E. RON PICKARD and LINDA PICKARD, as TRUSTEES OF THE SHARON CHARITABLE TRUST and as INDIVIDUALS v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION, TENNESSEE WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD and TENNESSEE MATERIALS CORPORATION (Tenn. Ct. App. August 15, 2012)
The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation issued a permit allowing a proposed rock quarry to discharge storm water and wastewater into a nearby creek. Owners of property allegedly affected by the discharge filed an appeal challenging the issuance of the permit with the Water Quality Control Board, as well as a petition seeking a declaratory order construing the rules regarding the protection of existing uses of waters. The Water Quality Control Board refused to issue a declaratory order and the property owners appealed to the Davidson County Chancery Court. Because we conclude that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant the relief requested, we vacate the judgment of the trial court and remand for dismissal of this cause. Vacated and remanded.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/pickarde_081512.pdf
August 20, 2012
Court addresses whether a property developer or a county owns a road on which a motorcycle accident occurred
TIMOTHY KLEIN and ANGELA KLEIN v. HARDIN COUNTY, TENNESSEE, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 16, 2012)
This is an appeal from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellee, a property developer. The underlying case is for personal injuries sustained by Plaintiffs in a motorcycle accident, which was allegedly caused by a pothole in the road. The question presented for determination is, as between Appellee and Appellant Hardin County, who owns the portion of the road where the accident occurred. After completing its development, Appellee dedicated portions of the roadway to Hardin County for public use. However, in cross-motions for summary judgment the Appellee and Appellant each claimed that the other owned the disputed portion of the road where the accident occurred.
Although the disputed portion of the road was specifically excluded from the dedication, and Appellee maintained the road, the trial court determined that Appellee had implicitly dedicated the disputed portion to Appellant and granted summary judgment in favor of Appellee developer. Based upon the evidence in record, we conclude that reasonable minds could reach different conclusions concerning ownership of the road and accordingly, reverse the grant of summary judgment.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/kleint_081612.pdf
This is an appeal from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellee, a property developer. The underlying case is for personal injuries sustained by Plaintiffs in a motorcycle accident, which was allegedly caused by a pothole in the road. The question presented for determination is, as between Appellee and Appellant Hardin County, who owns the portion of the road where the accident occurred. After completing its development, Appellee dedicated portions of the roadway to Hardin County for public use. However, in cross-motions for summary judgment the Appellee and Appellant each claimed that the other owned the disputed portion of the road where the accident occurred.
Although the disputed portion of the road was specifically excluded from the dedication, and Appellee maintained the road, the trial court determined that Appellee had implicitly dedicated the disputed portion to Appellant and granted summary judgment in favor of Appellee developer. Based upon the evidence in record, we conclude that reasonable minds could reach different conclusions concerning ownership of the road and accordingly, reverse the grant of summary judgment.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/kleint_081612.pdf
August 16, 2012
Court determines the priority of two liens--a mechanic's lien and a deed of trust
ANCHOR PIPE COMPANY, INC. v. SWEENEY-BRONZE DEVELOPMENT, LLC ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 3, 2012)
This appeal concerns the priority of two liens, a mechanic’s lien and a bank’s deed of trust. We have determined that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the bank. We have further determined that the mechanic’s lien is entitled to priority and that the trial court erred in failing to grant summary judgment on that issue.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/anchorpipe_080312.pdf
This appeal concerns the priority of two liens, a mechanic’s lien and a bank’s deed of trust. We have determined that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the bank. We have further determined that the mechanic’s lien is entitled to priority and that the trial court erred in failing to grant summary judgment on that issue.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/anchorpipe_080312.pdf
August 15, 2012
Court reviews a challenge to Lawrence County's decision to contract with another proposer for solid waste management
WASTE SERVICES OF DECATUR, LLC V. COUNTY OF LAWRENCE, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 15, 2012)
Losing proposer for solid waste management services challenges Lawrence County’s decision to contract with another proposer. Because we find that the County acted arbitrarily and illegally in making its decision, we reverse the decision of the trial court and remand for further proceedings.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/wasteservices_081512.pdf
Losing proposer for solid waste management services challenges Lawrence County’s decision to contract with another proposer. Because we find that the County acted arbitrarily and illegally in making its decision, we reverse the decision of the trial court and remand for further proceedings.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/wasteservices_081512.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)