Court reviews an unlawful detainer action involving counterclaims of unlawful foreclosure practices

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION v. ALAN WILSEY AND SANDRA WILSEY (Tenn. Ct. App. May 21, 2012

This appeal involves an unlawful detainer action. After foreclosure, the defendants refused to leave the subject property. The plaintiff filed this unlawful detainer action against the defendants, and ultimately filed a motion for summary judgment. In response, the defendants, acting pro se, filed documents suggesting fraud and/or unlawful foreclosure practices. The defendants filed no evidence to support their claims and no other response to the plaintiff’s motion. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants now appeal. Discerning no error, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/federalhomeloan_052112.pdf

Court reviews whether a land surveyor can be held liable for damages incurred by sinkholes

BRIAN DALE, single; BRIAN LAWHORN and wife, PAMELA LAWHORN; and WILLIAM JENKINS and wife, ELAINE JENKINS v. B & J ENTERPRISES, ET AL. (tenn. Ct. App. May 10, 2012)

Homeowners filed this lawsuit against various individuals and entities shortly after purchasing their homes, when they discovered that their properties are affected by numerous sink holes. Original defendants identified a surveyor as a comparative tortfeasor, and the homeowners amended their complaint to add the surveyor as a defendant. The surveyor filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the homeowners’ claims were barred by Tennessee Code Annotated section 28-3-114, which provides that all actions to recover damages against any person engaged in the practice of surveying for any deficiency, defect, omission, error or miscalculation shall be brought within four years from the date the survey is recorded on the plat, or else be forever barred. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs were subsequently granted permission by the trial court and this Court to pursue an interlocutory appeal. Finding that section 28-3-114 governs the homeowners’ claims, we affirm.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/daleb_051012.pdf

Court reviews an agreement that restricted the use of a roadway that provided access to property

TOMMY HINTON and wife, JEAN MARIE HINTON v. JERRY L. EDMONDS and wife, SUSAN D. EDMONDS (Tenn. Ct. App. May 7, 2012)

Adjoining property owners dispute the validity of an Agreement which placed restrictions upon a roadway across one property which provided access to the other property. The trial court, after making specific factual findings, found the Agreement invalid and non-binding upon the parties. We affirm the trial court’s factual findings as well as its ultimate determination of invalidity.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/hintont_050712.pdf