Case law

State Ex Rel. Hammond v. Wimberly

184 Tenn. 132 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1946

In Buena Vista Special School District et al. v. Board of Election Commissioners of Carroll County et al., 173 Tenn. 198, 201 , 116 S. … Also, see State ex rel. v. Meador, 153 Tenn. 634 , 284 S. W. 890 .

Rugg v. Nash-Echoff Motor Co.

161 Tenn. 121 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1930

Brown v. Brown, 159 Tenn., 554 . One of the reasons for testing pleadings is to enable the pleader to cure any defect by amendment. … Sheppard v. Akers, 1 Tenn. Chy., 327; Smith v. Insurance Co., 2 Tenn. Chy., 604; 10 R. C. L., 449; 21 C. J., 487.

Knox County v. Fox

107 Tenn. 724 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1901

In the case of Knox v. … The cost of boarding prisoners and turnkey’s fees are properly chargeable in these misdemeanor cases to the county and not to the prisoner.

Bradley v. State

159 Tenn. 432 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1929

In Reams v. … advisory and not binding upon the board.

Linder v. Officer

175 Tenn. 402 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1940

Hooberry v. Harding, supra; Jourolmon v. Massengill, 86 Tenn., 81 , 5 S. W., 719 . … Vaccaro v. Cicalla, 89 Tenn., 63 , 14 S. W., 43 ; Stratton v. Thompson and Tribble, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea), 229; Fulton v. Davidson, 50 Tenn. (3 Heisk.), 614, 615; Thompson v. Childress, 1 Tenn., Ch., 369.

Ellithorpe v. Ford Motor Company

503 S.W.2d 516 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1973

DeFelice v. Ford Motor Co., 28 Conn.Sup. 164 , 255 A.2d 636 [1969]; Williams v. Brown Manufacturing Co., 45 Ill.2d 418 , 261 N.E.2d 305 [1970]; Williams v. … Brown v. Barber et al, 26 Tenn.App. 534 , 174 S. W.2d 298 [1943], cited with approval in Stinson v. Daniel, supra.

Caldwell v. Powell

65 Tenn. 82 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1873

of Board. … In the case of Ann Dougherty v. A. M.

Massa v. State

159 Tenn. 428 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1929

Cope v. State, 157 Tenn., 199 ; Borkowski v. United States, 268 Fed., 412 ; Brown v. Commonwealth, 208 Ky., 345 ; State ex rel. v. District Court, 72 Mont., 77 ; McBride v. United States, 284 Fed., 416 . … . *431 It is conceded by the State that the “one transaction” rule is applicable, and, upon the authority of Patmore v.

Hicks v. Porter

90 Tenn. 1 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1891

Brown v. Dailey, 1 Pickle, 218 ; Turley v. Turley, 1 Pickle, 251 . … Gilchrist v. Cannon, 1 Cold., 590 ; Patterson v. Arnold, 4 Cold., 368 , 369; Caldwell v. Hodsden, 1 Lea, 46 , 47.

Martin Bros. Container & Timber Corp. v. Lynch

551 S.W.2d 687 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 31, 1977

One of the landmark cases dealing with occupational diseases is American Insurance Company v. Ison, 519 S.W.2d 778 (Tenn.1975). … Brooks v. Gilman Paint, 208 Tenn. 595 , 347 S.W.2d 665 (1961). Lastly, the trier of facts “should be left free to adopt that view which is most consistent with reason and justice.” Graybeal v.

Davenport v. Blankenship

203 Tenn. 679 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1958

Garrett v. Garrett, 156 Tenn. 253 , 300 S.W. 9 . This identical situation was presented to this Court in 1945 in the reported opinion of Poston v. Aetna Ins. … . *682 After setting forth, these various reasons and citing numerous authorities therefor (Poston v. Aetna Ins.

Lella Yvonne Graham v. CHI Memorial Healthcare System

Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2025

Michael Czarnecki, a board-certified pulmonologist. Dr. … In her brief on appeal, Employee relies on Goins v.

C. F. Simmons Medicine Co. v. Mansfield Drug Co.

93 Tenn. 84 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1893

Browne on Trade-marks, Sec. 71; and see Pidding v. How, 8 Sim., 477 (R. Cox, 640); Partride v. Menck, 2 Sandf. Ch. Hep., 662 (R. Cox, 72); Hobbs v. Francais, 19 How. Pr., 567 (R. Cox, 287); Phalon v. … Browne, on Trade-marks, 2d Ed., pages 417-423, Secs. 418-420; Apollinaris Co. v.

State v. Wilson

80 Tenn. 246 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1883

The board did hold over, and another board >of aldermen was elected at an election held at the time designated by the act, and qualified accordingly. … Lafland, 4 Cold., 96 ; Nashville Bank v. Petway, 3 Hum., 522 ; Prowse v. Foot, 3 Br. P. C., 167; Elmendorf v. Ewen, 2 N. Y. Obs., 85; Elmendorf v. Mayor, etc., 25 Wend., 693 ; 2 Kent Com., 238; A. & A. on Corp., 108.

Smiley v. Mayor of Chattanooga

53 Tenn. 604 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1871

Franklin, who was a member of the Board of Aldermen, and also of its Committee on Health and Hospitals, at the time and in pursuance of authority given him by the board; but the witness stated that the contract was not signed … See also Williams v.

Frye v. Memphis State University

671 S.W.2d 467 · Tennessee Supreme Court · May 29, 1984

Chapdelaine v. … We find nothing to the contrary in State Board of Regents v. Gray, 561 S.W.2d 140 (Tenn. 1978), relied upon by appellant.

City of Chattanooga v. Fanburg

196 Tenn. 226 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1954

City Transportation Co. v. Pharr, 186 Tenn. 217 , 200 S. W. (2d) 15 ; Large v. City of Elizabethton, 185 Tenn. 156 , 203 S. W. (2d) 907 ; Tennessee Coach Co. v. Lenoir City, 179 Tenn. 453 , 167 S. … Tennessee Coach Co. v. Lenoir City, supra. In Stephenson v. Binford, 287 U. S. 251, 256 , 53 S. Ct. 181, 184 , 77 L. Ed. 288 , 87 A. L.

Calcote v. Elkin

3 Shan. Cas. 319 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1890

Perry v. Railroad Co., 5 Cold., 138 . Mrs. E. S. Galeote made her home with her daughter, Mrs. Carsey, from the death of her daughter, Mrs. … Calcóte paid her board to Mr. and Mrs.

LensCrafters, Inc. v. Sundquist

33 S.W.3d 772 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2000

In April 1997, the Tennessee Board of Optometry (Board) sanctioned Jeffery A. Rothman, O.D., an optometrist who leased space from LensCrafters. The Board found that Rothman had violated Tenn. … Loser v.

Prichard Bros. v. Causey

158 Tenn. 53 · Tennessee Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1929

Co. v. Ward, 153 Tenn., 383 ; Gillispie v. Bradford, 15 Tenn., 170 . … King v. Patterson, 129 Tenn., 1 ; Jackson v. Coffman, 110 Tenn., 272 . The lis pendens does not become operative until service of process. Harris v. Beasley, supra. In Brown v.