Woodridge Properties v. Franco-Ward

• Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: January 27, 2000
• Docket: M1999-00458-COA-R3-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE FILED WO ODR IDGE PRO PER TIES , L.L.P., ) ) January 27, 2000 Plaintiff/Appellee, ) ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. Montg omery C ircuit Appellate Court Clerk VS. ) No. C10-324 ) JAMES FRA NCO-WA RD and ) Appeal No. JANE A. FRANCO-WARD, ) M1999-00458-COA-R3-CV ) Defendants/Appellants. )

ORDER

This appeal involves an attempt by a Woodridge Properties, L .L.P. (“W oodridge ”) to gain possession of real prop erty purcha sed at a foreclosure sale. The mortg agors, James C. Franco-Ward and Jane A. Fra nco-Ward defaulted on a prom issory note secured by the real property and, after proper notice, a foreclosure sale was held. The mortgagee purchased the property at the foreclosure sale, and subsequently transferred it to Woodridge. When the Franco-Wards refused to move out, Woodridge brought this action in the General Sessions Court of Montgomery County. The general sessions court ordered that Woodridge be put in possession of the property. On the Franco-Wards’ appeal to the Montgomery County Circuit Court, the jury retu rned a verd ict that Wo odridge is e ntitled to posse ssion of the property, and the trial judge entered a final judgment to that effect. The Franco-Wards appea l.

Our review of the record indicates that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed in accordance w ith Tenn. Ct. App. R . 10(a),1 and we remand the case to the trial court for whate ver further p roceeding s may b e required. W e also tax the costs of this appeal to James C. Franco-W ard and Jane A . Franco-Ward for which execution , if necessary, may issue.

_____________________________ BEN H. CANTRELL, PRE SIDIN G JU DGE , M.S.

_____________________________

1 Tenn. Ct. App. R. 10(a) reads as follows: Affirmance Without Opinion. The Court, with the concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may affirm the action of the trial court by order without rendering a formal opinion when an opinion would have no precedential value and one or more of the following circumstances exist and are dispositive of the appeal:

(1) the Court concurs in the facts as found or as found by necessary implication by the trial court.

(2) there is material evidence to support the verdict of the jury. (3) no reversible error of law appears. Such cases may be affirmed as follows: "Affirmed in accordance with Court of Appeals Rule 10(a)." WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE

_____________________________ WILLIAM B. CAIN, JUDGE

-2-