Holley vs. Haehl M1999-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
Landowner sued adjoining landowner and timber cutter in general sessions court for trespass and the cutting of timber on her land. From an adverse judgment, landowner appealed to the circuit court. After a trial de novo, the trial court held that adjoining landowner owned the land involved by adverse possession and entered judgment for defendants. Landowner has appealed.
Giles
Court of Appeals
Edgar/Mary Mulrooney vs. Town of Collierville W1999-01474-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This appeal arises from a quo warranto action filed by the Mulrooneys ("Property Owners") on behalf of residents of subdivisions annexed by Collierville ("Town"). Property Owners claimed that Town did not meet the statutory requirements needed to annex the subdivisions. The jury returned a verdict on behalf of Town, finding that the annexation was proper. Thereafter, Property Owners filed a motion for new trial which was denied by the court. Property Owners appeal.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Nancy Bloom vs. Douglas Bloom W1998-00365-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio
This is a divorce case. The parties were married for eighteen years and had a fifteen year old son. The wife was granted the divorce. The wife was awarded, inter alia, the marital home and the equity in it, 60% of the value of various financial assets, her automobile, and various household furnishings. Custody of the parties' son was awarded to the wife, and the husband was granted supervised visitation. The husband was ordered to pay child support. The wife was awarded 60 months of rehabilitative alimony, with the rate of rehabilitative alimony to increase when the husband's child support obligation ends. The wife's request for attorney's fees was denied. The husband appeals the division of the marital property and the amount of rehabilitative alimony awarded. The wife appeals the denial of her request for attorney's fees. We affirm, finding that the preponderance of the evidence supports the trial court's division of the marital property, the award of alimony, and the denial of the wife's request for attorney's fees.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Michael Alger vs. Corrections Corp. W2000-00500-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
An inmate sued Corrections Corporation of America and various individuals alleging failure to provide dental and medical care. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The judgment of the trial court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.
Hardeman
Court of Appeals
James Karls vs. Percy Pitzer, et al W1999-01107-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This is an appeal from the trial court's order dismissing a petition for writ of habeas corpus for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm the ruling of the trial court.
Hardeman
Court of Appeals
Clementine Newman vs. Allstate Insurance Co. W1999-02064-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers
Automobile owner sued body shop and her insurance company for alleged faulty repairs to vehicle after it was involved in a collision. The body shop repaired what the insurance company authorized, but owner initially claimed other damages which the insurance company and body shop determined were not a result of the collision. During attempts to resolve the dispute, body shop was willing to repair anything authorized by the insurance company, but requested the owner to pay the deductible and retrieve her automobile from their facility. Owner refused to take the automobile, and the body shop, after notification to her, started charging storage charges. In the suit that was initially tried in general sessions court, then de novo in the circuit court, owner sought to recover storage charges paid an additional award for other damage to her vehicle and for relief under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. The trial court awarded owner a judgment against the insurance company for additional damages and denied her claims under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act and for repayment of the storage charges. Owner has appealed.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
E1999-02594-COA-R3-CV E1999-02594-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: William R. Brewer
Blount
Court of Appeals
E2000-00256-COA-R3-CV E2000-00256-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
This is an appeal in a divorce case of the Trial Court’s denial of Wife’s Motion seeking postjudgment interest. The Judgment was satisfied three years and four months after it was entered. The Motion for post-judgment interest was filed three months after the Judgment was paid. The Trial Court denied post-judgment interest on two grounds. The first was the Trial Court’s finding of an accord and satisfaction resulting from Husband’s payment of the judgment without interest. The Trial Court also held it would be unconscionable and inequitable for Husband to pay post-judgment interest. The Trial Court then exercised its discretion to deny post-judgment interest. Wife argues that the Trial Court can not deny post judgment interest for equitable reasons, that Husband failed to prove an accord and satisfaction, and that the accord and satisfaction affirmative defense may not be raised for the first time during legal argument, cannot be established without proof, and is waived if not pleaded. We hold the Trial Court erred, reverse the Judgment of the Trial Court, and remand the case for further proceedings. To avoid the appearance of impropriety or lack of impartiality, the Trial Judge is to recuse himself from those further proceedings. Tenn. R. App. R. 3; Judgment of the Trial Court Reversed; Case Remanded
By this suit the Plaintiffs seek a declaration that they are entitled to four separate prescriptive easements across property owned by the Defendant. Prior to the commencement of trial the Defendant conceded that the Plaintiffs were entitled to one easement and the Plaintiffs conceded that they were not entitled to another one. The Trial Court found in favor of the Plaintiffs as to the remaining two easements, resulting in this appeal. We affirm.
Kenneth A. McBride appealed from an Order of the Chancellor confirming the Referee's Report that concluded McBride had offered no new evidence on the issue of reducing child support, which had been previously adjudicated. We affirm.
This appeal questions whether a forum selection clause is valid and enforceable against the Plaintiffs, Larry Wells and Signal Capital Corporation. Pursuant to the forum selection clause, Signal One LLC and NationsBanc Capital Corporation filed a motion to dismiss for improper venue. The Trial Court granted the motion to dismiss by finding the forum selection clause was valid. We affirm.
This appeal arises from an action for ejectment filed by Plaintiff John W. Johnson ("Plaintiff") against Defendant Bernice Wade ("Defendant"). Plaintiff filed suit in the Gibson County Circuit Court alleging that he was the sole owner of the tract of land where both Plaintiff's and Defendant's residences are located. Prior to Defendant's filing on an answer, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. Thereafter, Defendant filed an answer, a motion to dismiss, and a motion to compel Plaintiff to appear for deposition. Following Plaintiff's failure to appear for deposition, failure to prepare an order as directed by the court, and an attempt to file a premature appeal, the trial court dismissed Plaintiff's case for failure to properly prosecute. Plaintiff appeals.
Gibson
Court of Appeals
Scholz vs. S.B. International M1997-00215-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from a dispute over the severance benefits in an employment contract. Following his termination, a corporate officer filed suit against his former employer in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking his severance benefits. The employer asserted that its former officer was not entitled to the severance benefits. Following a jury trial, the trial court entered a judgment awarding the officer $111,623.33 but denying his requests for prejudgment interest and discretionary costs. On this appeal, the officer asserts that the trial court erred by failing to award him prejudgment interest and discretionary costs. We agree and, therefore, remand the case for further proceedings.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Howard vs. Howard M1999-00670-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This appeal arises from a dispute over a contractual provision in a Marital Dissolution Agreement ("MDA") between the parties. Susan Trabue Howard ("Mother") filed a Petition for Enforcement of Contractual Obligation, alleging that Robert Mark Howard ("Father") had failed to abide with a provision in the MDA providing that Father would be responsible for Daughter's "related costs of education." The court below found in favor of Mother, holding that Father was responsible for all of Daughter's expenses for the time specified in MDA. Father appeals.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Sloan vs. Perryman M1999-00828-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
This appeal arises from a breach of contract suit and action to assert priority of a mechanics lien filed by Jason Sloan ("Contractor") against Shelby Ray Perryman ("Owners") and First Farmers & Merchants National Bank ("Bank"). Contractor sought recovery for labor and materials under the contract including expenses that exceeded Contractor's original bid price. In the alternative, Contractor sought recovery under quantum meruit. The court granted Bank's motion for summary judgment on the issue of priority of liens. Following trial, the court awarded Contractor damages under an implied contract theory, limiting Contractor's recovery to the bid price. In addition, the court denied Contractor's claim for alternative recovery in quantum meruit. Contractor appeals.
Maury
Court of Appeals
Miller vs. Miller M1999-00724-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
In this divorce, both Husband and Wife have appealed contesting the trial court's division of marital property and alimony awards. The division of marital property is affirmed, alimony awards are modified, and the case is remanded for a determination of the value of Husband's retirement plan and a proper division thereof.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Miller vs. Miller M1999-00724-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
In this divorce, both Husband and Wife have appealed contesting the trial court's division of marital property and alimony awards. The division of marital property is affirmed, alimony awards are modified, and the case is remanded for a determination of the value of Husband's retirement plan and a proper division thereof.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Kibby vs. Kibby M1999-00906-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
This appeal presents a dispute of custody, visitation, and attorney fees. The parties are parents of one child, Ian Kibby, who is the subject of this dispute. The father was awarded primary custody when the parties divorced in May of 1996. The mother filed a Petition for Contempt and Modification seeking primary residential placement of Ian and later requested that the court refer this matter to mediation. The father filed a counter-petition requesting a change in the mother's visitation privileges and attorney's fees. The trial court dismissed the mother's petition but granted the father's petition reducing the mother's visitation rights. The court also refused to refer this matter to mediation and did not award attorney fees to the father. The mother now appeals the court's dismissal of her petition, failure to refer the matter to mediation, and change in visitation; the father also appeals the failure of the trial court to award attorney fees to him. We agree with the trial court on all issues and affirm its ruling. We also award attorney's fees necessitated by this appeal to the father and remand to the trial court for a determination of this amount.
Zettersten vs. Zettersten M1999-01186-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
This appeal arises from an action for divorce and division of marital assets. The court below granted Linda Jean Zettersten ("Wife") a divorce on grounds of Rolf Birger Zettersten's ("Husband's") stipulation of inappropriate marital conduct; awarded Wife alimony in futuro and rehabilitative alimony and child support for the parties' minor child; awarded Wife $11,923.50 in attorney's fees, discretionary costs and court costs. Wife appeals.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Union Planters Bank vs. Choate M1999-01268-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from a breach of contract case filed against Mickie Davis ("Davis") by Carole Choate ("Choate"). Choate alleged that Davis breached her contractual and fiduciary duties by authorizing release of funds to Rochford Realty ("Rochford") for a construction project. The trial court granted Davis' motion for summary judgment. Choate appeals.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Shuman vs. Parkhurst M1999-02043-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
James Parkhurst d/b/a Parkhurst Home Improvement appeals the trial court's final judgment awarding Ken Shuman $8,021.14 in actual damages for breach of oral construction contract and $2,406.33 in attorney's fees based upon a finding of fraud in violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Parkhurst raised two issues on appeal, contending that the damages awarded in this home construction dispute were not legally warranted and that the trial court erred in finding fraud, therefore justifying an award for attorney's fees under the Act. We conclude that Shuman presented sufficient proof to find a violation of the Act and to support his claim for damages and for attorney's fees. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
Spurlock vs. Jackson Co. M1999-01407-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wootten, Jr.
The appellants were hurt in a collision with a subject allegedly being pursued by county officers in a high speed chase. They sued the county, and the Circuit Court of Jackson County granted the county summary judgment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
