H.D. Edgemon Contracting Co. v. King
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DROWOTA, Justice.
The Defendants Walter and Katherine King filed in the Court of Appeals a motion to dismiss the appeal, pursuant to Rule 26(b), Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure (T.R.A.P.), because the statement of the evidence and brief were not filed within the time allowed by Rule 24(c) and Rule 29(a), T.R.A.P.1 The Court of Appeals, relying on this Court’s opinion in Davis v. Sadler, 612 S.W.2d 160 (Tenn.1981), denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss. We granted Defendants’ Rule 11 Application for Permission to Appeal because we feel our decision in Davis v. Sadler needs…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lambert v. Home Federal Savings and Loan Assoc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1972
- G. F. Plunk Construction Co. v. Barrett Properties, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1982
- City of Chattanooga v. SwiftTennessee Supreme Court · 1969
- Davis v. SadlerTennessee Supreme Court · 1981
- Meeks v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1971
3Cited by14 opinions
- Brandon v. WILLIAMSON MEDICAL CENTERCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2010
- Dominion Bank of Middle Tennessee v. CraneCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1992
- Rainey Bros. Construction Co. v. Memphis & Shelby County Board of AdjustmentDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1997
- Carroll Marie Stovall v. UHS of Lakeside, LLCCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2014
- Edward Gilbert v. State of TennesseeCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2022
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.