George Moore, Jr. v. City of Clarksville, TN, M2016-00296-COA-R3-CV

George and Andrea Moore bought a Clarksville home in June 2012; about a year later sewage backed up into the house. Plumbers and Roto-Rooter indicated the problem was off the Moores' property and possibly on the City side.
The property had earlier been sold with disclosures and a loan addendum stating the lot used a private disposal/septic system and was not connected to City sewer.
The disputed sewer line runs across multiple subdivision lots; the damaged portion is not on the Moores' parcel. The Moores allege the City effectively extended its public sewer through that line and thus impliedly contracted to maintain it.
The Moores sued the City (June 4, 2014) seeking (a) an order requiring the City to repair the line and (b) compensatory damages for sewage backup and pumping costs, pleading an implied-in-fact contract and third‑party beneficiary status.
The City moved for summary judgment arguing the claim actually sounds in tort and is barred by the Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA) 12‑month statute; the trial court granted summary judgment, finding the gravamen tortious, accrual June 26, 2013, and service on the City defective, so the GTLA limitations period expired.
The Court of Appeals affirmed: the complaint's factual basis is property damage (tort), the GTLA applies, the claim accrued by June 26, 2013, service was ineffective, and the suit was time‑barred.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Moores stated an enforceable implied‑in‑fact contract (third‑party beneficiary) obligating the City to repair/maintain the line	Moores: City effectively extended public sewer through the line and assumed repair/maintenance obligations; they are intended beneficiaries	City: No contract; line is private and City never assumed responsibility	Held: No enforceable contract—gravamen is property damage/tort, not contract
Whether GTLA applies or the action sounds in contract (affecting statute of limitations)	Moores: Claim is contract-based so GTLA inapplicable	City: Claim sounds in tort; GTLA applies with 12‑month limitations period	Held: Court applies two‑step Benz‑Elliott test and concludes claim sounds in tort; GTLA applies
When the GTLA claim accrued (triggering the 12‑month limit)	Moores: suit timely filed within one year of filing complaint	City: Claim accrued when Moores learned City was allegedly responsible (June 26, 2013)	Held: Accrual no later than June 26, 2013 (Moores do not dispute)
Whether service tolled the GTLA limitations period	Moores: initial filing and service tolled limitations	City: Service on an administrative assistant was ineffective; Rule 4.04(8) requires service on mayor or city attorney; reissuance was untimely	Held: Service defective; Moores failed to reissue process within Rule 3 one‑year window; claim time‑barred

Rye v. Women’s Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235 (Tenn. 2015) (summary judgment / standard of review and nonmoving party evidence requirement)
Dick Broad. Co., Inc. of Tenn. v. Oak Ridge FM, Inc., 395 S.W.3d 653 (Tenn. 2013) (summary judgment review principles)
Abshure v. Methodist Healthcare–Memphis Hosp., 325 S.W.3d 98 (Tenn. 2010) (summary judgment de novo review and evidentiary rules)
Martin v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 271 S.W.3d 76 (Tenn. 2008) (moving party’s burden in summary judgment)
Benz‑Elliott v. Barrett Enters., LP, 456 S.W.3d 140 (Tenn. 2015) (two‑step test to determine gravamen: basis of claim and type of damages)
Vance v. Schulder, 547 S.W.2d 927 (Tenn. 1977) (consideration of claim basis and injuries for gravamen analysis)
Goff v. Elmo Greer & Sons Const. Co., Inc., 297 S.W.3d 175 (Tenn. 2009) (compensatory damages as compensation for personal injury or property damage)
Kirby Farms Homeowners Ass’n v. Citicorp, Citibank, N.A., 773 S.W.2d 249 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989) (alleged contract claims grounded in property damage may sound in tort)
Doe v. Coffee Cty. Bd. of Educ., 852 S.W.2d 899 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992) (accrual rule for GTLA claims—when injured party knew injury and allegedly responsible party)
Hall v. Haynes, 319 S.W.3d 564 (Tenn. 2010) (Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure have force of law)