# Cooper v. Queen

> Court of Appeals of Tennessee · March 30, 1979 · 586 S.W.2d 830

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9661931

## Case

- **Full name:** George W. COOPER, III, Administrator of the Estate of Barry Wesley Cooper, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W. R. QUEEN, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Tennessee
- **Decided:** March 30, 1979
- **Citations:** 586 S.W.2d 830; 1979 Tenn. App. LEXIS 334
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Lewis
- **Judges:** Lewis, Todd, Drowota
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9661931

## Opinion text

ORDER ON PETITION TO REHEAR
LEWIS, Judge.
The plaintiff’s able and forceful Petition to Rehear points out no new matters of fact or law overlooked by us in reaching our conclusion. The Petition only reargues matters which were fully considered by us.
The plaintiff also asked that he be allowed to amend his complaint in this Court or, in the alternative, this Court remand the cause to the Circuit Court so that he would have an opportunity to amend there.
This Court considers only such matters as were brought to the attention of the Trial Court and acted upon or permitted by the Trial Court. Clement v. Nichols, 186 Tenn. 235 , 209 S.W.2d 23 (1948). Only in rare cases will an amendment be allowed in the appellate court. Tennessee Cent. R. Co. v. Brown, 125 Tenn. 351 , 143 S.W. 1129 (1911). This case in not one of those.
Further, even if the amendment were allowed, it does not add anything new to the complaint.
The Petition to Rehear is therefore respectfully denied at plaintiff’s cost.
TODD and DROWOTA, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9661931. Public record. Not legal advice.