Opinion FlashJanuary 30, 2002
Volume 8 Number 018
What follows is the case style or name, first paragraph, author's name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion released eletronically today to TBALink.
There are three ways for TBALink members to get the full-text versions of these opinions from the Web:
Howard H. Vogel
CALSONIC YOROZU CORPORATION, INC. v. FORKLIFTS UNLIMITED, L.L.C. Court:TCA Attorneys: George E. Copple, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Forklifts Unlimited, L.L.C. B. Timothy Pirtle, McMinnville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Calsonic Yorozu Corporation, Inc. Judge: CANTRELL First Paragraph: Calsonic Yorozu Corporation, Inc., appellee, sought declaratory judgment relieving it of its duties under contract to Forklifts Unlimited, L.L.C., appellant. Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. Because we think the defendant was denied a reasonable opportunity for discovery we reverse the summary judgment granted by the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/calsonicsyorozu.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE, EX REL. TEWANNA STEWART v. GARY LOCKETT Court:TCA Attorneys: Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Stuart F. Wilson-Patton, Senior Counsel, for the appellant, State of Tennessee, ex rel. Tewanna Stewart. Terry Clayton, Nashville, Tennessee (at trial) for the appellee, Gary Lockett. Judge: CANTRELL First Paragraph: The juvenile court ordered the father of a minor child to pay retroactive child support for the first ten years after the child's birth. Because the court did not want to create a windfall for the mother, it ordered that only part of the retroactive support be paid to her, and that the remainder be placed in an educational trust fund for the child's benefit. The State argues on appeal that under the facts of this case, the creation of an educational trust fund is not authorized by the child support statutes and guidelines. We affirm the award of retroactive child support, but we reverse its allocation between the mother and the child. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/stewartt.wpd
WATSON'S CARPET AND FLOOR COVERINGS, INC. v. RICK McCORMICK, et al. Court:TCA Attorneys: Trevor W. Howell and R. Scott Jackson, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Watson's Carpet and Floor Coverings, Inc. Alan Mark Turk, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the Appellees, Rick McCormick and Carpet Den, Inc. Kaz Kikkawa and William A. Blue, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Mohawk Industries, Inc. Judge: GODDARD First Paragraph: This is a suit by Watson's Carpet and Floor Coverings, Inc., seeking damages for intentional interference with a business relationship and civil conspiracy. The Trial Judge found, under the authority of Nelson v. Martin, 958 S.W.2d 643 (Tenn. 1997), that no such cause of action exists in Tennessee. He also awarded discretionary costs to all of the Defendants, and attorney fees to the Defendants, Rick McCormick and his Corporation, Carpet Den, Inc. The Plaintiff appeals contesting all of the Court's determinations. We affirm. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/watsoncarpetmc.wpd
PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
For the HTML Text Version:
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
To STOP receiving TBALink Opinion-Flash:
© Copyright 2002 Tennessee Bar Association