Foley v. Hamilton
Court of Appeals of Tennessee
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRANKS, Judge.
Plaintiffs, homeowners in a subdivision, sued, among others, the developers and the county seeking a determination of responsibility for maintaining roads in the subdivision and, in the alternative, sued for damages. The chancellor, responding to motions for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint1 on the basis it neither stated a cause of action against the developers nor the county.
We conclude the complaint is actionable and there are disputed issues of fact. We reverse and remand for trial on the merits. T.R.C.P., 56.03.
The complaint alleges that since October, 1973,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Patelle v. Planning BoardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1978
- Bunns v. Walkem Development Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1964
3Cited by9 opinions
- River Birch Associates v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Paduch v. City of Johnson CityTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
- State Ex Rel. Byram v. City of BrentwoodCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1991
- Hackett v. Smith CountyCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1990
- Foley v. HamiltonTennessee Supreme Court · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.