Zahreddine vs. Choi M2000-01281-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This appeal involves the timeliness of a personal injury complaint. Two days before the expiration of the statute of limitations, the plaintiffs' lawyer placed an envelope containing a complaint and summons in a commercial delivery service's drop-off receptacle in Williamson County. Even though the envelope bore the courthouse address of the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Davidson County, the commercial delivery service delivered the envelope to a central governmental mail room on the day the statute of limitations expired. However, the central mail room did not physically deliver the envelope to the trial court clerk's office until three days later. The defendant later filed a motion for summary judgment in the Circuit Court for Davidson County, asserting that the complaint was time-barred. The trial court denied the motion but granted the defendant permission to pursue an interlocutory appeal. We have determined that the defendant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law because the plaintiffs' complaint was not timely filed with the trial court clerk as required by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 3.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Sandra Allman vs. Hut's, Inc. W2000-01829-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Mark Agee
This appeal arises from the alleged fall of the Appellant outside the Appellee gas station and convenience store. The Appellant brought a complaint against the Appellee in the Circuit Court of Gibson County, alleging that the Appellee negligently maintained its premises which was a proximate cause of the Appellant's injuries. The Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging that the Appellant was unable to prove that the Appellee owed a duty to the Appellant or breached a duty. The trial court granted the Appellee's motion for summary judgment. The Appellant appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Appellee by the Circuit Court of Gibson County. For the reasons stated herein, we reverse the trial court's decision.
Gibson
Court of Appeals
Jack Biggs vs. Farm Credit W2000-00545-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton
In this boundary line dispute, the trial court was presented with conflicting testimony from two surveyors as to the proper boundary lines of a two and one-half acre tract. After reviewing the evidence presented, the trial court determined that Mr. Biggs' surveyor's plat controlled. We affirm.
McNairy
Court of Appeals
David Eason vs. Melissa Bruce W2000-01326-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This is a post-divorce child custody case. In its initial decree, the trial court found that neither parent demonstrated sufficient interest or ability to care for the minor children and custody was awarded to the maternal grandparents. Subsequently, the trial court awarded joint custody of the children to the father and the maternal grandparents. Father petitioned for sole custody which the trial court denied. Father appeals. We affirm.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Robert McCurley vs. Harold Angus W2000-01348-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Roger A. Page
This is an action in negligence arising out of the demolition by the Appellee of a condemned building in Jackson, Tennessee pursuant to a contract with the city of Jackson. The demolished building was located adjacent to the Appellants' building, and the two buildings shared a party wall. The Appellants' building sustained damages as a result of the demolition of the condemned building. The Appellants brought a complaint against the Appellee in the Circuit Court of Madison County, alleging negligence on the part of the Appellee. The jury found in favor of the Appellee. The Appellants appeal from the entry of a jury verdict in favor of the Appellee. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court's decision.
