CREDENTIAL LEASING CORPORATION OF TENNESSEE, INC. v. PATRICK L. WHITE - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Amelia Ferrell Knisely on May 17, 2016

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Gregory C. Logue and Robert L. Vance, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Patrick L. White.

Attorneys 2:

Kenneth S. Christiansen and Daniel J. Chung, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Credential Leasing Corporation of Tennessee, Inc.

Judge(s): FRIERSON

The defendant, a practicing attorney, prepared a deed of trust for the benefit of the plaintiff lender concerning a loan made by the lender to the defendant‘s brother. The subject property was subsequently foreclosed upon by the first mortgage holder without notice to the lender. The lender later discovered that its deed of trust contained certain defects. The lender filed the instant action against the defendant, claiming that the defendant was liable for professional negligence, breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and a violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the lender on the professional negligence claim while granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant on the breach of contract claim. The case proceeded to trial upon the remaining issues of fraudulent misrepresentation, consumer protection claims, timeliness, and damages. Following a bench trial, the court granted judgment to the lender in the amount of $52,600.00 based on the court‘s determination that the defendant was liable for professional negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation, and breach of contract, despite the earlier grant of summary judgment on the latter issue. The court further determined that the defendant had violated the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act and awarded treble damages and attorney's fees. The defendant has appealed. Having determined that the trial court erred in finding a violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, we reverse the trial court‘s award of treble damages and attorney's fees. We also reverse the trial court‘s determination of breach of contract, due to the lack of notice to the defendant that this issue would be tried. We affirm the trial court‘s judgment in all other respects.