Smith v. Williams

4 Citing cases

  1. Hudson v. Grunloh

    No. E2013-01434-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2014)

    Because Ms. Grunloh failed to comply with Rule 38.02, we affirm the trial court's denial of a jury trial on the issue of attorney fees. We note that Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 39.02 gives the trial court discretion to grant a jury trial "'even though the moving party had not made a timely demand for a jury as required by Rule 38.'" Marion v. Bowling, 1999 WL 1059670, at * (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 22, 1999) (quoting Smith v. Williams, 575 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1978)). This decision is, of course, discretionary, and in any event, Ms. Grunloh does not raise Rule 39.02 as a vehicle for relief on appeal.

  2. HUNTER v. URA

    No. M2002-02573-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2003)   Cited 1 times
    In Hunter, the Appellee, who was the administratrix of her husband's estate, was awarded eight peremptory challenges by the trial court.

    T.R.C.P. 46 states that "[f]ormal exceptions to rulings or orders of the court are unnecessary." This Court applied Rule 46 in the case of Smith v. Williams, 575 S.W.2d 503 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1978). In Williams, the parties entered an agreed order waiving a jury trial and agreeing that the lawsuit would be tried before the trial court without a jury.

  3. Holt v. Parton

    No. E2000-02695-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2001)   Cited 1 times

    We note that this Court has held that "[t]here is no provision [in Tenn. R. Civ. P.] which permits the trial judge to impanel a jury on his own motion; there must be a demand by a party." Smith v. Williams, 575 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tenn.Ct.App. 1978) (emphasis in original) (reviewing Tenn. R. Civ. P. 38 and 39). Since the dispositive issues on appeal involve only the Trial Court's conclusions of law, our review is de novo review with no presumption of correctness.

  4. Marion v. Bowling

    C/A No. 03A01-9906-CV-00229 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 22, 1999)   Cited 4 times

    Rule 39.02 "places within the discretion of the trial judge, upon motion by a party, the power to grant a jury trial even though the moving party had not made a timely demand for a jury as required by Rule 38." Smithv. Williams, 575 S.W.2d 503, 505 (Tenn.App. 1978) (emphasis added). Bowling never asked the trial court for a jury trial.