Harry Gray Smith v. City of Knoxville, Code Enforcement

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Harry Gray Smith v. City of Knoxville, Code Enforcement

Court of Appeals of Tennessee·Decided February 3, 1997·No. 03A01-9609-CH-0287·Published

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS

FILED February 3, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk HARRY GRAY SM TH, I ) KNOX CHANCERY ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9609- CH- 00287 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. SHARON BELL ) CHANCELLOR ) ) ) ) ) CI TY OF KNOXVI LLE, CODE ) REVERSED, J UDGMENT VACATED a n d ENFORCEM ENT, ) REMANDED ) De f e nda nt - Appe l l e e )

U. W LFRED NW A, Knoxvi l l e , f or Appe l l a nt . I AUW

K. DI CKSON GRI SSOM, De put y l a w di r e c t or , Ci t y of Kn o x vi l l e , f or a pp e l l e e .

O P I N I O N

M M r a y, J . c ur Thi s i s a n a c t i on f or da ma ge s f or pe r s ona l i nj ur y a nd t h e

n e g l i g e nt , ma l i c i ous a nd wr ongf ul de s t r uc t i on of r e a l a nd pe r s o n a l

p r o p e r t y o f t he p l a i nt i f f , Ha r r y Gr a y Smi t h. Pl a i nt i f f f i l e d s u i t

i n t h e Cha nc e r y Cour t f or Knox Count y a l l e gi ng t ha t t he de f e nd a n t

d e s t r o y e d t hr e e pi e c e s of hi s pr ope r t y, l oc a t e d a t 1417 M g n o l i a a

Av e n u e , 1421 M gnol i a Ave nue a nd 400 W nona St r e e t Nor t h, wi t h o u t a i

pr ope r not i c e . Pl a i nt i f f c l a i me d t ha t , n ot wi t hs t a ndi ng a " No

Tr e s pa s s i ng" s i gn he ha d e r e c t e d on t he pr e mi s e s , e mpl oye e s of t h e

Ci t y d e s t r oye d t he s t r uc t ur e s wi t hout s e r vi c e of a ny f i na l

c o n d e mn a t i on o r d e mol i t i on not i c e . He f ur t he r a s s e r t s t ha t t he

d e f e n d a nt r e f us e d t o a l l ow hi m t o r e move me di c a l e qui pme nt f r om o n e

o f t h e s t r uc t ur e s i n whi c h he wa s l i vi ng. He f ur t he r a l l e ge d t h a t

a s a r e s ul t of t he de mol i t i on a n d ve r ba l t hr e a t s of bodi l y h a r m

whi c h h e c l a i ms we r e ma de by a ge nt s of t he de f e nda nt , pl a i nt i f f 1 s u f f e r e d a he a r t a t t a c k n e c e s s i t a t i ng hos pi t a l i z a t i on.

De f e nda nt f i l e d a mot i on t o di s mi s s b a s e d upon gr ounds t h a t

t he Ci t y wa s i mmune f r om s ui t unde r t he pr ovi s i ons of t he

Go v e r n me nt a l Tor t Li a bi l i t y Ac t . Tha t m i on wa s ot de ni e d, a nd

d e f e n d a nt f i l e d a n Ans we r , whi c h wa s s ubs e que nt l y a me nde d t o s e t

f or t h t h e de f e ns e s o f e xc l us i ve r e me di e s a nd l i mi t a t i ons o f a c t i o n s

a s s e t f or t h i n t he Sl um Cl e a r a nc e a nd Re de ve l opme nt Ac t , c odi f i e d

i n T. C. A. § 13- 21- 101 e t s e q . De f e nda nt t he n f i l e d a s e c ond mot i o n

1 Al t h o u g h t h e Pl a i n t i f f a l l e g e d p e r s o n a l i n j u r i e s a s a r e s u l t o f d e f e n d a n t ' s a c t i o n s , t h e Ch a n c e l l o r r u l e d t h a t t h e c i t y wa s i mmu n e f r o m s u i t u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Go v e r n me n t a l To r t Li a b i l i t y Ac t . Th e p l a i n t i f f h a s n o t r a i s e d t ha t a s a n i s s ue on a ppe a l .

2 t o d i s mi s s ba s e d upon t hos e gr oun d s . Af t e r a he a r i ng on t h e

mo t i o n , t he t r i a l c our t i s s ue d a me mor a ndum opi ni on gr a nt i n g t h e

d e f e n d a nt ' s mot i on.

The pl a i nt i f f a nd d e f e nda nt s t at e t he i s s ue f or our

c on s i d e r a t i on v i r t ua l l y t he s a me . We s umma r i z e t he i s s ue as

f o l l ows : W t he r he t he t r i a l c our t e r r e d i n gr a nt i ng a mot i on t o

d i s mi s s .

