Nickolas Price, et al vs. Christian Price
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Bobbie & Willie Byrd vs. First Tennessee Bank
|
Court of Appeals | ||
The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Hunter vs. Anderson
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Ruff vs. Traughber
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Tomlinson vs. Traughber
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Flowers vs. Metro Baptist Schools
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Gates, Duncan & Vancamp Co., et al vs. Richard Levantino
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Marles Flowers vs. Memphis Housing Authority
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Susan Turner v. Jeffrey Purvis
|
Montgomery | Court of Appeals | |
Henderson vs. Harlan, d/b/a: Lodge Quarters
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Jammi vs. Conley
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Bain vs. City of Murfreesboro
|
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
Wood vs. Prosser, et. al.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Aghili vs. Saadatnejadi
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Coffee | Court of Appeals | |
Than Those Articulated By The Majority. The Majority Relies Upon State v. Marshall,
|
McMinn | Court of Appeals | |
Glenda Whisenhunt vs. Gordon Whisenhunt
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
David Dunnehew vs. Donna Dunnehew
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Thelma W. Kelley, v. John E. Vance and Betty L. Vance, and Allstate Insurance Company
In this action, plaintiff seeks uninsured motorist coverage from her insurance company, and the Trial Court, responding to motion for summary judgment, granted judgment to defendant Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate). Plaintiff has appealed.
|
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Pacific Properties, v. Home Federal Bank of Tennessee, v. Michael S. Stalcup
This action for conversion was submitted to a jury which returned a general verdict for the plaintiff, thereby implicitly finding that the fact-driven principal defense of the Statute of Limitations was not well-taken. Home Federal appeals and presents for review issues which, as paraphrased, question the propriety of the submission of the case to the jury, whether the defense of Statute of Limitations was well-taken, as a matter of law, whether requested jury instructions should have been given and whether the drawer of a check adequately instructed the drawee Bank as to its disposition. Pacific Properties |
Court of Appeals | ||
Casey Lynn Burgess, v. Brenda Lea (Burgess) Welch
By this appeal Casey Lynn Burgess insists that the Trial Court was in error in dismissing his petition for change of custody of his two children, custody of whom by the divorce decree was awarded to Ms. Welch. |
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
Gladstone Ralph Hobbs v. Mollie Jane Hobbs - Concurring
This is a divorce action. The defendant (wife) assertson this appeal, among other things, that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a continuance of the trial. The record reflects that there was a great deal of confusion as to the way and manner the case was set for trial because of the resignation of the former Circuit Judge. The wife's counsel claims to have had no notice of the trial date until the day the case was set for trial. On that date, he applied to the court for a continuance. The court continued the case until the following morning at 7:00 a.m. Prior to the trial, the court allowed the wife's attorney to make a motion for a continuance on the record, with a written motion, to be filed as exhibit No.1. Counsel's affidavit supporting the motion for a continuance was allowed to be filed as exhibit 2. |
Greene | Court of Appeals | |
Keith Hardware, Inc. v. Douglas L. White and Carolyn L. White - Concurring
The issue on this interlocutory appeal granted pursuant to T. R. A. P. Rule 9, is whether the lease between the parties is too broad to be enforceable, as was held by the Trial Court. |
Washington | Court of Appeals |