Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
KHB Holdings, Inc. ("KHB") sued Mark A. Duncan and Tina L. Duncan ("the Duncans"), alleging that the Duncans had terminated KHB's contract to construct a residence for them. The trial court found that KHB's corporate charter had been revoked two years prior to the date on which KHB ostensibly contracted with the Duncans; denied KHB's motion to substitute its sole shareholder, Kenneth H. Boyd ("Boyd"), for the corporation; and held that KHB had failed to establish it was entitled to recover based upon a theory of quantum meruit. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson
The Trial Court gave Judgments for plaintiffs against defendants and cross-defendant Slaughter was given Judgments for compensatory and punitive damages against co-defendant Crowe and her deed to Crowe was voided. On appeal, we affirm all Judgments except for the Judgment for punitive damages which is remanded for trial on damages.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tom E. Gray
The Chancery Court of Sumner County declared the parties divorced, divided the marital property, and awarded the wife rehabilitative alimony. On appeal the wife argues that since her conservator executed her counterclaim for divorce, the court had no jurisdiction to award her a divorce. She also contests the amount and duration of the alimony awarded to her. We affirm the divorce, but we reverse the award for rehabilitative alimony and modify the award to alimony in futuro. We remand for a hearing as to the amount.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carol L. Soloman
The Circuit Court of Davidson County granted summary judgment to the owner of a building in a slip and fall case. We concur with the trial court in its conclusion that the defendant did not owe the plaintiff a duty to make its premises safer and that the plaintiff's own negligence was more than 50 percent of the cause of the accident. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Dwight E. Stokes
The trial court terminated the parental rights of L.F. ("Mother") with respect to her minor child, D.F. (DOB: January 28, 1994) ("the child"). Mother appeals, essentially arguing that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's dual findings, by clear and convincing evidence, (1) that statutory grounds for termination exist and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III
The Trial Court approved adoption of three minor children by sister of biological mother. Mother appealed, insisting Georgia Court decree terminating her parental rights to the children was defective. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Jean A. Stanley
Jack H. Parks sued Chuck Rich, the owner of an apartment complex. Parks initially complained of a back injury resulting from his jumping off a first floor balcony railing, and irritation to his body caused by a bug spray applied in his apartment unit, both of which incidents occurred at the complex. The trial court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff appeals, contending that summary judgment is not appropriate with respect to the bug spray matter and that the trial court erred with respect to certain discovery matters. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: William T. Denton
This is a paternity case. Following DNA testing, the parties agreed that Randy L. Garner ("Father") is the biological father of Crystal Michelle Moats (DOB: August 13, 1985) ("the child"). The issues remaining before the trial court were "current support, past due support, and medical payments." Following a bench trial, the court addressed these issues. As pertinent to this appeal, the trial court awarded Mother $1,000 as support for the child from her date of birth to the date of filing of the paternity petition, i.e., September 18, 2000. Mother appeals, contending that the trial court erred in setting the amount of retroactive support for the period prior to the filing of the petition. We vacate the trial court's award of $1,000 and remand for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: David Loughry
This appeal involves a claim filed against an estate for personal services rendered to a decedent. The lower court granted the estate's motion to dismiss, finding that the claim was time barred, the claimant had received compensation for her services, and there was no evidence of "fraud, tort, deceit, or concealment." The parties raise multiple issues on appeal. For the following reasons, we affirm
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
This case began as four separate cases which were consolidated. All four cases arose from the divorce of James Hollister Williams and Kathyrn L. H. Williams, his untimely death, and the probate and distribution of assets in his sizeable estate. The trial court upheld the validity of the divorce by denying Ms. Williams relief under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02, awarded several annuities to Ms. Williams based on her status as the named beneficiary, ordered her to pay the estate taxes resulting from those annuities, and approved part of a claim filed by Ms. Williams against the Estate, but denied part. We affirm the decisions of the trial court upholding the validity of the divorce and awarding the annuities to Ms. Williams, but vacate the order granting the Estate a judgment against Ms. Williams for the estate taxes on the annuities. We also affirm in part and reverse in part the decision of the trial court with respect to the claim against the Estate, and hold that the entire claim should have been denied.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
This case involves an appeal from the trial court's determination of Appellant's child support and alimony arrearages, as well as the denial of a request to modify a previous award of alimony and child support. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
This is a divorce case. At the time the wife filed for divorce, the parties had been married for eight months. The trial judge awarded the divorce to the wife on the grounds of adultery. The trial court also granted the wife a monetary award for "alimony in solido and as a division of the marital estate." The husband appeals. We affirm and modify. The proof at trial did not support awarding the wife the divorce on grounds of adultery, nor did it support the amount of the monetary award to the wife. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed but modified to reflect that the wife is granted the divorce on grounds of inappropriate marital conduct, and the monetary award is modified as well.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
In this consolidated case involving claims of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and violations of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, the trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on the ground that he had not acted individually and his corporation had not been named as a defendant. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand the decision of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This is a retaliatory discharge case. In July 1998, the plaintiff truck driver began working for the defendant trucking company. In June 1999, the truck driver was involved in a one-vehicle accident while making a delivery for the company. Soon thereafter, the truck driver was discharged. The truck driver sued the trucking company in the court below, alleging that his discharge was not because of the vehicular accident, but rather was in retaliation for refusing to participate in or remain silent about alleged illegal activity by the trucking company. The trial court found in favor of the trucking company on all issues. The plaintiff truck driver now appeals on several grounds. No transcript or statement of the evidence was filed. The issues raised by the plaintiff require a review of the proceedings below that is not possible in the absence of a transcript of the trial proceedings or a statement of the evidence. Consequently, we affirm the trial court's decision.
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Daniel L. Smith
This is an appeal from a Final Order, granting the parties a divorce and dividing the marital property. Wife appeals and asserts that the division of marital property is inequitable. We affirm.
