute among the members and officials of a church and the church pastor. The plaintiff church members and officials filed for injunctive relief against the defendant pastor of the church, seeking to remove him as pastor and prevent him from disposing of or eroding church assets. The trial court enjoined the pastor defendant from disposing of, eroding or concealing church assets, and also ordered an election. Under the court-ordered church election, the defendant was removed as pastor of the church. Subsequently, the defendant pastor executed a trust deed encumbering certain church properties. After the trust deed was foreclosed and the property was sold at a foreclosure sale, the defendant pastor filed a counter-complaint in the pending suit, alleging that he was the successful bidder at the foreclosure sale and that title of the church property should be transferred to him. In payment of his bid, the defendant pastor tendered bonds issued by the church. The trial court referred to a special master eight issues relating to the ownership and value of the bonds. The special master and trial court found that the defendant pastor had not established that he paid for the bonds. The defendant pastor appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in its finding on the bonds and that it failed to address or take evidence on additional issues raised in his counter-complaint. We affirm the decision of the trial court on the bonds, but remand the cause for proof on the remaining issues.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Eddie Williams vs. Alton Hesson W2000-02725-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
This appeal involves a claim of discrimination and denial of access to the courts by a maximum security inmate in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction. The court below granted summary judgment to the defendants. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's entry of summary judgment.
Lauderdale
Court of Appeals
State, Ex Rel., Tammy Davenport vs. Gerald Partridge E1999-02779-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey
This appeal from the Hamilton County Juvenile Court concerns whether the Juvenile Court erred in determining the child support obligation of the Appellant, Gerald Lamont Partridge. We vacate the order of the Juvenile Court and remand for further findings of fact.
Sharon Kelly vs. George Evans, III E1999-00417-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Steven H. Jones
This is a suit initiated by Sharon S. Sarli (now Kelly) against George Leroy Evans, III, wherein she sought a determination that he was the father of her child. After Mr. Evans stipulated that he was indeed the father of the child, the Referee and the Juvenile Judge made various determinations relative to custody, child support and the like. Mrs. Kelly, being dissatisfied with a number of the determinations in the Referee's last order which on appeal was in the main affirmed by the Juvenile Judge, filed this appeal. We vacate the judgment of the Juvenile Court and remand the case for further proceedings.
Sullivan
Court of Appeals
Seibers vs. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. M1999-02559-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: J. Curtis Smith
This case involves a dispute between a lawyer and his former client over a fee in a personal injury case. The client discharged the lawyer before the case was concluded and agreed to give the lawyer a lien on the potential recovery for the work the lawyer had already performed. When the lawyer attempted to collect his fee after the case was settled by another lawyer, the former client asserted that the lawyer should forfeit his fee because he engaged in unethical conduct. Following a bench trial, the trial court found that the lawyer had "technically" violated Tenn. S. Ct. R. 8, DR 5-105(A) but that the lawyer's conduct had not prejudiced the client and that the client had waived his conflict-of-interest claims. Accordingly, the trial court awarded the lawyer $69,525.83 in legal fees and expenses. We affirm the trial court's judgment.
Putnam
Court of Appeals
Castleman vs. Castleman M2000-00270-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
Mother appeals the trial court's denial of her motion to set aside a default judgment awarding divorce to Father, distributing marital property, and awarding custody of the minor child to Father. Because no evidence was heard regarding factors which must be considered by a court in making these determinations, we reverse the trial court's denial of her motion to set aside the default judgment and remand this matter for a trial on the merits.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Stan Wallace Mosley vs. Carrie Lynn Mosley E2000-01445-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Jean A. Stanley
This appeal arises from a bifurcated trial in a divorce action. After hearing the parties' proof in the second phase regarding alimony, child support and division of property, the Trial Court entered a Judgment which the Trial Court designated as "final." The Judgment, however, does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 54.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. The Trial Court did not decide the issue of whether excess retained earnings of Telescan, Inc., a company in which Stan Wallace Mosley ("Husband") is a 90% shareholder, should be imputed as income to Husband. The Judgment states that this issue will be considered by the Trial Court in the future. Husband appeals the Judgment but does not raise the issue of Telescan's excess retained earnings. Carrie Lynn Mosley ("Wife") contends that the Trial Court erred by failing to impute the excess retained earnings of Telescan to Husband's personal income for purposes of calculating his child support obligation. We dismiss this appeal because the Judgment is not a final judgment from which an appeal lies.
