Jerry Collins D/B/A Westside Equipment Company, Inc. v. Greene County Bank

CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedNovember 1, 1995
Docket03A01-9507-CH-00216
StatusPublished

This text of Jerry Collins D/B/A Westside Equipment Company, Inc. v. Greene County Bank (Jerry Collins D/B/A Westside Equipment Company, Inc. v. Greene County Bank) 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
Jerry Collins D/B/A Westside Equipment Company, Inc. v. Greene County Bank, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON FILED November 1, 1995 J ERRY COLLI NS, d / b/ a W ESTSI DE ) C/ A NO. 03A01- 9507- CH- 0021 6 Cecil Crowson, Jr. EQUI PMENT COM PANY, I NC. , ) Appellate C ourt Clerk ) GREENE CHANCERY Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt , ) ) HON. DENNI S H. I NMAN, v. ) J UDGE ) GREENE COUNTY BANK, ) AFFI RMED I N PART, ) VACATED I N PART, De f e nda nt - Appe l l e e . ) AND REM ANDED

J . RONNI E GREER, Gr e e ne vi l l e , f or Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt .

KENNETH CLARK HOOD, ROGERS, LAUGHLI N, NUNNALLY, HOOD & CRUM, Gr e e ne vi l l e , f or De f e nda nt - Appe l l e e .

O P I N I O N

Fr a nks . J .

I n t hi s di s put e be t we e n pl a i nt i f f bor r owe r a nd

d e f e n d a nt l e nde r , t he Tr i a l Cour t e nt e r e d s umma r y j udgme nt f o r

t h e d e f e nda nt a nd pl a i nt i f f ha s a ppe a l e d.

Pl a i nt i f f Col l i ns be ga n ope r a t i ng W s t Si de Tr a c t or e

Co mp a n y, I nc . ( WST) f or i t s owne r , Ke nne t h M l one i n 1986. a

Pl a i n t i f f a nd M l one a gr e e d t ha t Pl a i nt i f f woul d be c ome t he a

o wn e r of W i n e xc ha nge f or pa yi ng t he c ompa ny' s de bt s . ST Pl a i n t i f f s i mul t a ne ous l y owne d a nd r a n W s t Si de Equi pme nt e

Co mp a n y ( W , a us e d e q ui pme nt t r a di ng bus i ne s s . SE) The

b u s i n e s s a r r a nge me nt be t we e n Pl a i nt i f f a nd M l one c ont i nue d a

u n t i l 1992, whe n W be c a me de l i nque nt wi t h i t s de a l e r s a nd ST

s u p p l i e r s a nd c l os e d.

I n 1990, Pl a i nt i f f pl e dge d hi s home a nd f a r m a s

c o l l a t e r a l f or a $125, 000 l oa n f or W f r om de f e nda nt Gr e e ne ST

Co u n t y Ba nk. Ul t i ma t e l y , de f e nda nt f or e c l os e d on t he pr ope r t y

a n d p l a i nt i f f ' s e f f or t s t o pr e ve nt t he f or e c l os ur e t hr ough

l i t i g a t i on f a i l e d.

Pl a i nt i f f t he n f i l e d t hi s a c t i on a l l e gi ng t ha t

i l l e g a l hol ds ha d be e n pl a c e d on hi s c he c ki ng a c c ount , t ha t

o r a l r e pr e s e nt a t i ons r e ga r di ng t he c r os s - c ol l a t e r a l i z a t i on

c l a u s e i n t he de e d of t r us t c ons t i t ut e d f r a udul e nt i nduc e me n t

t o e n t e r a c ont r a c t , a nd t ha t s t a t e me nt s by ba nk of f i c i a l s

c o n s t i t ut e d t or t i ous i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h t he bus i ne s s

r e l a t i ons hi p be t we e n pl a i nt i f f a nd M l one . a

The Tr i a l Cour t gr a nt e d s umma r y j udgme nt on a l l

i s s ue s . Af t e r gi vi ng Appe l l a nt a n a ddi t i ona l t wo we e ks t o

f i l e n ot i c e s of hol ds t ha t ha d be e n pl a c e d on hi s a c c ount , t h e

Co u r t f ound t ha t none of t he hol ds pr oduc e d we r e wi t hi n t he

r e g u l a t i on' s one ye a r l i mi t a t i ons pe r i od. The Cour t a l s o

c on c l u de d t ha t r e s j udi c a t a a nd c ol l a t e r a l e s t oppe l ba r r e d t h e

c l a i m of f r a udul e nt i ndu c e me nt t o e nt e r a c ont r a c t . Fur t he r ,

t h e c o ur t de t e r mi ne d t ha t t he bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons hi p a l l e ge d l y

i n t e r f e r e d wi t h wa s pr os pe c t i ve i n na t ur e a nd t hi s

j u r i s d i c t i on doe s not r e c ogni z e a c a us e of a c t i on f or

p r o s p e c t i ve i nt e r f e r e nc e .

