X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9509-CV-00324
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9510-CV-00336
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Doris Ashby vs. Jerry Ashby
|
Carroll | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Campbell | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9506-CH-00265
|
Lincoln | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9408-CH-00391
|
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9504-CH-00160
|
Maury | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9501-CH-00352
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Roane | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Roane | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9506-CV-00198
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
William Stokely Donelson, II, v. Nancy Drake Donelson
The sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial court awarded petitioner/appellant's attorney a reasonable attorney's fee. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Estate of Jessie Haney, Deceased, Mable Young, et al., v. Arlene Bush, Individually, and as Executor under the Will of Jessie Haney
This is a will contest in which the contestants have appealed from a jury verdict and judgment in favor of the will. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re:Estate of Jessie Haney, Deceased, Mable Young, Leona Young, Beulah Young, Glenda Young, and Jewel Mitchell, v. Arlene Bush, ndividually and Executor Under the Will of Jessie Haney - Concurring
The majority has reached the correct result in this case. I have prepared this separate opinion for two reasons. First, we should state clearly that the contestants’ trial counsel should not be faulted for requesting the trial court to use a Tennessee Pattern Jury Instruction that the Tennessee Supreme Court had disapproved only one month before trial. Second, we should conclude without equivocation that the record contains material evidence upon which the jury could have determined that the beneficiary had clearly and convincingly rebutted the presumption of undue influence arising from her confidential relationship with Mrs. Haney. |
Jackson | Court of Appeals | |
Franklin Shane Halstead, v. Niles-Bolton Associates, Derek Barton Company, Inc., D/B/A Derek Barton Tennis Courts, et al.
This appeal involves a personal injury action in which the plaintiff sought to file a separate suit against previously unknown defendants in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-1-119 (1994). The Fifth Circuit Court for Davidson County granted the new defendants’ motions for summary judgment on the ground that the complaint was filed one day late. The plaintiff asserts on this appeal that the trial court erred by failing to extend the time for filing his amended complaint by three days in accordance with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 6.05. We have determined that Tenn. R. Civ. P. 6.05 does not extend the deadline for taking the actions required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-1-119 and, therefore, affirm the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Lucille Beske, v. Opryland USA, Inc.
The defendant, Opryland USA, Inc., has appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Lucille Beske in the amount of $125,000 for personal injuries sustained in a fall on the premises of defendant. The jury awarded plaintiff $200,000, but the Trial Judge suggested a remittitur of $75,000 which was accepted by the plaintiff without protest. The Trial Judge also awarded plaintiff judgment for $1,404.50 discretionary costs. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals |
