X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9707-CV-00292
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Wilson vs. Mcwherter
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Dowling, aka: Berle
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Smiley, et. al. vs. Walker
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Smiley, et. al. vs. Walker
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Griffin (Meyer) vs. Griffin
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Knight vs. City of Gallatin
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Dowling, aka: Berle
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
City of Milan Hosp., et al vs. Rex Ferrell, et al
|
Gibson | Court of Appeals | |
Emma Smith vs. Hubert Smith
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Billie Russell vs. Pakkala M.D.
|
Hardeman | Court of Appeals | |
IN RE: Estate of O'Neal
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Ogburn vs. Dept. of Corrections
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Harvell vs. Williams
|
Maury | Court of Appeals | |
Ogburn vs. Dept. of Corrections
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Stinson vs. 138 Fifth Avenue South, et. al.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Deroyal vs. Johnson
|
Claiborne | Court of Appeals | |
Haren vs. Haren
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Henson vs. Carte r
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Williamson vs. Sanders
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Ridley vs. Ridley
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Graves vs. Grady's
|
Court of Appeals | ||
M & M vs. Maples
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Robert J. McCurley, Patricia G. McCurley, v. City of Jackson, Tennessee, Charles Farmer, and J.B.Glassman and wife, Brenda Glassman, and Harold Angus
This is an action in negligence arising out of the June 1993 acts of the appellant, Harold Angus, in demolishing the “Glassman” building, located at 111 North Highland Avenue in Jackson, pursuant to a contract with the city. Angus’ demolition of the building, which had been declared condemned by the city code, is not disputed. Nor is it disputed that, as a result of the building’s demolition, damage was sustained to the building located adjacent thereto, identified as the “Carmen’s” building, and owned by the appellees, Robert J. McCurley and wife, Patricia G. McCurley.1 The two buildings shared a common “party wall.” At issue in this case is whether Angus was negligent in its demolition of the Glassman building so as to be held legally accountable to the McCurleys for the damages they sustained. The case proceeded to a trial by jury where, at the close of all proof, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of the appellees on the issue of liability.2 Angus has appealed challenging the correctness of the trial judge’s decision in this regard. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we reverse and remand for a new trial. |
Madison | Court of Appeals |