Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims

Court of Appeals of Tennessee

Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims

DecidedFebruary 6, 1996

Docket02A01-9411-CH-00252

StatusPublished

This text of Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims (Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims) 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

Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE WESTERN SECTION AT JACKSON _____________________________________________

HERBERT ADAMS, ) From the Chancery Court ) for Crockett County, Tennessee Plaintiff/Appellee, ) ) The Hon. George R. Ellis, Chancellor vs. ) ) Crockett County Chancery No. 6358 ROBERT SIMS AND ) Appeal No. 02A01-9411-CH-00252 PATRICIA SIMS ) ) DISMISSED & REMANDED Defendants/Appellants. ) ) ) Theo J. Emison Alamo, Tennessee FILED ) Attorney for Appellants February 6, 1996 ) ) James Belew Webb Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) Milan, Tennessee Appellate C ourt Clerk ) Attorney for Appellee ________________________________________________________________________

OPINION AND ORDER ________________________________________________________________________

LILLARD, J.

This case came to be considered by the Court upon a grant of a Rule 9 application for

permission to appeal an interlocutory Order of the trial court.

The appellants, Robert and Patricia Sims, seek to appeal the trial court’s ruling on their

motion in limine to exclude from the trial certain types of evidence. The trial court granted the

appellants’ Rule 9 application for permission to appeal the denial of appellants’ motion in limine.

This Court thereafter granted appellant’s Rule 9 request for permission to appeal the trial court’s

ruling.

After hearing oral argument, and upon examination of the record, the Court is of the

Opinion that the Rule 9 application for permission to appeal was improvidently granted and that

the matter should be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

It is therefore ordered that the Rule 9 application is dismissed and the matter is remanded

to the trial court. Costs are taxed to the appellant. It is SO ORDERED this ______ day of January, 1996.

_________________________________ LILLARD, J.

_________________________________ CRAWFORD, P.J.,W.S.

_________________________________ HIGHERS, J.

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

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE WESTERN SECTION AT JACKSON _____________________________________________

HERBERT ADAMS, ) From the Chancery Court ) for Crockett County, Tennessee Plaintiff/Appellee, ) ) The Hon. George R. Ellis, Chancellor vs. ) ) Crockett County Chancery No. 6358 ROBERT SIMS AND ) Appeal No. 02A01-9411-CH-00252 PATRICIA SIMS ) ) DISMISSED & REMANDED Defendants/Appellants. ) ) ) Theo J. Emison Alamo, Tennessee FILED ) Attorney for Appellants February 6, 1996 ) ) James Belew Webb Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) Milan, Tennessee Appellate C ourt Clerk ) Attorney for Appellee ________________________________________________________________________

OPINION AND ORDER ________________________________________________________________________

LILLARD, J.

This case came to be considered by the Court upon a grant of a Rule 9 application for

permission to appeal an interlocutory Order of the trial court.

The appellants, Robert and Patricia Sims, seek to appeal the trial court’s ruling on their

motion in limine to exclude from the trial certain types of evidence. The trial court granted the

appellants’ Rule 9 application for permission to appeal the denial of appellants’ motion in limine.

This Court thereafter granted appellant’s Rule 9 request for permission to appeal the trial court’s

ruling.

After hearing oral argument, and upon examination of the record, the Court is of the

Opinion that the Rule 9 application for permission to appeal was improvidently granted and that

the matter should be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

It is therefore ordered that the Rule 9 application is dismissed and the matter is remanded

to the trial court. Costs are taxed to the appellant. It is SO ORDERED this ______ day of January, 1996.

_________________________________ LILLARD, J.

_________________________________ CRAWFORD, P.J.,W.S.

_________________________________ HIGHERS, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Herbert Adams v. Robert Sims and Patricia Sims, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herbert-adams-v-robert-sims-and-patricia-sims-tennctapp-1996.