Tennessee Business Litigation Lawyers Blog

Boundary Disputes And Tennessee Law

Published on: July 26, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

In Tennessee, adjoining landowners sometimes end up in court in boundary disputes. There are various reasons that boundary line disputes arise, including: imprecise descriptions in deeds; conflicts between descriptions in recorded plats and deeds to owners of subdivision lots; fences that have been in place for years, but that are not consistent with deed descriptions; and deed overlaps (where, for example, there is not enough land to satisfy the deed descriptions for two adjoining parcels which were once part of the same tract).

Even if a Tennessee court might otherwise resolve a boundary dispute in favor of Landowner A, instead of Landowner B, based strictly on deed descriptions and/or the testimony of a surveyor, Landowner B might still be declared the lawful owner of the disputed land. Why? In Tennessee, if adjoining landowners agree, even verbally, on a boundary line, the agreed boundary line may well become the legally accepted boundary line. Keep in mind that an agreement in this context requires some sort of communication and assent. It is typically not enough for one of the landowners to say simply that the other did not object to a fence, wall, or other boundary marker.

In addition to an agreement between adjoining landowners as to a boundary line, disputed property might be held to be the property of one of the landowners (let’s say Landowner B) based on the doctrine of adverse possession. This might be the case even if the court determines that the relevant deeds establish that the property would otherwise belong to Landowner A.

Easements: Some Basic Tennessee Law

Published on: July 19, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

In Tennessee, easement rights are a fairly frequent source of conflict and disagreement. What is an easement? How does someone obtain easement rights? How does an easement affect the person upon whose land the easement is located?

Generally speaking, an easement is a right to use a part of the land owned by someone else. In Tennessee, there are many easements that give easement holders the right to use part of the lands owned by others to access other lands, frequently, lands owned by the easement holders. Some easements confer rights other than just the rights to go across someone else’s land. There are a multitude of easements in Tennessee that allow one landowner to use land owned by someone else to lay pipe, utility lines, or connect to a sewer.

Easement rights are often created by written documents. Sometimes, such documents are titled “Easement” or “Grant of Easement,” but a valid, enforceable easement can be created without specifically being referred to as an “easement.” For example, an easement can be created by a document that describes a “right to access,” “right of way,” or “right to ingress and egress.”

Employer Prevails In Breach Of Contract Case For Failure To Pay Bonus

Published on: July 7, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

Every contract in Tennessee has an implied duty of good faith which applies to both parties to the contract. A recent case from the Tennessee Court of Appeals illustrates well the point that the implied duty of good faith will not override an unambiguous, express contract term. Here are the pertinent facts of that case:

• The Plaintiff in the case was a doctor

• The Plaintiff was an employee of a pain management clinic with offices in Hermitage, Tennessee and Brentwood, Tennessee

The Effects Of Tennessee Licensing Laws On Contractors And Subcontractors

Published on: June 28, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

In Tennessee, if you are doing construction work for $25,000.00 or more, and you fall under the definition of “contractor,” you must have a contractor’s license. If you don’t, you could “lose your shirt.” Generally speaking, if you are a subcontractor, even if your contract is for more than $25,000.00 worth of work, you do not have to be licensed by the State of Tennessee. In a breach of contract case between a project owner and a contractor, the fact that the contractor was not licensed may result in a substantial windfall to the project owner.

Who must be licensed by Tennessee as a contractor? What construction trades that are typically considered “subcontractors” have to be licensed? What are the consequences of someone without a license engaging in contracting work which requires a license? The first place to look to answer these questions is Tennessee Code Annotated (“T.C.A.”) §62-6-102 which defines a “contractor.”

To say the least, the definition of “contractor” in Tennessee is expansive. Even if someone engages in work that would make them a “contractor” under Tennessee law, so long as the total cost of the work does not equal or exceed $25,000.00, they do not need to have a license (for “masonry contractors” that threshold jumps to $100,000.00). Most subcontractors are not bound by the licensing requirements that apply to general contractors, but there are exceptions.

Will Contests And Undue Influence In Tennessee

Published on: June 22, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

Fairly frequently, we receive calls from people inquiring about their chances of having a will invalidated. Often, those persons believe that a will contest is in order because another relative, or person close to the deceased, unfairly influenced the terms of the will.

A recent Tennessee case, which was decided by the Tennessee Court of Appeals, is an informative read for anyone interested in educating himself or herself about the basics of Tennessee law regarding will contests and undue influence. Keep in mind that, if you are looking for guidance about your possible will contest case, you should not count on finding a definite answer as to the outcome of your specific case. In Tennessee, each will contest case involving a challenge to a will on the grounds of undue influence will be decided on its own unique facts.

