Thursday, August 25, 2011

Court reviews whether several deeds of conveyance were fraudulent.

TABITHA LAYNE, ET AL. v. TYRON LAYNE ADKINS, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 25, 2011)

Tabitha Layne, individually, and as Administratrix of the Estate of Freddie Steven Layne, and as Next Friend of Stephanie Layne and Teddy Layne ("Plaintiff") sued Tyron Layne Adkins, Kenneth Rowe, and a certain tract or parcel of Property Identified as Map #089, Parcel 060.01 ("the Property") alleging, in part, that Ms. Adkins and Mr. Rowe had committed fraud with regard to deeds of conveyance of the Property.

After a trial, the Trial Court entered its judgment finding and holding, inter alia, that four specific deeds with regard to the Property were void; that legal title to the Property is held by the heirs of Ted Layne with the Estate of Freddie Steven Layne holding title to one-third interest, Nancy Bolton Layne holding title to one-third interest, and Tyron Layne Adkins holding title to one-third interest; and awarding Mr. Rowe a judgment against Tyron Layne Adkins of $139,000 as a result of a cross-claim. Mr. Rowe appeals to this Court. We affirm.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/laynet_082511.pdf

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Court reviews whether the Knoxville City Council can review the Board of Zoning Appeals's decisions.

ANITA J. CASH, CITY OF KNOXVILLE ZONING COORDINATOR, v. ED WHEELER (Tenn. Ct. App. August 16, 2011)

The City of Knoxville Board of Zoning Appeals granted defendant a variance and the Knoxville City Council then nullified the variance granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Defendant then appealed to the Chancery Court of Knox County contending that the city ordinance which permitted the City Council to review the decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals was invalid, and the Chancellor agreed. On appeal, we hold that the ordinance at issue is valid under the State's statutory scheme. We reverse the Chancellor and remand for further proceedings.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/casha_081611.pdf

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Court reviews the boundary lines established by two different surveyors

GLENN CUPP ET AL. v. BILL HEATH ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 11, 2011)

In late 2007, the defendant Bill Heath built a fence on a line running generally east and west, said line having been established by surveyor Bill Parsons in 1990 and then re-staked in 2007 by surveyor Dennis Fultz. The plaintiff Glenn Cupp, an adjoining landowner to the south of Heath, hired surveyor Mark Comparoni to establish his northern line because Cupp believed Heath had built the fence much too far to the south. Marjorie Keck, who joins Heath on her northern boundary and Cupp on her western boundary, also commissioned Comparoni to survey her land. Comparoni's survey confirmed that Heath's new fence incorrectly encompassed approximately 35 acres of Cupp's land and approximately 6 acres of Keck's land. Cupp and Keck filed this action against Heath in 2008 to establish their northern boundary with Heath and the Cupp/Keck common boundary as surveyed by Comparoni. The trial court found that the Comparoni survey correctly established the boundary lines of all the parties. Heath appeals. We affirm.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/cuppg_081111.pdf

Monday, August 8, 2011

Court reviews claims of fraud and unjust enrichment against a defendant who defaulted on a loan

THE BANK OF NASHVILLE v. CHARLES CHIPMAN, SR., ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 8, 2011)

Defendant defaulted on a $300,000 loan from plaintiff bank. He subsequently renewed the loan but not before transferring certain assets to his wife. He never repaid the loan. The bank filed suit against the husband for breach of contract and fraud and against both defendants for fraudulent conveyance, conversion, civil conspiracy to defraud, and unjust enrichment. The bank also sought a lien lis pendens, a constructive trust, and a judicial sale and foreclosure.

The trial court found against the husband with respect to the bank's claims for breach of contract and fraud (in renewing the loan), against the wife for unjust enrichment, and against both defendants for fraudulent conveyance. The court denied the bank's request for a constructive trust and a judicial sale and foreclosure. The parties appeal the trial court's disposition of claims for fraud, civil conspiracy to defraud, and unjust enrichment, as well as its decision not to impose a constructive trust. We find for the bank on its fraud (against the husband) and unjust enrichment (against the wife) claims. We find against the bank on its claims for civil conspiracy to defraud and the imposition of a constructive trust.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/bankofnashville_080811.pdf

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Court reviews a zoning board's decision to deny a permissible use permit for rural property

JERRY KITTRELL v. WILSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 4, 2011)

The owner of a piece of rural property in Wilson County applied for a "permissible use" permit that would allow him to display vehicles for sale on the property. The County planning staff recommended against issuance of a permit, reasoning that the proposed use was not consistent with other uses permitted in an A-1 (agricultural) zoning district. The owner appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals, which agreed to issue the permit, but limited the use to "no more than 10 serviceable items being on the property at any given time."

The owner challenged the limitation by filing a petition for writ of certiorari in the Wilson County Chancery Court. The court determined that the BZA had acted arbitrarily and had exceeded its authority by placing a condition on the owner's use of the property of a type not contemplated by the controlling ordinance, and it removed that condition. We affirm the removal of the condition, but we reverse the trial court's holding that the BZA had violated the property owner's substantive due process rights.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/kittrellj_080411.pdf

Monday, August 1, 2011

Land dispute impacts eminent domain cases

In the battle of land for Nashville's new convention center, the recusal of Judge Barbara Haynes seems to have been crucial. That, and a couple of Californians who have had a hand in changing the way eminent-domain cases are handled in Davidson County.

Read the full story at the Nashville Post's website.