Madison
Court of Appeals
Rose Construction vs. Raintree Dev. W2000-01388-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This is an arbitration case. The plaintiff construction company agreed to construct the defendant developer's planned development project. When disputes arose out of the parties' performance, they terminated the contract. The parties then entered into arbitration. The arbitration panel found in favor of the plaintiff for $974,068.00 plus interest, including a $250,000 award for attorney's fees. The plaintiff filed an action in the chancery court, seeking confirmation of the award. The defendant asked the chancery court to vacate the arbitration award. The trial court vacated the entire award, finding that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority in awarding attorney's fees. The plaintiff construction company appeals. We reverse, finding that the award of attorney's fees is authorized under the parties' contract, and remand the case for confirmation of the arbitration award in toto.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Darrell L. Edwards, et al vs. Seleta Kaye Campbell, et al E2000-01463-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Jacqueline E. Schulten
The Trial Court granted Defendants summary judgment based on the expiration of the statutes of limitation because of Plaintiffs' failure to comply with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 3 and 4.04. Plaintiffs sued Defendants for personal injuries and property damage allegedly resulting from a 1989 motor vehicle accident. Plaintiffs first filed suit in 1990. They voluntarily dismissed that suit in 1996 and re-filed within one year. Plaintiffs obtained issuance of the first set of summons in the second suit in March 1997, and attempted service of process by mail. A third person, but neither defendant, signed the return mail receipts. Defendants raised the defense of insufficiency of service of process in their answer and moved for a stay of the proceedings which was granted. The Trial Court conditioned the removal of the stay upon Plaintiffs' payment of costs associated with their first lawsuit. Two years later, Plaintiffs paid the costs, and the Trial Court lifted the stay. Thereafter, Plaintiffs obtained issuance of new process. It is undisputed that Defendants were served in October 1999. Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment arguing that the statutes of limitation had expired because Plaintiffs failed to serve Defendants in March 1997, and did not obtain issuance of new process from the Trial Court clerk until more than two and a half years later. Plaintiffs did not respond to Defendants' motion which the Trial Court granted. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Perry vs. Campbell M1998-00943-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves a prisoner's challenge to a prison disciplinary board's decision to place him in involuntary administrative segregation. After exhausting his remedies within the Department of Correction, the prisoner filed petitions for a common-law and a statutory writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County complaining that he had been denied the right to call witnesses, that the board's decision was racially motivated, and that the board's decision lacked evidentiary support. The trial court granted the State's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the prisoner's petitions. We affirm the trial court's judgment.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Mary Browning vs. Harold D. Vandergriff, Jr., D/B/A Sunrise Market & Deli E1999-02711-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this appeal from the Circuit Court of Knox County the Defendant/Appellant, Harold D. Vandergriff, Jr., appeals the Circuit Court's judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict allowing damages to Plaintiff/Appellee, Mary Browning, for negligent infliction of emotional distress. We reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court, dismiss the complaint and remand for collection of costs below.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Muirhead vs. Muirhead M1999-02385-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
This appeal involves the custody of four minor children following dissolution of a sixteen (16) year marriage. The trial court awarded a divorce to Father on the ground of inappropriate marital conduct but awarded custody of the parties' four minor children to Mother. The trial court set child support, awarded rehabilitative alimony, and divided the marital property, awarding Mother the marital residence. The Mother appeals the property division and alimony award. The Father appeals the award of custody. We reverse the trial court's award of custody because Father is comparatively more fit than Mother to have custody, modify the award of rehabilitative alimony, vacate the child support award, and remand to the trial court for child support and visitation issues.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Garrison vs. Burch M1999-02819-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Casey Moreland
This appeal involves a dispute regarding an order of protection. After the petitioner was threatened and attacked by his girlfriend's former husband, he sought an order of protection from the Davidson County General Sessions Court. The general sessions court granted the order of protection, and the former husband appealed to this court. We reverse and vacate the general sessions court's order because the parties are not within the degree of relationship required by the statute authorizing the issuance of orders of protection.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Stone vs. Faulkner, Mackie & Cochran M2000-00125-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
Plaintiff, Terry Stone d/b/a Medical Claims and Collections Specialist, sued Defendants, David Cochran, and Faulkner, Mackie & Cochran, for interference with contractual and business relationships between Plaintiff and Plaintiff's third-party client, Levine & Sharp Associates. The trial court granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment in this matter finding no genuine issue of material fact and dismissed Plaintiff's claims. The question presented to the Court is whether or not there are genuine issues of material fact such that the trial court erred in granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on the claim for interference with a business relationship. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of this claim.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Perry vs. TN Bd. of Paroles M1998-01018-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves a prisoner's efforts to be released on parole. After the Tennessee Board of Paroles declined to release him on parole, the prisoner filed petitions for both common-law and statutory certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County asserting that the Board had acted illegally, arbitrarily, and fraudulently. The trial court dismissed the prisoner's petition. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Montague vs. TDOC M1999-00513-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This Court determined a previous appeal by Charles Montague to be frivolous and remanded the case to the trial court to set attorney's fees. The state submitted evidence of attorney's fees incurred, both in the trial court and in this Court. Montague appeals and we modify the judgment of the trial court so as to only allow attorney's fees on the initial appeal.