In the recent case mentioned above, the trial court’s decision that a will should be invalidated on the grounds of undue influence was affirmed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals. Here are the basic facts of the case:

Trust Agreements Mean What They Say In Tennessee

Published on: June 16, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

A Tennessee case involving a father who, by all indications, intended that each of his three children share equally in his assets, illustrates the importance of paying careful attention to the specific language in a trust agreement. Here are the facts:

• The father (“Father”) executed a living trust (“Trust”) in 1996.

• The Trust provided that the Father’s daughter, Judith, would have her share of the distributed Trust assets reduced by $247,800 on account of advances Father had made Judith over the years

Homeowners’ Association Issues In Tennessee: The Case Of The Stinking Unit

Published on: June 10, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

A recent Tennessee case involving a Nashville condominium and its homeowners’ association (also referred to herein as a “condominium association”) may not be very instructive legally, but it is bizarre enough to make an interesting blog post. Stacy Harris lived at the Windsor Tower Condominiums, a high-rise condo building on Harding Road in Nashville. Like all condominium residents, Ms. Harris was subject to terms in the master deed for the condominium as well as to the bylaws and rules and regulations of the condominium association.

The bylaws and rules and regulations in question forbid the owners of the individual units from carrying on any “unlawful noxious or offensive activities” or doing anything that amounted to a nuisance or “disturbance to others.” The bylaws stated that trash and garbage should be kept only in sanitary conditions, and should be “disposed of in a clean and sanitary manner.” Residents were also prohibited from causing an “unreasonable disturbance to others.” All of the foregoing are typical condominium association rules.

The property manager for the Windsor Tower began to receive complaints about noxious and offensive odors in the building. Eventually, it was determined that the odors were emanating from Ms. Harris’ unit. After a visit inside Ms. Harris’ unit, it was determined that there were “major sanitation issues” inside of her unit. The property manager reported that the smell inside Ms. Harris’ unit was so terrible that it made her eyes water and she had to fight her gag reflex.

Breach Of Contract Damages In Tennessee

Published on: June 7, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

Assuming that one party proves that the other party has breached a valid and enforceable contract, what amount of money can the non-breaching party recover from the breaching party? When explaining how a Tennessee court will approach the question of what amount of money to award someone for a breach of contract, I think that it is helpful to think of two broad categories of damages under Tennessee law that come into play when a contract has been breached.

What are those categories? The first is the category of expectation damages. The second is the category of reliance damages. An astute client, who has lost money because of a breach of contract, might ask the following questions (all of which I will attempt to answer):

• What damages are expectation damages and what damages are reliance damages?

Intentional Interference With Contract In Tennessee (Part Two)

Published on: June 2, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

In order to prove an intentional interference with contract claim in Tennessee, a plaintiff must prove the following elements:

1. That there was a legal contract;

2. The defendant knew of the contract;

Intentional Interference With Contract In Tennessee (Part One)

Published on: May 25, 2011 | by J. Ross Pepper

One of a number of “business torts,” as they are called, which is recognized in Tennessee is the tort of intentional interference with contract. That tort is sometimes also referred to as “procurement of breach of contract” or “tortious interference with contract.” There is a Tennessee statute which makes procurement of breach of contract a tort. Businesses need to be aware of this tort, particularly since a party who commits it is liable for three times the actual damages suffered by the injured party.

In our practice, this cause of action seems to arise often in employment matters. For example, we handled a case where an employee, who was not bound by any non-compete agreement, left one employer and went to work for a competitor. Working for a competitor, when there is not a non-competition agreement in effect is, standing alone, not a problem. The legal problem in the case we handled arose because, after the employee started with the competitor of his former employer, a valuable customer of the former employer began doing business with the new employer.

Intentional interference claims also arise frequently when an employee who is bound by a non-compete agreement resigns or is terminated, and then goes to work for a competitor. Such a situation can create a liability problem, not only for the employee, but also, for the employer who hired the employer if that employer was aware of the non-competition agreement.

For a Consultation(615) 256-4838

Name (Required)Email (Required)Phone (Required)Message I accept the terms and conditions. Terms and Conditions: You are sending a form to an email address of Pepper Law, PLC. Before accepting any representation, Pepper Law's professional obligations require that it determine whether there are any actual or potential conflicts with any current or former clients of the Firm. In addition, we do not accept any representation solely as a result of having been contacted via email. By sending this form, you acknowledge that you will not become a client of Pepper Law, PLC merely by sending this email or by the Firm's receipt of it. Any information you send to this Firm before an attorney-client relationship is acknowledged by the Firm and a representation agreement is signed will not be considered confidential or protected by the attorney-client relationship. Do not send any information in this email that is, or that you wish to be treated as, confidential.