338 S.W.3d 540
Tenn. Ct. App.2010Background
- Baileys sued by Roberts for boundary dispute; Baileys filed third-party complaint to quiet title against Littletons and Dutton; trial court denied partial summary judgment and certified final, Baileys appeal; 1918 deed conveyed ~100 acres to Nubert and Pearl Bailey during hiatus years; issue whether they held as tenants in common or by entirety; emancipation statute in 1914-1919 abrogated coverture disability and purportedly the entirety estate; Gill v. McKinney held tenancy by entirety abolished by emancipation; 1919 statute reestablished tenancy by the entirety; Robinson v. Trousdale Cty. criticized these doctrines but did not address gap-period title; court affirmed trial court, holding Gill remains controlling and title held as tenants in common; no summary judgment for quiet title to Littletons
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nubert and Pearl Bailey held property as tenants in common | Baileys argue Gill overruled | Gill still controls; hiatus invalidates tenancy by entirety | No summary judgment for quiet title; Gill controls |
Key Cases Cited
- Gill v. McKinney, 140 Tenn. 549 (1918) (emancipation abolished tenancy by entirety)
- Moore v. Cole, 200 Tenn. 43 (1956) (affirmed Gill remains controlling)
- Robinson v. Trousdale Cty., 516 S.W.2d 626 (1974) (disfavored coverture doctrine; did not address gap-period title to tenancy by entirety)
- Hicks v. Sprankle, 149 Tenn. 310 (1924) (discussed hiatus period between emancipations)