Case law

Frank Bell v. Christine Bradley

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Sep 27, 1995

See Tomlinson v. Board of Equalization, 88 Tenn. 1, 6-7, 12 S.W. 414 (1889); Spunt v. Fowinkle, 572 S.W.2d 259, 265 (Tenn. App. 1978). … The correctness of the application of a principle of law by the Board of Claims is not reviewable by certiorari. Henry v. Board of Claims, 638 S.W.2d 825, 827 (Tenn. App. 1982).

Spalding v. Spalding

597 S.W.2d 739 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 29, 1980

See Bauer v. Bauer, 184 Tenn. 217 , 197 S.W.2d 892 (1946); Pendergrass v. Pendergrass, 56 Tenn.App. 227 , 405 S.W.2d 666 (1966). … .”_ Garrett, Tennessee Divorce, Alimony and Child Custody § 12-3, at 113 (1978); Brown v. Brown, 156 Tenn. 619, 626-27 , 4 S.W.2d 345, 347 (1928).

Peoples v. Hagaman

31 Tenn. App. 398 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Mar 9, 1948

Church, as limited to its own' particular facts, and the soundness of the rule followed in the earlier case of Kirkman v. Brown, 93 Tenn. 476 , 27 S. W. 709 were reaffirmed. The distinction between Erck v. … Brown and the other cases cited, and which comprise the body of the law in this state upon the effect of a accidental possession. Erck v.

Virnie Fulks v. J. Hulan Watson

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jun 18, 2001

Ryan v. Anderson, 481 S.W.2d 371, 374 (Tenn. 1972) (citing State v. Yoakum, 201 Tenn. 180, 297 S.W.2d 635 (1956)). Tenn. … Pullum v. Smallridge, 652 S.W .2d 338 (Tenn. 1 983); White v. Banks, 614 S.W.2d at 334; Mitchell v. G arrett, 510 S.W.2d 894, 89 8 (Tenn . 1974); Pemberton v. Wilson, 481 S.W.2d 760, 770 (Tenn. 1972); Galyon v.

Puckett v. Roberson

183 S.W.3d 643 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jun 30, 2005

See Biscan v. Brown, (Court of Appeals No. M-2001-02776-SC-R11-CV, appeal pending before the Supreme Court). … In Byrd v.

Linder v. Little

490 S.W.2d 717 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jun 30, 1972

Brown that, the night preceding the execution of the deed, he heard Mrs. Pope and Mrs. Brown discuss the consideration for the conveyance. … Adrian v. Brown, 29 Tenn.App. 236 , 196 S.W.2d 118 (1946). And, proof of a parol trust must be of the clearest and most convincing character.

Christopher Pope v. Dept of Correction

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Oct 30, 2002

Turner v. Tennessee Board of Paroles, 993 S.W.2d 78 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999); Powell v. Parole Eligibility Review Board, 879 S.W.2d 871 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994); Yokley v. State, 632 S.W.2d 123 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). … But the intrinsic correctness of the Board’s decision is not reviewable under the writ of certiorari. Turner v. Tennessee Bd. of Paroles, 993 S.W.2d 78, 80 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999); Arnold v.

La Southaphanh v. Tennessee Department of Correction

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jan 14, 2022

Arnold v. Tenn. Bd. of Paroles, 956 S.W.2d 478, 480 (Tenn. 1997); Powell v. Parole Eligibility Rev. Bd., 879 S.W.2d 871, 873 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “The intrinsic correctness of the Board’s decision is not reviewable.” … V. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court affirming the decision of the Tennessee Board of Parole.

Isom v. Knox Co.

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Mar 27, 1998

On No vember 2 , 1995, the S upreme C ourt issued a n opinion in McCaleb v. Saturn Corp., 910 S.W.2d 412 (Tenn. 1995). … Thankiwe v. Traughber, 909 S.W.2d 802 (Tenn. App. 1994). The rule is mandatory and jurisdicti onal in c ivil case s. Id. (Citations omitted).