Washington
Court of Appeals
In Re: The Matter of John Adams, Deceased v. City of Lebanon v. The Tennessean M2001-00662-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Clara W. Byrd
This appeal challenges the jurisdiction of the trial court to issue a protective order sealing a settlement agreement between the City of Lebanon, Tennessee, and a private citizen, Mrs. Lorrine Adams. The trial court issued the protective order in response to the City's motion, a motion which followed a request by The Tennessean, a daily newspaper, for information regarding the settlement. The protective order was issued ex parte, despite the fact that no action had been filed against the City by Mrs. Adams or by The Tennessean. We hold that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to enter the protective order. The order is therefore void and vacated.
Wilson
Court of Appeals
Mary Hall, et al vs. Mary Rose Pippin, et al M2001-00387-COA-OT-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Vernon Neal
This is an original contempt proceeding filed by the appellants against the Clerk and Master of the Chancery Court for Putnam County in a now-concluded appeal. The appellants assert that the clerk and master knowingly and willfully violated our September 3, 1998 order directing her to file a supplemental record containing seven exhibits that had not been previously transmitted to this court. We have determined that we no longer have jurisdiction to consider the contempt motion because it was not filed until after our jurisdiction over the appeal had ended.
Putnam
Court of Appeals
John Morgan, etc. vs. Cherokee Children & Family Services, Inc. M2000-02382-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
The State Comptroller sued Cherokee Children & Family Services, Inc. seeking access to Cherokee's records for an audit of the company's affairs. The Chancery Court of Davidson County held that the company's contract with the State, and Chapter 960 of the Public Acts of 2000, gave the State the right to conduct the audit. Based on our opinion in Memphis Publishing Company, et al. v. Cherokee Children & Family Services, et al., released simultaneously with this opinion, we hold that the company's contracts with the State do not make all their records public records. We also hold that to apply Chapter 960 retroactively would violate the constitutional prohibition against retrospective legislation. We therefore reverse the lower court's judgment.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Memphis Publishing Co., et al vs. Cherokee Children & Family Svcs, Inc., et al M2000-01705-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
The publisher and assistant managing editor of The Commercial Appeal, a Memphis newspaper, sued a non-profit corporation seeking access to the corporation's books and records under the Tennessee Public Records Act. The Circuit Court of Shelby County held that the corporation's contract with the State made virtually all of its records State property. We reverse the judgment of the trial court and reject the appellee's alternative argument that the corporation is a State agency. Therefore the appellee is not entitled to free access to the corporation's records.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Lindsey, Bradley & Maloy vs. Media Marketing Systems, Inc., et al E2000-00678-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
This appeal involves a grant of summary judgment to Defendant Sam Cooper, the sole shareholder, president and CEO of his co-defendant, Media Marketing Systems, Inc. Lindsey, Bradley & Maloy ("Plaintiff") brought suit against Sam Cooper and Media Marketing for breach of contract stemming from an agreement between Plaintiff and Media Marketing. Plaintiff sought to pierce Media Marketing's corporate veil so as to render Defendant personally liable for the debt owed under the agreement. Plaintiff also made claims against Defendant for his alleged individual tortious conduct related to the agreement. Both Plaintiff and Defendant filed motions for summary judgment. The Trial Court denied Plaintiff's motion but granted Defendant's motion. Plaintiff appeals and argues that it is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of whether Media Marketing's corporate veil should be pierced due to Defendant's conduct. Plaintiff also contends that Defendant should not have been granted summary judgment because there are genuine issues of material fact. We reverse in part and affirm in part.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Herman Majors, Jr. vs. Detective James Smith M2000-01430-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: James E. Walton
A man indicted for robbing a convenience store was ultimately acquitted of the crime. He subsequently filed a malicious prosecution suit against the detective who arrested him. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant detective. We affirm.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Frankie White, et al vs. Ronnie Gault, et al M2000-00534-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: L. Craig Johnson
The plaintiff filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02 motion, seeking to reinstate his claim after the Supreme Court reversed a decision cited by this court when dismissing his appeal. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm.
