From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Breakstone v. Home Federal Sav. L. Ass'n

Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Western Section
Jul 26, 1976
539 S.W.2d 45 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1976)

Summary

noting "the inconvenience and costs of piecemeal review"

Summary of this case from Harris v. Chern

Opinion

March 26, 1976. Certiorari Denied by Supreme Court July 26, 1976.

Appealed from order of the Chancery Court, Shelby County, Robert A. Hoffmann, Chancellor.

Appeal rejected and remanded.

John C. Robertson, Memphis, for appellants-appellees.

John R. Dunlap, T.F. Jackson, III, Memphis, for appellee-appellant.


The Chancellor granted a discretionary appeal pursuant to T.C.A. § 27-305 from an interlocutory order overruling defendant's motion for summary judgment. Both sides to the controversy have appealed. The defendant claims error in the Chancellor overruling the motion. The plaintiffs say the Chancellor reached the correct results, but on faulty reasoning.

As is within our discretion we decline to accept this appeal. See T.C.A. § 27-305; Tennessee Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, et al v. Lowell Paul Hughes, Tenn., 531 S.W.2d 299, Supreme Court Opinion filed at Nashville on December 30, 1975, marked "For Publication."

In Ratliff v. Hinman, et al filed in this Court on February 16, 1976, we stated:

"____ In the exercise of our discretion in accepting or rejecting an appeal under T.C.A. § 27-305, we are mindful that the true issues are the inconvenience and costs of piecemeal review on the one hand and the danger of denying justice on the other. Where the ruling of the trial judge is that the parties go to trial because of the existence of a genuine issue as to material facts, the danger of denying justice is removed. Only under the most extraordinary and compelling circumstances could we hold that the possible reduction in time and expense of trial would justify a review of that decision. The present lawsuit does not present those extraordinary circumstances, and we will not accept this appeal."

As found in Ratliff, supra, we also here find that "The present lawsuit does not present those extraordinary circumstances, and we will not accept this appeal."

The cause is remanded to the Chancery Court of Shelby County, Tennessee for further proceedings. Costs of appeal are adjudged equally against the parties and costs below will await the outcome of the trial.

CARNEY, P.J., and MATHERNE, J., concur.


Summaries of

Breakstone v. Home Federal Sav. L. Ass'n

Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Western Section
Jul 26, 1976
539 S.W.2d 45 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1976)

noting "the inconvenience and costs of piecemeal review"

Summary of this case from Harris v. Chern

In Breakstone v. Home Federal Savings and Loan Association, 539 S.W.2d 45 (Tenn. App. 1976), the chancellor had overruled the defendant's motion for summary judgment and granted a discretionary appeal pursuant to T.C.A. 27-305.

Summary of this case from Willett v. Ford
Case details for

Breakstone v. Home Federal Sav. L. Ass'n

Case Details

Full title:Richard C. BREAKSTONE and wife, Dorothy Breakstone, Appellants-Appellees…

Court:Court of Appeals of Tennessee. Western Section

Date published: Jul 26, 1976

Citations

539 S.W.2d 45 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1976)

Citing Cases

Willett v. Ford

We do not believe that the proper exercise of our discretion compels us to consider this appeal. In…

Harris v. Chern

Our decision today should not be read as encouraging trial courts to certify interlocutory judgments as final…