Mark Percy v. Dept of Correction

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 22, 2002

Hunter v. Brown, 955 S.W.2d 49, 50-51 (Tenn. 1997). We must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and we must resolve all inferences in the non-moving party’s favor. Godfrey v. … Rampy v. ICI Acrylics, Inc., 898 S.W.2d 196, 198 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). We will, however, give effect to the substance, rather than the form or terminology, of their papers. Brown v.

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Schriver

541 S.W.2d 799 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · May 27, 1976

In Palmer v. … Palmer v. Love, supra; Cloud Cotton Company v. White, supra.

Smartt v. Fleming

481 S.W.2d 774 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 25, 1972

Therefore, under the provisions of T.C.A. 20-921, the Board of Education waived the right to rely upon the defense of governmental immunity. See Creekmore v. Woodard (1950), 192 Tenn. 280 , 241 S.W.2d 397 and Roberts v. … Co. v. Woodward (1928), 7 Tenn.App. 394 . In Klein v.

University of the South v. Franklin County

506 S.W.2d 779 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jul 27, 1973

State Board of Equalization (1966), 219 Tenn. 123 , 407 S.W.2d 443 . In State v. … In State ex rel. v.

Robert P. Hoover and wife, Donna D. Hoover v. Metropolitan Board of Housing Appeals of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Aug 2, 1996

The decision of the Board will not be disturbed unless it can be shown to be beyond its jurisdiction or not supported by material evidence in the record. Huddleston v. … McCallen v. City of Memphis, Tenn. 1990, 786 S.W.2d 633.

Copas v. Copas

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Feb 27, 1998

Brown v. Brown, 847 S.W.2d 496, 499 (Tenn. 1993). As the instant case demonstrates, the UCCJA has not always had its intended effect. … * * * V. Analysis In the landmark case of Brown v.

R. E. Sharp, Jr. v. Campbell Co. Bd. of Education & Campbell Co., TN

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Mar 31, 2000

Summit Hill Associates v. Knoxville Utilities Board, 667 S.W.2d 91, 96 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983). The record before us in this matter is sparse. … Wilson v. Hafley, 189 Tenn. 598, 226 S.W.2d 308 (1949); McDonald v. Onoh, 772 S.W.2d 913 (Tenn. Ct. App.1989); Irvin v. City of Clarksville, 767 S.W.2d 649 (Tenn. Ct. App.1988); Gotten v.

Rule v. Brotherhood's Relief & Compensation Fund

36 Tenn. App. 20 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jan 14, 1952

Honea v. American Council, J.O.U.A.M., 139 Tenn. 21 , 201 S. W. 127 ; Barthell v. Zachman, 162 Tenn. 336 , 36 S. W. (2d) 886 ; International Harvester Co. v. Campbell, 18 Tenn. App. 320 , 76 S. W. (2d) 986 ; 10 C. J. … Umstattd v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 21 Tenn. App. 312 , 110 S. W. (2d) 342 ; Arnold v. Locomotive Engineers Mut. Life & Acc. Ins. Ass’n, 30 Tenn. App. 166 , 204 S. W. (2d) 191 .

Lee v. Melson

54 Tenn. App. 53 · Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Jul 10, 1964

J Among the cases cited is Brown & Sons Lumber Co. v. … Brown, 132 Tenn. 294 , 177 S.W. 1158 , L.R.A.1915F, 723; Securities Inv. Co. v. White, 19 Tenn.App. 540 , and cases cited p. 556, 91 S.W.(2d) 581 , on the practice of limiting issues on remand.

Kenneth W. Taylor v. Lawrence County, Tennessee Election Commission

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · May 23, 2011

TAYLOR v. LAWRENCE COUNTY, TENNESSEE ELECTION COMMISSION ET AL. … Gleason v. Gleason, 164 S.W.3d 588, 592 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004).

Larry Littles v. Donal Campbell

Court of Appeals of Tennessee · Apr 22, 2002

On May 2, 2000, the prison Disciplinary Board (the “Board”) conducted a disciplinary hearing at which the Board found Mr. Little guilty of Conspiracy to Violate State Law. The Board sentenced Mr. … See Powell v. Parole Eligibility Review Board, 879 S.W.2d 871, 873 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994); Yokley v. State, 632 S.W.2d 123 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981).