Coffee
Court of Appeals
Kenneth Lewis vs. Dept. of Correction M2000-00675-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Appellant, a Department of Corrections inmate, appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of certiorari relative to disciplinary action by the TDOC resulting from a positive drug screen. We affirm the trial judge.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Peggy Boles vs. Dept. of Correction M2000-00893-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
The wife of an incarcerated person brought an action seeking to have a policy of the Department of Correction declared invalid. The policy involved a visitor's responsibility to control children while visiting an inmate in a state prison. The trial court dismissed the petition. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Jeff Utley, et al vs. Jim Rose, et al M2000-00941-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Two prison inmates sued the Assistant Commissioner of Correction and four other correctional employees for failing to release them from maximum security. The trial court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Peter Greer v. Dept of Correction M2000-00222-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Tennessee Department of Correction regarding a change in the way the Department reports pre-trial sentence credits. Believing that the change increased the length of his sentence, the prisoner filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County to rescind the change. The trial court concluded that the change had not altered the prisoner's sentence expiration date and dismissed the petition. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Charles Bobo v. Dept. of Corrections M2000-00517-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Appellant, a prison inmate, filed, in the Chancery Court of Davidson County, a Petition for Writ of Certiorari questioning disciplinary actions against him by the Department of Corrections. The petition was dismissed by the Chancellor with costs assessed against Appellant. Appellant then sought exemption of his inmate trust account from execution for costs asserting that Tennessee Code Annotated Section 26-2-103 rendered his trust account and personal property to a value of $4,000 exempt from execution for court costs. The Chancellor held Tennessee Code Annotated Section 26-2-103 to be inapplicable, and we affirm the Chancellor.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Mitchell Tarver vs. Dept. of Correction M2000-01622-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
A prison inmate filed a petition seeking a declaratory judgment that he was entitled to parole consideration in accordance with his plea bargain. The trial court dismissed the petition on summary judgment. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Ronald L. Davis vs. Hershell D. Koger M2000-01598-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
This appeal involves a dispute between a convicted felon and the lawyer appointed to represent him in his efforts to reopen his post-conviction challenge to his conviction. After the efforts to set aside his conviction proved unsuccessful, the prisoner sued the lawyer in the Chancery Court for Maury County arguing that his civil rights had been violated because his lawyer had conspired with the prosecutor and the trial judge to prevent him from obtaining the post-conviction relief to which he believed he was entitled. The lawyer denied these allegations, and the prisoner moved for a summary judgment. On June 15, 2000, the trial court summarily dismissed the prisoner's complaint on two grounds. First, the court concluded that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider claims regarding the denial of the prisoner's request for post-judgment relief. Second, the trial court concluded that the prisoner had failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm the dismissal of the prisoner's complaint.
Maury
Court of Appeals
Derrick Jackson v. Dept of Correction M2000-02065-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Department of Correction over the prisoner's loss of sentence credits as punishment for a disciplinary offense. Failing to obtain redress from the Department, the prisoner filed a petition in the Chancery Court for Williamson County alleging that he was being held unlawfully because his sentence had expired. The trial court dismissed the petition, and the prisoner appealed. We have determined that this appeal is now moot because the prisoner has been released from custody. Therefore, we vacate the trial court's order and remand the case with directions to dismiss the prisoner's petition.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Frances Wolfe vs. Kroger Co. W2000-00281-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell
Plaintiff sued Defendant to recover for injures she received from a fall inside Defendant's store. The trial court granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment. We affirm based on Plaintiff's failure to counter Defendant's evidence that it neither caused the condition which caused the fall nor did it have notice of that condition.