Case law

City of Alcoa v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 760

203 Tenn. 12 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1957

Utah Labor Relations Board, decided by tbe Supreme Court of tbe United States on March 25, 1957, 77 S.Ct. 598 , 353 U.S. 1 , 1 L.Ed.2d 601 , and Amalgamated Meat Cutters, etc., v. … Co. v.

State ex rel. Turner v. Wilson

196 Tenn. 152 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1954

Turner et al., whom we shall refer to herein as the new Board, were designated as the Mayor and Board of Aldermen to serve as such until the first Monday of March 1955. … Rightmire v. Camden, 50 N. J. L. 43, 13 A. 30 ; Johnson v. Mann, 77 Va. 265, 271 ; State [ex rel. Bickford] v. Cocke, 54 Tex. [482] 485, and cases collected in note 50 L. R. A., N. S., 365.

Hinkle v. Montgomery

596 S.W.2d 800 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1980

The Beer Board of Minor Hill, Tennessee, has appealed from the decision of the Chancellor which reversed the decision of that board and ordered that a permit to sell packaged beer be issued to the appellee. … Moreover, as we rioted in Lones v.

Pack v. Royal-Globe Insurance Companies

224 Tenn. 452 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 4, 1970

Putnam County Beer Board v. Speck, 184 Tenn. 616 , 201 S.W.2d 991 .” (Emphasis supplied). 205 Tenn. 668 , 330 S.W.2d 17 . … Board of C.

Railway Co. v. Wallace

90 Tenn. 53 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1891

Railroad v. Fleming, 14 Lea, 137 . … ITe charged in another place that Wallace had no right, even if ordered by the conductor, to board .the train if going at a dangerous speed.

State ex rel. Ellis v. Ellis

191 Tenn. 376 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1950

The complainants rely on two Sections of the Code, as follows: “No member of the county board of education or of the quarterly county court shall take or make, as the adverse party, any contract which his board is competent … Boles v. Groce, 152 Tenn. 566 , 280 S. W. 27, 28 . In that case, the Court was interpreting Section 1874 of the Code of Tennessee.

Wall v. Millsaps

199 Tenn. 241 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1955

Buchanan v. Matlock, 27 Tenn. 390 , 391; Brown v. Brown, 18 Tenn. 84 , 93. … Phillips’ Pritchard on Wills, Section 50; Buchanan v. Matlock, supra; Townsend v. Townsend, Ex’r, supra.

Tata v. Nichols

848 S.W.2d 649 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1993

Blaylock & Brown Construction, Inc. v. AIU Insurance Co., 796 S.W.2d 146, 149 (Tenn.App.1990). Words in an insurance policy are given their common and ordinary meaning. … It cannot mean that the insured, to be within the meaning of the clause, had to be couched on the roof of the car or on the running board or sitting on the hood.

City of Brownsville v. Reid

158 Tenn. 445 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1929

Railroad v. Crider, 91 Tenn., 494 ; Palmer v. … This proposition is illustrated by tbe cases of Green v. State, 15 Lea, 711 ; State v. Whitworth, 8 Lea, 596 ; Leuhrman v. Tawing District, 2 Lea, 429; Cannon v. Mathes, 8 Heisk., 519 ; State v.

State Ex Rel. SCA Chemical Waste Services, Inc. v. Konigsberg

636 S.W.2d 430 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1982

See Miller v. Board of Public Works, 195 Cal. 477 , 234 P. 381 , 38 A.L.R. 1479 (1925), error dismissed 273 U.S. 781 , 47 S.Ct. 460 , 71 L.Ed. 889 (1927). … Almquist v. Marshall, 308 Minn. 52 , 245 N.W.2d 819 (1976); Sherman v. Reavis, 273 S.C. 542 , 257 S.E.2d 735 (1979); Taylor v. City of Little Rock, 266 Ark. 384 , 583 S.W.2d 72 (1979); A. Copeland Enterprises, Inc. v.

Broyles v. Synercon Corp.

512 S.W.2d 288 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1974

In the summer of 1971, an optionee other than the plaintiff, Broyles, requested the Board of Directors to construe Section V(e). … The Board determined that its original intent was to limit the optionee to accrued shares under Section V(c).

