Frances Gregg Brickell and Edwina Ellis Coffey v. City of Friendsville

CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedDecember 6, 1995
Docket03A01-9505-CV-001159
StatusPublished

This text of Frances Gregg Brickell and Edwina Ellis Coffey v. City of Friendsville (Frances Gregg Brickell and Edwina Ellis Coffey v. City of Friendsville) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Frances Gregg Brickell and Edwina Ellis Coffey v. City of Friendsville, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS

FILED December 6, 1995

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk FRANCES GREGG BRI CKELL a nd ) BLOUNT CI RCUI T EDW NA ELLI S COFFEY, I ) 1 C. A. NO. 03A01- 9505- CV- 00115 9 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l e e s ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. W DALE YOUNG . ) J UDGE ) ) ) ) ) CI TY OF FRI ENDSVI LLE, ) AFFI RMED AND REMANDED ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt )

M CHAEL H. M I EARES, M r yvi l l e , f or a ppe l l a nt . a

DAVI D T. BLACK, M r yvi l l e , f or a ppe l l e e . a

O P I N I O N

M M r a y, J . c ur

Th i s i s a n e xt r a or di na r y a ppe a l i n t he mos t l i t e r a l s e ns e o f

t he wo r d. The a ppe l l a nt pr e va i l e d i n t he t r i a l c our t , but ne ve r t h e - l e s s , h a s a ppe a l e d c l a i mi n g t ha t t he t r i a l c our t e r r e d i n r e f us i n g

t o c o n s o l i da t e t hi s a c t i on wi t h a not he r a c t i on r e l a t i ng t o t he s a me

s u b j e c t ma t t e r pe ndi ng i n t he s a me c our t .

The pl a i nt i f f s f i l e d t he i r c ompl a i nt s e e ki ng a de c l a r a t o r y

j u d g me n t a s t o t he owne r s hi p of a n a ba ndone d r a i l r oa d r i ght - of - wa y .

Th e r a i l r oa d r i ght - of - wa y ha s be e n f or ma l l y a ba ndone d by CSX

Tr a n s p o r t a t i on, I nc . , or i t s pr e de c e s s or i n t i t l e a nd no i s s ue i s

ma d e r e g a r di ng t he a ba ndonme nt . The pl a i nt i f f s s ought t he c our t ’ s

j u d g me n t t ha t t he Ci t y of Fr i e nds vi l l e ha d no owne r s hi p r i ght t o

t he a b a ndone d r i ght - of - wa y. The p l a i nt i f f s f ur t he r s ough t a

d e t e r mi na t i on a s t o whe t h e r t he a c t i vi t i e s of t he Ci t y upon t h e

pr ope r t y c ons t i t ut e d a t a ki ng by i nve r s e c onde mna t i on. Th e

p l a i nt i f f s f i l e d a mot i on f or pa r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt on t he i s s u e

o f o wn e r s hi p of t he a ba ndone d r i ght - of - wa y. The Ci t y r e s ponde d t o

t he mo t i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt a nd i n i t s r e s pons e a gr e e d t h a t

t he r e wa s no i s s ue of ma t e r i a l f a c t r e l a t i ng t o o wn e r s hi p of t h e

p r o p e r t y a nd a gr e e d t ha t t he pr ope r t y r e ve r t e d t o t he a dj oi n i n g

l a n d o wn e r s as a l l e ge d in t he c ompl a i nt . The Ci t y a s s e r t e d,

h o we v e r , t ha t t he r e wa s a ge nui ne i s s ue of ma t e r i a l f act as t o

wh e t h e r t he Ci t y ha d i nv e r s e l y c onde mne d pl a i nt i f f s ’ pr ope r t y b y

i t s a c t i on a s a l l e ge d i n t he c ompl a i nt . The Ci t y f ur t he r a s s e r t e d

t ha t i f t he r e ha d be e n a t a ki ng by i nve r s e c onde mna t i on, t he Ci t y ’ s

a c t i o n wa s b a r r e d b y t he s t a t ut e of l i mi t a t i ons c ont a i ne d i n T. C. A.

§ 2 9 - 1 6 - 124. Al t e r na t i ve l y, t h e Ci t y i ns i s t e d t ha t i f t he r e wa s n o

2 i n v e r s e c onde mna t i on, t he n t he i s s ue s we r e l i mi t e d t o a n a c t i on f o r

t r e s pa s s . Fur t he r , t h e Ci t y i ns i s t e d i n i t s r e s pons e t o t he mot i o n

f or s u mma r y j udgme nt t ha t t he c a s e s houl d be c ons ol i da t e d wi t h

M Co l l um, c et al v. Ci t y of Fr i e nds vi l l e , a s i mi l a r case t he n

p e n d i n g i n t he s a me c our t , f or f e a r t ha t a “ f a i l ur e t o c ons ol i da t e

t he s e a c t i ons s ubj e c t s t he de f e nda n t t o t he r i s k of i nc ons i s t e n t

d e t e r mi na t i on o n t he i s s ue of i nve r s e c onde mna t i on a nd woul d r u n

c o n t r a r y t o j udi c i a l e c onomy. ”

Su bs e que nt t o t he r e s pons e t o t he mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme n t ,

t he Ci t y f i l e d i t s a ns we r . I n t he a ns we r , t h e Ci t y a dmi t t e d t ha t

i t h a d “ gr a de d, l a nds c a pe d a nd s owe d” t he f or me r r a i l r oa d r i ght - o f -

wa y a n d a ve r r e d t ha t it h a d done s o s i nc e 1988. The Ci t y a ga i n

a s s e r t e d t he s t a t ut e o f l i mi t a t i ons .

