You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

John Foster v. Larry Glenn

Citation: Not availableDocket: E2001-01435-COA-R3-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Tennessee; January 13, 2002; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

A detainer warrant was filed by John and Mamosa Foster against Larry Glenn in the General Sessions Court, seeking possession of property Glenn occupied under an "AGREEMENT FOR DEED." Glenn countered with a breach of contract claim and won $4,500 in damages in General Sessions. On appeal, the Circuit Court favored the Fosters by upholding the detainer warrant but awarded Glenn $1,005.70 for insurance proceeds related to damage from a truck incident, after deducting hold-over rent. Glenn's appeal claimed errors by the Trial Court, which the Court of Appeals found insufficiently detailed for review. The request to supplement the record was denied as the additional material was not properly part of the Circuit Court trial. The appellate court affirmed the Trial Court's judgment, noting that all parties must adhere to procedural laws, including pro se litigants, and recognized that the Fosters did not pursue the issue of insurance proceeds further. Costs of appeal were assigned to Glenn.

Legal Issues Addressed

Adherence to Procedural Laws by Pro Se Litigants

Application: The Court of Appeals emphasized that all parties, including those representing themselves, must follow procedural laws, and Glenn's appeal was affected by this requirement.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the Trial Court's judgment, noting that all parties must adhere to procedural laws, including pro se litigants.

Appellate Review of Trial Court Decisions

Application: The Court of Appeals dismissed Glenn's claims of trial court errors due to insufficient detail in the appeal, demonstrating the necessity for precise claims to enable review.

Reasoning: Glenn's appeal claimed errors by the Trial Court, which the Court of Appeals found insufficiently detailed for review.

Award and Deduction of Damages

Application: The Circuit Court decision to award Glenn $1,005.70 for insurance proceeds, adjusted for hold-over rent, reflects the court's role in calculating and adjusting awards based on relevant factors.

Reasoning: The Circuit Court favored the Fosters by upholding the detainer warrant but awarded Glenn $1,005.70 for insurance proceeds related to damage from a truck incident, after deducting hold-over rent.

Costs of Appeal Assignment

Application: The appellate court assigned the costs of the appeal to Glenn, highlighting the discretion of the court in determining financial responsibility for appeal costs.

Reasoning: Costs of appeal were assigned to Glenn.

Supplementation of the Record on Appeal

Application: The Court of Appeals denied the request to supplement the record because the additional material was not part of the original Circuit Court trial, illustrating the requirement that appellate records be complete and accurate.

Reasoning: The request to supplement the record was denied as the additional material was not properly part of the Circuit Court trial.