From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bank of Greenwood v. Bank of Clarksville

Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville. December Term, 1928
Jan 11, 1929
12 S.W.2d 528 (Tenn. 1929)

Opinion

Opinion filed January 11, 1929.

1. SUPREME COURT. Court of Appeals. Jurisdiction.

Where the pleadings in a cause disclose that it must be finally determined upon issues of fact, the appellate jurisdiction is in the Court of Appeals. (Post, p. 51.)

2. SUPREME COURT. Court of Appeals. Jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to review action of Court of Appeals can only be exercised by writ of certiorari after final decree of that Court. The Supreme Court is without power to review the interlocutory decrees of the Court of Appeals. Such was the ruling with reference to the Court of Civil Appeals, and the reasoning applies with equal force to the Court of Appeals. (Post, p. 51.)

Citing: Chapter 100 of the Acts of 1925, Sec. 14; Chapter 82, Acts of 1907, Sec. 8; Walker v. Lemma, 129 Tenn. 444; Sharp v. Rose, 130 Tenn. 228; Burns v. City of Nashville, 132 Tenn. (5 Thomp.), 429; State ex rel. v. Alexander, 132 Tenn. (5 Thomp.), 439.

Differentiating: Cockrill v. Peoples Savings Bank, 155 Tenn. (2 Smith), 342.

3. COURT OF APPEALS. Jurisdiction.

In a case of which the Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction, the denial by a member of that Court of certiorari and supersedeas upon application made, may be disregarded as ill-advised and without effect. (Post, p. 52.)

See Cockrill v. Peoples Savings Bank, 155 Tenn. 342.

FROM SHELBY.

Appeal from the Chancery Court of Shelby County. — HON. M.C. KETCHUM, Chancellor.

FITZHUGH FITZHUGH and S.L. GWINN, for appellant.

CHANDLER, SHEPHERD, OWEN WILLIAMS, for appellee.


This is an application for certiorari and supersedeas directed to an order of the Court of Appeals discharging a supersedeas issued by a member of that court which was directed to an order of the Chancery Court of Shelby County dissolving an injunction issued in favor of the complainant herein.

It is obvious from an inspection of the pleadings that this cause must be finally determined upon issues of fact. Appellate jurisdiction thereof is accordingly in the Court of Appeals. State of Georgia v. City of Chattanooga, 153 Tenn. 349.

Section 14 of chapter 100 of the Acts of 1925, which Act created the Court of Appeals, and section 8 of chapter 82 of the Acts of 1907, which Act created the Court of Civil Appeals, alike provide that this court can reach a case properly brought to the intermediate court only by the writ of certiorari and only then after final decree of that court. This court is without power to review the interlocutory orders of the other court in cases construing the Court of Civil Appeals Act and the reasoning of these decisions applies with equal force to the Court of Appeals Act. Walker v. Lemma, 129 Tenn. 444; Sharp v. Rose, 130 Tenn. 228; Burns v. City of Nashville, 132 Tenn. 429; State ex rel. v. Alexander, 132 Tenn. 439. Cockrill v. Peoples Savings Bank, 155 Tenn. 342, is not in point. That was a case of which this court had immediate appellate jurisdiction (no issue of fact being involved) and the writ of certiorari issued directly to the chancery court.

We were careful to point out, page 346, that the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction and that the application to a member of that court for certiorari and supersedeas, which was denied, might "be disregarded as ill-advised and without effect."

For the reasons stated, the petition for the writs of certiorari and supersedeas must be denied.


Summaries of

Bank of Greenwood v. Bank of Clarksville

Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville. December Term, 1928
Jan 11, 1929
12 S.W.2d 528 (Tenn. 1929)
Case details for

Bank of Greenwood v. Bank of Clarksville

Case Details

Full title:FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GREENWOOD, MISS., v. PLANTERS NATIONAL BANK OF…

Court:Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville. December Term, 1928

Date published: Jan 11, 1929

Citations

12 S.W.2d 528 (Tenn. 1929)
12 S.W.2d 528

Citing Cases

Cole v. State

" This arrangement, which is most salutary in that it avoids a piecemeal trial of every issue through all of…