Lilly v. Smith

4 Citing cases

  1. Riggs v. Burson

    941 S.W.2d 44 (Tenn. 1997)   Cited 306 times
    Holding that a local ordinance permitting the operation of a heliport within nine miles of a national park boundary did not take precedence over a state statute requiring that heliports within nine miles of a national park boundary be eliminated

    Here, the trial court correctly applied this analysis in the context of the defendant's motion to dismiss under Tenn.R.Civ.P. 12.02(6). In Lilly v. Smith, 790 S.W.2d 539 (Tenn. App. 1990), for example, the plaintiff raised an equal protection challenge to the State's grade policy for admission into state nursing schools. The trial court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss under Rule 12.02(6).

  2. McPHERSON v. SHEA EAR CLINIC

    No. W2004-00690-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May. 18, 2005)   Cited 1 times

    Thus, when a complaint is tested by a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6) motion to dismiss, we must take all the well-pleaded, material factual allegations as true, and we must construe the complaint liberally in the plaintiff's favor. Lewis v. Allen, 698 S.W.2d 58, 59 (Tenn. 1985); Holloway v. Putnam County, 534 S.W.2d at 296, Lilly v. Smith, 790 S.W.2d 539, 540 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1990).Id. at 273-274.

  3. Blake v. Abbot Laboratories

    C.A. No. 03A01-9509-CV-00307 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 27, 1996)   Cited 1 times
    In Blake, the Tennessee Court of Appeals found that the complaint stated a cause of action under the TTPA because the court could not determine from the record whether the allegedly wrongful acts predominately affected interstate commerce.

    Thus, when a complaint is tested by a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6) motion to dismiss, we must take all the well-pleaded, material factual allegations as true, and we must construe the complaint liberally in the plaintiff's favor. Lewis v. Allen, 698 S.W.2d 58, 59 (Tenn. 1985); Holloway v. Putnam County, 534 S.W.2d at 296; Lilly v. Smith, 790 S.W.2d 539, 540 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1990). Dobbs v. Guenther, 846 S.W.2d 270 (Tenn.App. 1992).

  4. Dobbs v. Guenther

    846 S.W.2d 270 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 259 times
    Holding the legal conclusions set forth in a complaint are not required to be taken as true

    Thus, when a complaint is tested by a Tenn.R.Civ.P. 12.02(6) motion to dismiss, we must take all the well-pleaded, material factual allegations as true, and we must construe the complaint liberally in the plaintiff's favor. Lewis v. Allen, 698 S.W.2d 58, 59 (Tenn. 1985); Holloway v. Putnam County, 534 S.W.2d at 296; Lillyv. Smith, 790 S.W.2d 539, 540 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990). We are not required to consider factual inferences or legal conclusions as true. Elliott v. Dollar Gen. Corp., 225 Tenn. 658, 664, 475 S.W.2d 651, 653 (1971).