De s pi t e bot h pa r t i e s l a be l i ng t he i s s ue as a mot i on to

d i s mi s s , i t a ppe a r s t ha t t hi s ma t t e r wa s di s pos e d of by t he t r i a l

c o u r t a s a mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt . A t r i a l c our t c a n c onv e r t

a Ru l e 1 2. 02( 6) mot i on t o di s mi s s i nt o a Rul e 56 mot i on f or s umma r y

j u d g me n t by c ons i de r i ng ma t e r i a l out s i de of t he pl e a di ngs . Kni e r i m

v. Le a t he r wood , 542 S. W 2d 806, . 808 ( Te nn. 1976) . Bot h pa r t i e s

s t a t e t ha t t he t r i a l c our t di d c ons i de r ma t e r i a l out s i de of t he

p l e a d i n gs , t he r e f or e , we mus t c ons i de r t he mot i on a s a mot i on f o r

s u mma r y j udgme nt .

The s t a nda r ds gove r ni ng a n a ppe l l a t e c our t ' s r e vi e w of a t r i a l

c o u r t ' s a c t i on on a mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt a r e we l l - s e t t l e d .

Si n c e o u r i nqui r y i nvol ve s pur e l y a que s t i on of l a w, no pr e s umpt i o n

o f c o r r e c t ne s s a t t a c he s t o t he t r i a l c our t ' s j udgme nt , a nd our t a s k

is c o n f i ne d to r e vi e wi ng t he r e c or d to de t e r mi ne whe t he r t he

r e qu i r e me nt s of T. R. C. P. 56 ha ve be e n me t . Cowde n v. Sov r a n

3 Ba n k / Ce nt r a l Sout h , 8 16 S. W 2d 741, . 744 ( Te nn. 1991) . T. R. C. P.

56. 03 pr ovi de s t ha t s umma r y j udgme nt is onl y a ppr opr i a t e wh e r e

t he r e is no ge nui ne i s s ue wi t h r e ga r d to t he ma t e r i a l f act s

r e l e va nt t o t he c l a i m or de f e ns e c ont a i ne d i n t he mot i on a nd t h e

mo v i n g pa r t y i s e nt i t l e d t o j udgme nt a s a ma t t e r of l a w on t he

undi s put e d f a c t s . Byr d v. Ha l l , 847 S. W 2d 208, 210 ( Te nn. 199 3 ) ; .

An d e r s o n v. St a nda r d Re gi s t e r Co. , 857 S. W 2d 555, . 559 ( Te n n .

1 9 9 3 ) . The movi ng pa r t y ha s t he bur de n of pr ovi ng t ha t i t s mot i o n

s at i s f i es t he s e r e qui r e me nt s . Downe n v . Al l s t a t e I ns . Co. , 811

S. W 2 d . 523, 524 ( Te nn. 1991) . The s t a nda r ds gove r ni ng t he

a s s e s s me nt of e vi de nc e i n t he s umma r y j udgme nt c ont e xt ar e al s o

we l l e s t a bl i s he d. Cour t s mus t vi e w t he e vi de nc e i n t he l i ght mo s t

f a v o r a b l e t o t he nonmovi ng pa r t y a nd mus t a l s o dr a w a l l r e a s ona b l e

i n f e r e nc e s i n t he nonmovi ng pa r t y' s f a vor . Byr d v. Ha l l , 847 S. W 2 d .

a t 2 1 0 - 11. Cour t s s houl d gr a nt a s umma r y j udgme nt onl y whe n b o t h

t h e f a c t s a nd t he c onc l us i ons t o be dr a wn f r om t he f a c t s pe r mi t a

r e a s o n a bl e pe r s on t o r e a c h onl y one c onc l us i on. Ca r ve l l v. Bot t oms ,

9 0 0 S. W 2d 23 ( Te nn. 1995) . .

The Ci t y' s ma i n d e f e n s e t o t hi s a c t i on wa s t ha t t he pl a i nt i f f

f a i l e d t o a va i l hi ms e l f of t he e xc l us i ve r e me dy a nd wi t hi n t h e

s t a t ut e of l i mi t a t i on c ont a i ne d i n T. C. A. § 13- 21- 101 e t s e q. Th e

Ch a nc e l l or , i n he r me mor a ndum opi ni on f r om t h e b e nc h, s umma r i z e d

t ha t r e me dy a s f ol l ows : " Re s pe c t f ul l y, c ouns e l , I be l i e ve unde r t he

s t a t u t e t ha t t he e xc l us i ve r e me dy a t l e a s t i n r e ga r d t o t he r e a l

4 p r o p e r t y i s t o f i l e f or t he i nj unc t i ve r e l i e f wi t hi n 60 da ys a f t e r

s e r v i c e a nd pos t i ng of t h e or de r . " Sh e f u r t he r s t a t e d t ha t t he

Ci t y h a d ma i l e d t he not i c e s t o pl a i nt i f f , but t ha t he i gno r e d 2 a n d / o r r e j e c t e d s uc h not i c e s . W b e l i e ve t ha t unde r t he s umma r y e

j u d g me n t s t a nda r d, t hi s wa s e r r or .

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