George H. Richardson v. Joyce R. Richardson
In this divorce action, plaintiff/appellant, George H. Richardson, appealed and presented three issues: (1) "Whether the trial court erred in failing to eliminate appellant's alimony obligation in the form of making the monthly mortgage payment on the marital residence occupied by appellee as well as paying appellee's car payments[,]" (2) "Whether the trial court erred in failing to relieve appellant of his obligation to pay for appellee's attorney's fees[,]" and (3) "Whether the trial court erred in failing to adopt appellant's proposed division of marital property." |
Maury | Court of Appeals | |
IN RE: Estate of Odell P. Bradley, Deceased; Edith Steward and Barbara Ramsey v. Christian F. Hofstetter Executor, et al. - Concurring
Contestants (“appellants”) have appealed from a dismissal of a will contest suit filed by them in the Davidson County Probate Court. Following a bench trial, the Honorable Joe P. Binkley, Sr., Special Judge, found that no proof had been presented to establish that the decedent was unduly influenced or that he was of unsound mind, and that the will was in fact his proper Last Will and Testament. The contestants' complaint was dismissed. One of the contestants below has appealed pro se. Appellant's brief fails to comply with T.R.A.P. 27(a) in several ways, one of them being an absence of the statement of the issues. In order to properly dispose of this case, we conclude that the issue presented is whether the evidence preponderates against the judgment of the trial court. We find that it does not and affirm. |
Davidson | 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
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Hamilton | 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 | ||
03A01-9506-CH-00182
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Traci Sorrells vs. Donald Lee Sorrells
|
Bradley | Court of Appeals | |
02A01-9409-CH-00218
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9505-CV-00151
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Gail Farley Dyer v. Terry R. Farley - Concurring
The defendant Terry R. Farley, has appealed from the final judgment of the Trial Court in a controversy regarding his dealings with his deceased father, Benton James Farley. |
DeKalb | Court of Appeals | |
Earl L. Fox v. Tennessee Board of Paroles
This appeal involves the denial of parole to an inmate serving a twenty-year sentence for aggravated rape. The inmate filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County challenging the Tennessee Board of Parole’s decision. The trial court granted the board’s motion to dismiss. We affirm the dismissal because the inmate’s petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A common-law writ of certiorari cannot be used to review the intrinsic correctness of the parole board’s decision. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Edwin H. Bush and William G. Gibson, Co-Administrators of the Estate of Lonnie Mae Lane, Deceased, v. Tony Wesley Carrick
The nature of this suit is stated in the complaint as follows: The purpose of this action is to set aside for the benefit of the estate of the said Lonnie Mae Lane the conveyances of the land |
Bedford | Court of Appeals | |
01A01-9505-CV-00210
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In the Matter of: Estate of Jim Eden (Deceased), Georgia Bradley, v. Betty Lewis, Agnes Hendsley, and Bertie Carver, Executors
This appeal arises from a dispute over a will in which a 93-year-old man left his estate to three of his four surviving daughters. The daughter who was not named in her father’s will challenged the validity of the will after her sisters propounded it for probate in the Chancery Court for Trousdale County. The chancery court transferred the case to the Circuit Court for Trousdale County where a jury found in favor of the will. The daughter who contested the will has appealed. We have determined that no reversible error was committed in the circuit court proceeding and, therefore, affirm the circuit court’s judgment and remand the case to the chancery court for further probate proceedings. |
Trousdale | Court of Appeals | |
Katherine Montgomery Price v. Thomas Bradley Price - Concurring
The sole issue presented by the appellant is: "Did the trial court err by awarding custody of the appellant's minor child to a third party?" |
Wilson | Court of Appeals | |
Jerry D. Adcock and wife, Nancy M. Adcock, v. James F. Witcher, Jr.
This is an appeal by plaintiffs/appellants, Jerry and Nancy Adcock, from the judgment of the trial court in favor of defendant/appellee, James F. Witcher. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
June R. Husted, mother and next-of-kin of Todd F. Husted, Deceased, v. Everett Echols, III, M.D., Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, et al.
This is a suit for wrongful death by suicide allegedly resulting from negligence of the defendant, a psychiatrist. After a jury could not agree upon a verdict, the Trial Judge directed a verdict and dismissed the suit. Plaintiff has appealed and presented a single issue as follows: |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Carolyn Louise Taylor Perkins v. John Bauman Perkins, Jr., - Concurring
This is a divorce case in which Wife appeals the judgment of the trial court regarding, inter alia, the division of marital property and the trial court's allowance of expert testimony. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Donna Faye Glover England, v. Richard Piercey
This is a grandparent's visitation case. Plaintiff, Donna Faye Glover England, is the maternal grandmother of Skylar Piercey, age four. Skylar's natural mother died in December of 1993. Skylar's natural father, Richard Piercey, now refuses to allow England to see Skylar. England filed a petition for grandparent visitation. The trial court dismissed the case based upon the Tennessee Supreme Court decision of Hawk v. Hawk, 855 S.W. 2d 573 (Tenn. 1993), reasoning that Hawk allows Piercey as the natural father, to deny England the right to see Skylar in the absence of a showing of substantial harm to the child. We affirm the decision of the trial court. |
Court of Appeals |
