Bobby Murray v. Dennis Miracle
2014 Tenn. App. LEXIS 583
Tenn. Ct. App.2014Background
- Plaintiffs Bobby Murray and Loretta Murray sued Dennis Miracle and Robert Smith over real property in Roane County seeking road improvements; the trial court found Plaintiffs had a right to improve the roadway but disagreed on the nature of the work and appointed a Special Commissioner to supervise it.
- On remand after Murray I, the trial court ordered sanctions for discovery abuses, requiring Plaintiffs to repay $438.82 to Defendants.
- After trial, the February 11, 2013 Final Judgment was entered by the Chancery Court; Plaintiffs appealed.
- The Court in Murray I reversed dismissal but warned about Rule 27 compliance; Plaintiffs’ subsequent brief again failed to meet Rule 27 requirements.
- The Court ultimately deemed the appeal frivolous, awarded damages for frivolous appeal, vacated the 2012 sanctions order, reinstated the 2010 sanctions order, and remanded for reconsideration of sanctions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Frivolous appeal determination | Murray's status and brief deficiencies show merit | Briefs fail to meet Rule 27, indicating frivolity | Appeal deemed frivolous; damages awarded; remanded for sanctions relief determination |
| Sanctions interpretation | Murray I required reversal of the sanctions | Murray I did not address the $438.82 sanction’s propriety | Sept. 25, 2012 order vacated; Sept. 22, 2010 sanctions reinstated; remanded for reconsideration |
Key Cases Cited
- Hart v. First Nat'l Bank, 690 S.W.2d 536 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985) (attorney conduct binding on client; general principle of agency in litigation)
- Young v. Barrow, 130 S.W.3d 59 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003) (pro se litigants entitled to fair treatment but must comply with rules)
- Bean v. Bean, 40 S.W.3d 52 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000) (waiver for failure to cite authorities and record where not argued on appeal)