Editorial
Front Page - Friday, August 7, 2009
Case Digests - Tennessee court of appeals syllabus
Dawn Brown, et al vs. Tennessee Title Loans, Inc.
Hamilton County - We accepted this interlocutory appeal to consider “the sole issue of whether the Tennessee Title Pledge Act [“the Act”], Tenn. Code Ann. § 45-15-101, et. seq. [(2007)] provides . . . a private right of action.” Defendant is a “title pledge lender” as defined in the Act. Plaintiffs all allegedly obtained loans from the defendant and, again allegedly, were charged interest and fees, including a “redemption premium,” not allowed by the Act. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss all claims based on alleged violations of the Act, holding that the Act does not afford a private right of action. The trial court granted plaintiffs’ motion for an interlocutory appeal pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 9. Plaintiffs then filed a timely application for permission to appeal to this Court, which we granted, limited to the stated issue. We now vacate the order of dismissal and remand for further proceedings.
Francis Oscar Roy, M.D. v. Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners
Davidson County - A physician appeals the decision of the Board of Medical Examiners to revoke his medical license based upon findings that he prescribed narcotics or controlled drugs without proper documentation and without appropriate clinical indications. In his petition for judicial review, the physician contends the Board violated his due process rights by admitting into evidence the deposition of the Department of Health’s only expert witness, whose testimony was obtained pursuant to a deficient notice of deposition. The Chancery Court found that the physician waived any errors and irregularities in the notice for taking the deposition because he failed to promptly object in writing as required by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 32.04(1) and that the admission of the deposition of the Department’s expert witness into evidence did not violate the physician’s due process rights. We affirm.
Robert Edwards, et al. v. City of Memphis
Shelby County - The Charter of the City of Memphis provided for automatic promotion of police officers to the rank of captain after thirty years of service. In 2005, the rank of thirty-year captain was abolished, except for pension purposes. Plaintiffs, police officers with the City of Memphis, filed suit stating that they had been denied promotions to which they were entitled under the Charter, and asking the court to require that such promotions be given. The trial court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claim, finding that the suit was barred under the doctrine of res judicata. Plaintiffs appeal. We reverse.
Samantha Nabors v. William M. Adams, M.D., et al.
Shelby County - This appeal involves a medical malpractice action. In a motion for summary judgment, defendant physician asserted that plaintiff’s expert witness failed to satisfy the requirements of the locality rule. The trial court granted the motion finding that plaintiff’s expert failed to demonstrate a familiarity with the standard of care in defendant’s community or a similar community. In a motion to alter or amend the judgment, plaintiff attached a supplemental affidavit of the same expert in order to cure the deficiency. The trial court considered the expert’s supplemental affidavit and denied the motion because the new affidavit still failed to satisfy the locality rule. Plaintiff appeals. Reviewing the record, we find that the expert’s supplemental affidavit cured the initial deficiency by relating facts which showed the similarity of the two communities. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.
Annamarie Sturgeon vs. Robert Sturgeon
Sevier County - In this divorce action the trial court granted the wife a divorce, granted the mother custody of the daughter, and ordered child support. The husband has perfected his appeal pro se, but failed to file a transcript of the evidence admitted before the trial court. Essentially, all the issues raised on appeal by the husband are factual in nature, and in the absence of a transcript of evidence we must conclusively presume that the trial court’s findings of fact are correct and we therefore affirm the Judgment of the trial court and remand.
William C. Brothers v. Corrections Corporation of America, et al
Wayne County - This is an appeal from the dismissal of an inmate’s civil action for failure to pay court costs in prior lawsuits. Petitioner inmate, appearing pro se, filed this action for declaratory judgment asking the trial court to declare his rights with respect to several criminal statutes. Respondents filed a motion to dismiss based on Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-812 asserting that Petitioner had failed to pay court costs in two previous lawsuits. The trial court dismissed the action pursuant to the statute. Finding no error in the trial court’s decision, we affirm.
Tammy Jo Gordon, et vir v. Wayne Beard, et ux
Maury County - Defendants appeal the trial court’s reformation of a deed of trust and its finding that Plaintiffs own property free of any encumbrance. We dismiss for lack of a final judgment.
|
|