State Ex Rel. v. Ward

163 Tenn. 265 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1931

See Robinson and Walker v. State, 2 Cold., 183 ; State v. Buxton, 2 Swan, 57 ; West v. State, 14 Lea, 38 . … State ex rel. v.

AHCI, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Tennessee, Inc.

898 S.W.2d 191 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 1, 1995

The plaintiffs cited two cases — Brinkley v. Wolcott, 57 Tenn. 22 (Tenn.1872) and Russells Factory Stores, Inc. v. Fielden Furniture Co., 33 Tenn.App. 688 , 232 S.W.2d 592 (1950) — to support this proposition. … See Revlon Group Inc. v.

Eledge v. Dixon

193 Tenn. 654 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1952

Green v. Allen, 24 Tenn. 170 ; Henshaw v. Flenniken, 183 Tenn. 232 , 191 S. W. (2d) 541 , 168 A. L. R. 1010; and Ratto v. Nashville Trust Co., 178 Tenn. 457 , 159 S. W. (2d) 88 , 141 A. L. R. 341. … State v. Smith, 16 Lea, [84 Tenn.] [662] 670; Perry on Trusts, Secs. 744, 700; Dickson v. Montgomery , 1 *665 Swan [31 Tenn.] 348; Gass v. Boss, 3 Sneed [35 Tenn.] 346 [211]; * * * State, ex rel. T. J. Duncan, v.

Ballentine v. Wright

75 Tenn. 26 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1881

The. power of sale is coupled with a trust in favor of this legatee, not a mere discretionary power, and will be executed by the court: Robertson v. Gaines, 2 Hum., 367 ; Brown v. Higgs, 8 Ves., 574; Godolphin v. … Brown.” This amended will recognizes and republishes the-previous will, and so changes it as is specially provided. The general object of the testator is, perhaps,, clear.

Roy L. Tidwell and Richard Coggins v. City of Memphis

Tennessee Supreme Court · May 19, 2006

Sept. 15, 1986), city councils, see Huddleston, 635 S.W.2d at 694, pension boards, see Love v. Ret. Sys. of the City of Memphis, 1987 WL 17246 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 21, 1987), boards of education, see Cunningham v. … Oct. 1, 1986), and boards of health, see Goodwin v. Metro. Bd. of Health, 656 S.W.2d 383 (Tenn. Ct.

Lynn v. Polk

76 Tenn. 121 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1881

St., 1; Davis v. Gray, 16 Wall.; McComb v. Board of Liquidation , 2 Otto. It is said the State is an indispensable party. … Fleece, 2 Lea, 566 , as to real controversy ; Hartranft, Gov., 35 Penn., 444 ; 40 Wiconsin, 205-211; Williams v. Register, Cooke, 215 ; Jonesboro T. P. Co. v. Brown, 8 Baxt., 490 ; Morgan v.

Embry v. Morrison

63 Tenn. 186 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1874

that at the time he was a slave, and wholly ignorant of business transactions of this character, and of the value of such property; and that the defendant took advantage of his condition, and with the assistance of one Brown … See 9 Yerg., 307 ; Jenkins v. Brown, 6 Hum., 299 ; Fletcher v. The State, 6 Hum., 256 ; 5 Cold., 207 .

Alsobrook v. Orr

130 Tenn. 120 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1914

Ee-viewing these cases and our later statutes embodied *125 in the Code of 1858, this conrt in Alvis v. Oglesby, 87 Tenn., 172 , 10 S. W., 313 , and Hughes v. Brown, 88 Tenn., 578 , 13 S. W., 286 , 8 L. R. … Alvis v. Oglesby and Hughes v. Brown dealt with causes of action in which demands were asserted and relief sought against defendants. The holding in Hughes v.

Graham v. State

202 Tenn. 423 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1957

Williams v. State, 191 Tenn. 456 , 234 S.W.2d 993 ; and Gray v. State, 191 Tenn. 526 , 235 S.W.2d 20 . See also Porter v. State, 177 Tenn. 515 , 151 S.W.2d 171 , cited by Mr. Justice Prewitt in the Williams case. … They cannot, under any- circumstances, consider the power of the Governor to pardon, or the authority of the Parole Board to *427 grant paroles. Nor can they speculate as to what this Court might do on appeal. Gray v.