John Doe, alias a Citizen and resident of Hamilton County, Tennessee v. Mark Gwyn, Director of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, et al.
Hamilton County – This declaratory judgment action challenges the constitutionality of the Tennessee Sexual Offender and Violent Sexual Offender Registration, Verification and Tracking Act, Tenn Code Ann. § 40-39-201 et seq, on the grounds that plaintiff should not be required to register because his criminal convictions occurred in other states prior to the passage of the Tennessee Act, as applied to him. The trial judge declared that plaintiff was required to register under the Act, and plaintiff has appealed.
On appeal, we affirm the Chancellor’s Judgment which requires plaintiff to register in accordance with the Act.
Melody Jennings Bowers v. Daniel R. Bowers.
Davidson County – Alleg-ing Husband’s failure to pay child support and alimony as required, Wife filed petitions for contempt.
The trial court found Hus-band guilty of seven counts of willful criminal contempt and entered a judgment against him for unmet obligations.
On appeal, Husband claims the trial court erred in finding him in contempt, in imputing a $1,000 per month income to Wife, in upholding his work-related childcare obligation, in denying his counterpetition to modify spousal and child support, and in excluding certain witness testimony. He also argues that he was denied a hearing regarding Wife’s attorney fees.
Because the trial court failed to make a finding regarding Husband’s ability to pay, we reverse Husband’s criminal contempt conviction. Additionally, we find the trial court erred in upholding the work-related childcare award, and we remand for a determination of Husband’s retroactive credit for amounts paid subsequent to the filing of his petition to modify and for a recalculation of his future support obligations.
However, we find that the trial court did not err in imputing Mother’s income, in refusing to allow Father’s witness to testify, nor in awarding Wife her attorney fees without a hearing.
State of Tennessee ex rel, Frances Craig Creighton v. Wilbur Foster Creighton.
Davidson County – This is an appeal from the trial court’s order, finding Appellant in criminal contempt of court for willful failure to pay his ordered child support. Appellant appeals, alleging that the trial court erred in: (1) denying Appellant a full transcript of the hearing at the State’s expense; (2) giving little or no credence to the evidence offered by Appellant’s witness; and (3) finding Appellant in criminal contempt for willful failure to pay child support.
Discerning no error, we affirm.
American General Finan-cial Services, Inc. v. Martin Goss/Unkown Tenant of Fore-closed Property
Knox County – The plaintiff foreclosed on real property following the default on a loan secured by a deed of trust. The plaintiff then filed a detainer warrant in General Sessions Court and the defendant appeared claiming rightful possession to the property because of a quit claim deed.
After hearing the evidence, the General Sessions Court awarded possession of the property to the plaintiff. The defendant appealed to the Knox County Circuit Court. A jury trial commenced, and at the close of proof, the plaintiff moved for a directed verdict.
The trial court granted the directed verdict and awarded possession of the property to the plaintiff.
The defendant appeals. We affirm.
Central Parking System of Tennessee, Inc. v. Nashville Downtown Platinum, LLC.
Davidson County – NDP purchased property upon which Central Parking operated pay-parking lots pursuant to lease amendments with the prior owner. Central Parking calculated the rent it owed NDP pursuant to the amendments, but due to a computer glitch, paid double the rent it claimed was owed. NDP refused to refund the money, claiming the payment equaled the fair rental value of the property.
Central Parking sued NDP for the alleged overpayment, and the trial court dismissed Central Parking’s claims.
Because Central Parking’s only basis for relief on appeal – an implied notice theory – was first raised in a Rule 59.04 motion, and an issue first raised in a motion to alter or amend is not properly raised before the trial court, we find the issue is waived on appeal.
The trial court’s dismissal of Central Parking’s claims is affirmed.
Patsy Freeman, Personal
Representative and Admin-istratrix of the Estate of John R. Freeman, Deceased v. CSX Transportation, Inc., et al.
Bedford County – In this interlocutory appeal, we are asked to determine: (1) whether the Tennessee savings statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-105(a), may be invoked twice within the one-year savings period to save otherwise untimely actions; and (2) whether the Appellee acted with the diligence and good faith necessary to invoke the protection of the savings statute.
We conclude that Appellee’s suit was properly brought within the protection of the Tennessee savings statute. Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.