A h e a r i ng wa s he l d on t he mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt a nd u p o n

t he i s s u e of c ons ol i da t i on. The c our t s us t a i ne d t h e p l a i nt i f f s ’

mo t i on f or pa r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt r ul i ng t ha t t he a ba ndo n e d

r i g h t - of - wa y r e ve r t e d to t he a dj oi ni ng l a ndowne r s . The c our t

d e n i e d t he mot i on t o c ons o l i da t e .

Su bs e que nt t o t he s us t a i ni ng of t he pl a i nt i f f s ’ mot i on f o r

p a r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt , t he de f e nda nt f i l e d a mot i on f or pa r t i a l

s u mma r y j udgme n t a ve r r i ng t ha t t he r e wa s no ge nui ne i s s ue of

ma t e r i a l f act on t he i s s ue of i nve r s e c onde mna t i on a nd t ha t t he

3 Ci t y wa s e nt i t l e d t o j udgme nt as a ma t t e r of l a w. The Ci t y

a s s e r t e d i n i t s mot i on t ha t “ t he de f e nda nt [ Ci t y] i s e nt i t l e d t o

p a r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt a s a ma t t e r of l a w hol di ng t ha t t he Ci t y

o f Fr i e n ds vi l l e ha d not i nve r s e l y c onde mne d t he pr ope r t y a t i s s ue . ”

Af t e r a he a r i ng on J a nua r y 31, 1995, t he c our t e nt e r e d i t s

j u d g me n t . I n t he j udgme nt t he c our t r e c i t e d t ha t t he pl a i nt i f f s

t h r o u g h c ouns e l a dvi s e d t he c our t t ha t t he y di d not r es i s t t he

Ci t y’ s mot i on f or pa r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt a nd t ha t t he y wo u l d

a gr e e t o t he gr a nt i ng of pa r t i a l s umma r y j udgme nt i n or de r t o h a v e

t he ma t t e r f i na l l y r e s ol ve d. The pl a i nt i f f s a l s o a nn o u n c e d t h a t

t he y wo u l d vol unt a r i l y di s mi s s t he i r c l a i m f or da ma ge s f or t r e s p a s s

s o t h a t a f i na l or de r c oul d be e nt e r e d. The a ppe l l a nt pr e va i l e d o n

al l i s s u e s r e l a t i ng t o t he me r i t s of t he c a s e . It i s f r om t hi s

j u d g me n t t ha t t he Ci t y a ppe a l s .

Fi r s t l y t he r e is no r e qui r e me nt t ha t s e pa r a t e cases h a ve

c o n s i s t e nt j udgme nt s . Ea c h c a s e mu s t s t a nd or f al l on i t s o wn

me r i t s . The Ci t y a s s ume s t he pos i t i on t ha t t hi s c a s e wa s de c i de d

o n t he s a me f a c t s a s M Col l um c , s upr a . Suc h, howe ve r , i s not t h e

case. In t hi s cas e, as oppos e d to M Col l um, c t he p l a i nt i f f s

c on c e de d t ha t t he r e wa s no ge nui ne i s s ue of a ma t e r i a l f act

r e l a t i ng t o i nve r s e c ond e mn a t i on, a nd, t h e r e f or e , t h e Ci t y wa s

e n t i t l e d t o a j udgme nt a s a ma t t e r of l a w t ha t t he r e ha d be e n n o

t a k i ng . Fur t he r , t h e y wi t hdr e w t he i r c l a i ms f or t r e s pa s s t o t he i r

4 p r o p e r t y. The Ci t y c onc e de d t ha t i t ha d no owne r s hi p i nt e r e s t i n

t he p r o p e r t y i n que s t i on. I n t hi s c a s e t he r e wa s no j us t i c i a b l e

i s s ue l e f t f or t he c our t t o de c i de e xc e pt t he a s s e s s me nt of c os t s .

No i s s u e i s ma de r e ga r di ng t he a s s e s s me nt of c os t s .

Fo r a c ont r ove r s y t o be r e ga r de d a s " j us t i c i a bl e " t he r e mu s t

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Van Zandt v. Dance
827 S.W.2d 785 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Frances Gregg Brickell and Edwina Ellis Coffey v. City of Friendsville, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frances-gregg-brickell-and-edwina-ellis-coffey-v-c-tennctapp-1995.