SUPREME COURT OPINIONS

Fannie Tuggle and Hoyt Tuggle v. Allright Parking Systems, Inc.
02-S-01-9501-CV-00009
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kay S. Robilio

We granted this appeal to determine whether a party with a derivative claim - loss of consortium - is entitled to challenges under the peremptory jury challenge statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 22-3-105.

We conclude that the clear and unambiguous language of the jury challenge statute provides additional peremptory challenges to a party with a derivative claim,1 and that a new trial is required because the denial of that statutory right constitutes prejudice to the judicial process. In the interest of judicial economy, since a new trial is required, we have also decided that under comparative fault principles, the recovery of a spouse claiming loss of consortium will be reduced in proportion to or barred by the fault of the physically injured spouse. We, therefore, affirm the Court of  Appeals’ decision reversing and remanding for a new trial.

State of Tennesse v. Terry Wood -Dissenting
01S01-9501-CC-00015
Authoring Judge: Justice Reid
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald P. Harris

I concur in the dissent of Justice White.

Wanda Cruise v. City of Columbia - Concurring
01S01-9508-CV-00132
Authoring Judge: Justice Penny J. White
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joe C. Loser

In this property confiscation case, the Court must decide whether a direct  appeal was timely and whether the Governmental Tort Liability Act's1 twelve-month statute of limitations set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated Section 29-20-305(b) applies to bar plaintiff's claim for damage to and loss of personal property seized by police officers employed by defendant, the City of Columbia. For the reasons explained below, we hold that the appeal was timely and that plaintiff's claim is controlled by the three-year statute of limitations contained in Tennessee Code Annotated Section 28-3-105 and is, therefore, not barred.

03S01-9502-CV-00014
03S01-9502-CV-00014
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman

03S01-9503-CH-00027
03S01-9503-CH-00027

02S01-9504-CR-00029
02S01-9504-CR-00029
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Mccartie

01S01-9503-CH-00045
01S01-9503-CH-00045
Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Brandt

Gene v. Aaby,
03S01-9507-CH-00073

Gene v. Aaby,
03S01-9507-CH-00073

01S01-9505-CH-00083
01S01-9505-CH-00083

01S01-9504-CV-00047
01S01-9504-CV-00047

01S01-9508-CH-00138
01S01-9508-CH-00138
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

02S01-9410-CR-00071
02S01-9410-CR-00071

In Re: Estate of Mary T. Austin, Deceased, Elizabeth T. Austin, v .Christy N. Austin and Robert C. Austin C., Jr.
03S01-9410-PB-00092
Authoring Judge: Justice Lyle Reid
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Dennis H. Inman

This case presents for review the decision of the probate court, affimred by the Court of Appeals, that the personal representative in this case may, in his discretion, distribute certain corporate stock in kind rather than sell the stock and distribute the proceeds. The decision miscontrues applicable law and is reversed.

03S01-9505-CV-00047
03S01-9505-CV-00047

03S01-9505-CH-00060
03S01-9505-CH-00060

02S01-9502-CR-00019
02S01-9502-CR-00019
Trial Court Judge: H. T. Lockard

02S01-9505-CV-00036
02S01-9505-CV-00036
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown

01S01-9303-CC-00052
01S01-9303-CC-00052

03S01-9502-CH-00017
03S01-9502-CH-00017

01S01-9303-CC-00052
01S01-9303-CC-00052

01S01-9411-CR-00138
01S01-9411-CR-00138

02S01-9501-CV-00008
02S01-9501-CV-00008
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris

02S01-9502-CV-00015
02S01-9502-CV-00015
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley

02S01-9502-CV-00015
02S01-9502-CV-00015