Pl a i nt i f f c l a i ms t ha t Gr e e ne Count y Ba nk vi ol a t e d 1 2

2 C. F. R. 2 29 1 e t . s e q. ( c o mmonl y known a s Re gul a t i on CC) by

p l a c i n g i mpr ope r hol ds o n hi s c he c ki ng a c c ount s . The s t a t u t e

o f l i mi t a t i ons f or Re gul a t i on CC pr ovi de s t ha t a c t i ons mus t b e

b r o u g h t " wi t hi n one ye a r a f t e r t he da t e of t he oc c ur r e nc e of

t h e v i ol a t i on i nvol ve d. " 12 C. F. R. 229. 21 ( 1992) . At t he

h e a r i n g on t he mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt a nd a f t e r be i ng

g i v e n a n a ddi t i ona l t wo we e ks , pl a i nt i f f c oul d not pr oduc e a n y

h o l d not i c e s da t e d wi t hi n one ye a r of t he f i l i ng of t he s ui t .

Pl a i nt i f f a r gue s t ha t t he hol ds r e pr e s e nt e d a

c o n t i n ui ng oc c ur r e nc e a nd t he s t a t ut e of l i mi t a t i ons be ga n t o

r u n , f or a l l vi ol a t i ons , f r om t he da t e of t he l a s t hol d. Th i s

a r g u me nt i s wi t hout me r i t . The l a s t hol d not i c e i s da t e d mo r e

t h a n o ne ye a r f r om t he f i l i ng of t he s ui t a nd i s i t s e l f

o u t s i de t he l i mi t a t i ons pe r i od, a nd whi l e a " c ont i nui ng

v i o l a t i on" t he or y ha s be e n us e d t o pr e ve nt t he s t a t ut e of

l i mi t a t i ons f r om b a r r i ng e mpl oyme nt di s c r i m na t i on, s e e , e . g . , i

Ha v e n s Re al t y Cor p. v . Col e man, 455 U. S. 363, 71 L. Ed. 2d 21 4 ,

1 0 2 S. Ct . 1114 ( 1982) , t he c a s e s c i t e d by pl a i nt i f f f a i l t o

p r o v i de a ny r a t i ona l e f or a ppl i c a t i on of t he t he or y t o t he s e

c i r c u ms t a nc e s . Pl a i nt i f f r e c e i ve d wr i t t e n not i c e s i nf or mi ng

h i m o f e a c h a l l e ge d vi ol a t i on. The r e wa s no c onc e a l me nt of

h i s r i ght s or l a c k of oppor t uni t y t o pur s ue t he s e c l a i ms a s

s o o n a s t he y a r os e a nd we f i nd no r e a s on why t he s t a t ut e of

l i mi t a t i ons s houl d n ot ba r t hi s c l a i m.

Pl a i nt i f f a s k e d t he Tr i a l Cour t t o a l t e r or a me nd

t h e s u mma r y j udgme nt on t he ba s i s of hi s di s c ove r y of a not i c e

1 1 2 C. F . R. 2 2 9 . 2 1 i s e n t i t l e d " Av a i l a b i l i t y o f F u n d s a n d Co l l e c t i o n o f Ch e c k s " a n d g o v e r n s t h e p r o c e d u r e s wh i c h b a n k s mu s t f o l l o w i n ma k i n g d e p o s i t s a v a i l a b l e t o c u s t o me r s .

3 o f a hol d on hi s ba nk a c c ount t ha t ha d oc c ur r e d wi t hi n t he o n e

y e a r s t a t ut e o f l i mi t a t i ons pe r i od, a nd a l l e ge d a l t e r a t i ons 2

o f a b a nk doc ume nt . The mot i on wa s de ni e d.

W t he r t o gr a nt a ne w t r i a l ba s e d on ne wl y he

d i s c o v e r e d e vi de nc e i s di s c r e t i ona r y wi t h t he t r i a l j udge .

S e a y v . Ci t y o f Knox v i l l e , 654 S. W 2d 397 ( Te nn. App. 1983) . .

Th e mo vi ng pa r t y mus t de mons t r a t e t ha t t he ne w e vi de nc e wa s

n o t k nown pr i or t o or du r i ng t r i a l a nd t ha t i t c oul d not ha v e

b e e n a s c e r t a i ne d b y t he e xe r c i s e of r e a s ona bl e di l i ge nc e .

Al s o t o be c ons i de r e d by t he Tr i a l J udge i s whe t he r a ne w

t r i a l ba s e d on s uc h e vi de nc e woul d c ha nge t he r e s ul t . Le e pe r

v . Co o k , 688 S. W 2d 94 ( Te nn. App. 1985) . .

Pl a i nt i f f f ou nd t he hol d s l i ps by s e a r c hi ng t hr ou g h

h i s r e c or ds a nd t he ba nk doc ume nt , a l l e ge dl y a l t e r e d, wa s

t u r n e d ove r t o pl a i nt i f f dur i ng di s c ove r y. Ac c or di ngl y,

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

Related

Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe
455 U.S. 130 (Supreme Court, 1982)
Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman
455 U.S. 363 (Supreme Court, 1982)
Seay v. City of Knoxville
654 S.W.2d 397 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1983)
McKinney v. Widner
746 S.W.2d 699 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1987)
Lee v. Hall
790 S.W.2d 293 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1990)
Mefford v. City of Dupontonia
354 S.W.2d 823 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1961)
Byrd v. Hall
847 S.W.2d 208 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1993)
Scales v. Scales
564 S.W.2d 667 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1977)
Leeper v. Cook
688 S.W.2d 94 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1985)
Gifford v. City of Gatlinburg
900 S.W.2d 293 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jerry Collins D/B/A Westside Equipment Company, Inc. v. Greene County Bank, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerry-collins-dba-westside-equipment-company-inc-v-tennctapp-1995.