John Gunn v. Jefferson County Economic Development Oversight Committee, Inc.
578 S.W.3d 462
| Tenn. Ct. App. | 2019Background
- In 2013, Jefferson County residents (Gunn et al.) sued the Jefferson County Economic Development Oversight Committee (EDOC) alleging violations of the Open Meetings Act and Public Records Act and seeking declaratory relief, injunction, and attorney’s fees.
- After a bench trial the trial court held EDOC was not subject to those statutes; this Court reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
- On remand Plaintiffs moved for a permanent injunction, attorney’s fees, and discretionary costs; the trial court entered an order on June 5, 2018 denying injunction and fees but directing counsel to submit affidavits for discretionary costs.
- The court entered a separate order on July 16, 2018 fixing the amount of discretionary costs; Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on July 23, 2018.
- The Court of Appeals raised jurisdictional timing sua sponte and considered whether the appeal period ran from June 5 (substantive rulings) or July 16 (costs fixed).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the June 5, 2018 order was final for appeal purposes | The June 5 order was not final because a motion for discretionary costs remained pending | The June 5 order was final because only the amount of discretionary costs remained | June 5, 2018 order was final; time to appeal ran from that date |
| Whether a motion for discretionary costs tolls the 30-day appeal period | A discretionary-costs motion filed before final judgment prevents finality | A discretionary-costs motion is ancillary and does not toll the appeal clock | Motion for discretionary costs does not toll Rule 4 time period regardless of timing |
| Whether the notice of appeal filed July 23, 2018 was timely | The July 16 costs order triggered the appeal period, so appeal was timely | The appeal period began June 5, making the July 23 notice untimely | Notice of appeal was untimely and court lacks jurisdiction |
| Whether appellate jurisdiction can be retained despite unresolved discretionary costs | Plaintiffs argued unresolved costs precluded finality | Court relied on precedent treating discretionary costs as collateral | Unresolved discretionary-costs matters do not defeat finality for Rule 3(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- Albert v. Frye, 145 S.W.3d 526 (Tenn. 2004) (Rule 4’s 30-day appeal period is mandatory and jurisdictional)
- Binkley v. Medling, 117 S.W.3d 252 (Tenn. 2003) (same principle on appeal timing)
- Ball v. McDowell, 288 S.W.3d 833 (Tenn. 2009) (date of entry of final judgment triggers appeal period)
- Richardson v. Tennessee Board of Dentistry, 913 S.W.2d 446 (Tenn. 1995) (final judgment decides whole merits and leaves nothing for further court determination)
- Evans v. Wilson, 776 S.W.2d 939 (Tenn. 1989) (motions listed in Rule 4(b) can affect finality; non-listed motions do not)
- Payne v. Tipton County, 448 S.W.3d 891 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014) (post-judgment motion for discretionary costs does not arrest finality)
- Born Again Church & Christian Outreach Ministries, Inc. v. Myler Church Bldg. Sys. of the Midsouth, Inc., 266 S.W.3d 421 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007) (motions for discretionary costs are ancillary to merits)
- Mengle Box Co. v. Lauderdale County, 230 S.W. 963 (Tenn. 1921) (assessment of costs alone does not prevent a decree from being final)
Decision: Appeal dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; costs taxed to Plaintiffs.