Janine S. Taylor Hines vs. Richard Michael Tilimon E2000-00912-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Bill Swann
This is an interstate custody dispute. Janine S. Taylor Hines ("Mother") filed this action seeking a declaratory judgment pertaining to the custody of the parties' minor child. She also sought to modify certain foreign orders pertaining to the visitation rights of the defendant, Richard Michael Tilimon ("Father"). The trial court (a) entered a default judgment against Father, (b) declared Tennessee to be the child's home state, (c) decreed that custody would remain with Mother, and (d) limited Father's visitation to supervised visits in the state of Tennessee. The court later denied Father's motion to set aside the default judgment. Father appeals, raising issues as to subject matter jurisdiction, in personam jurisdiction, venue, and service of process. He also argues that the trial court erred (1) in denying his request for a continuance of the hearing on the plaintiff's motion for default judgment; (2) in not allowing him to participate by telephone in the hearing on his motion to set aside the default judgment; (3) in denying his motion to set aside the default judgment; (4) in ordering supervised visitation; and (5) in awarding Mother her attorney's fees. By a separate issue, Mother seeks attorney's fees for this appeal. We affirm and remand for a hearing to set Mother's fees on appeal.
Custom Packaging, Inc. vs. Patti Holliday, et al E2000-01744-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
Custom Packaging, Inc., appeals a summary judgment granted against it in its suit seeking recovery on a sworn account for merchandise sold according to the complaint to "Patti Holliday, Ind. & d/b/a Repeat Fibre." The Trial Court sustained Ms. Holliday's motion for summary judgment, finding there are no material disputed facts. We vacate the judgment below and remand the case for further proceedings.
Knox
Court of Appeals
State Department of Children's Services vs. RC E2000-01939-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: William H. Russell
In this action to terminate parental rights, the mother didn't appear for trial and the Trial Court terminated her parental rights. On appeal, she argues her constitutional rights were violated by proceeding to trial in her absence, and termination was not supported by clear and convincing evidence. We affirm.
Loudon
Court of Appeals
In Re: Estate of Constantine Anagnost E2000-02321-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
This litigation involves a claim against an estate. The claimant asserts that the decedent breached a contract which purportedly obligated the decedent to convey to the claimant a certain parcel of property upon the claimant's satisfaction of his contractual obligations. The estate moved for summary judgment, arguing that the issues relating to the existence of the purported contract had been decided adversely to the claimant in an earlier suit, thereby barring the present claim under the doctrine of res judicata. The trial court granted summary judgment to the estate, and the claimant now appeals, asserting that the prior judgment does not bar the instant claim. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Brian Mayes v. Ronald LeMonte M2002-00625-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Russ Heldman
In this dog bite case, the trial court awarded a meter reader $5000 in compensatory damages against the dog owner. The dog owner claims on appeal that he was not negligent in handling his dog and that the sitting trial judge was biased and prejudiced against him. We affirm.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Todd Hutcheson v. Irving Materials M2002-03064-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Frank Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Burch
Plaintiff filed suit for breach of contract and negligence alleging that concrete provided by Defendant did not meet specifications. Defendant filed counterclaim for Plaintiff's unpaid bill. Plaintiff failed to timely respond to requests for admissions. Defendant filed motion to have requests deemed admitted, which the trial court granted. Plaintiff took no remedial action until seven months later, after Defendant filed its motion for summary judgment that was primarily based on the now disputed admissions. Plaintiff then filed Tenn. R. Civ. P. 36.02 motion for relief from the admissions. Trial court denied Plaintiff's motion for relief, granted Defendant's summary judgment, awarding damages against Plaintiff, and dismissed Plaintiff's cause of action against Defendant. This is an appeal from the trial court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for relief pursuant to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 36.02, and the trial court's granting of Defendant's motion for summary judgment, rendering judgment in favor of Defendant. We affirm the trial court.
