COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

County

Authoring Judge

Originating Judge

Date Filter

Case Number

Case Name

Keyword Search

Sort by

Order

Raymond L. Cox v. Thomas R. Hicks E2000-01141-COA-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks Trial Court Judge: William E. Lantrip	Anderson	Court of Appeals	08/27/97
Steve/Lori Eldridge vs. City of Trenton, TN 02A01-9503-CV-00041 Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.	Gibson	Court of Appeals	08/26/97
James Jones, et al vs. Randall Harris, et al 02A01-9701-CH-00010 Trial Court Judge: John Walton West	Lauderdale	Court of Appeals	08/26/97
State DHS vs. Rogoish 03A01-9704-CV-00145	Knox	Court of Appeals	08/26/97
Ravenwood vs. Franklin 03A01-9705-CV-00156	Knox	Court of Appeals	08/26/97
Creative vs. Bale 03A01-9611-CH-00379	Campbell	Court of Appeals	08/26/97
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	08/26/97
Bruce Hutton, et al vs. City of Savannah, TN 02A01-9612-CV-00314 Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn	Hardin	Court of Appeals	08/22/97
W2001-01724-COA-R3-JV W2001-01724-COA-R3-JV Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby Trial Court Judge: Christy R. Little	Madison	Court of Appeals	08/22/97
Joseph Leibovich, et al vs. The Kroger Co., et al 02A01-9608-CV-00192 Trial Court Judge: D'Army Bailey	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/19/97
Decatur Co. Bank vs. Welborn Duck, et al 02A01-9603-CH-00057 Trial Court Judge: John Walton West	Decatur	Court of Appeals	08/19/97
Adams TV of Memphis vs. Comcorp of TN, et al 02A01-9606-CH-00142 Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/19/97
Carol Strong vs. Timothy Strong 02A01-9701-CV-00005 Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/18/97
Steve & Tammy Carroll vs. J.R. Roach 02A01-9703-CV-00056	McNairy	Court of Appeals	08/18/97
William Key vs. Julian Bolton, et al 02A01-9703-CR-00072 Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/13/97
Young vs. Young 01A01-9610-CH-00473 Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash	Rutherford	Court of Appeals	08/13/97
Tate vs. TN. Bd. of Paroles & Myers 01A01-9703-CV-00156 Trial Court Judge: Ben H. Cantrell	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/13/97
Kireyczyk, et. al. vs. MF Athletic Club 01A01-9612-CV-00549		Court of Appeals	08/13/97
01A01-9702- 01A01-9702- Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.	Davidson	Court of Appeals	08/13/97
02A01-9607-CH-00173 02A01-9607-CH-00173 Trial Court Judge: William Michael Maloan	Weakley	Court of Appeals	08/12/97
Roulette v. Roulette 03A01-9701-GS-00010		Court of Appeals	08/12/97
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX	Greene	Court of Appeals	08/12/97
Ray Darris Thompson v. Stanley Dickerson, et al. 02A01-9702-CV-00034 Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams Plaintiff, Ray Darris Thompson, appeals the order of the trial court dismissing his complaint against the defendants, Stanley Dickerson, Betty Hammond, Vernon Brown, June Wesson, Bruce MacDonald, and Christine Bradley, for failure to prosecute.	Shelby	Court of Appeals	08/10/97
Robert E. Evans, v. Amcash Mortgage Company, Inc. 01A01-9608-CV-00386 Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Brothers In this defamation action, Robert Evans (“Plaintiff”) filed suit against Amcash Mortgage Company, Inc. (“Defendant”) and Franklin American Life Insurance Company1 for an alleged defamatory statement made by Defendant’s attorney to one of Defendant’s employees. In granting the Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment, the trial court dismissed Franklin American Corporation from the suit, dismissed Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant under a theory of “slander by action,” and held that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether the statement made by Defendant’s attorney to one of Defendant’s employees regarding the reason for Plaintiff’s employment termination is subject to a qualified privilege. Defendant appeals the judgment of the court below arguing that the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding the statement made by Defendant’s attorney to one of Defendant’s employees concerningthe reason for Plaintiff’s employment termination because the statement is subject to a qualified privilege and is not defamatory in nature. For the reasons stated hereafter, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and hold that the statement made by Defendant’s attorney to one of Defendant’s employees regarding the reason for Plaintiff’s employment termination is subject to a qualified privilege and is not defamatory.		Court of Appeals	08/10/97
Allen D. Curtis and wife, Carolyn June Curtis, v. William M. Rice, and Rice & Papuchis Construction Company, Inc. 01A01-9605-CH-00211 Authoring Judge: Judge Samuel L. Lewis Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tom E. Gray This is an appeal by plaintiffs/appellants, Allen D. Curtis and his wife, Carolyn June Curtis, from a decision of the chancery court which dissolved the partnership formed between Curtis and defendant/appellee, William M. Rice, and which distributed the partnership's assets.1 The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows.	Sumner	Court of Appeals	08/10/97