- Search with
- Parallel SearchEnter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
- or
- Keyword SearchEnter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
- ANDfraud AND damagesBoth terms in document
- ORcar OR automobileEither term in document
- NOTinfringement NOT patentTerm must not appear in document
- """due diligence"Exact match
- ()appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)Grouping terms
- *withdr*wSingle letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
- !infring!Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
- /ninvestor /5 diligenceTerms within n words of each other
- /sfees /s reasonableTerms within same sentence
- /padmissible /p warrantTerms within the same paragraph
State ex rel. Moncier v. Jones
No. M2012-01429-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 6, 2013)3 Citing cases
Odom v. Claiborne Cnty.
498 S.W.3d 882 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016) Cited 12 timesUpholding a trial court's determination that there is no implied cause of action for violations of the Tennessee Constitution
Tennessee courts have continuously determined that Tenn. Const. [a]rt. I, § 17 does not create a substantive right, only a “mechanism by which a citizen may redress grievances.” State ex rel. Moncier [v. Jones ], [No. M2012–01429–COA–R3–CV], 2013 WL 2492648, [at] *6 (Tenn.Ct.App. [Nov. 13,] 2013) ; seeStaples v. Brown , [113 Tenn. 639,] 85 S.W. 254 (Tenn.1905). In State ex rel. Moncier, the Court specifically declined to hold that Article [I], Section 17 creates a substantive cause of action to enforce other constitutional provisions or laws.
Dellinger v. State
No. E2013-02094-CCA-R3-ECN (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 18, 2015) Cited 10 timesStaples v. Brown, 85 S.W. 254, 255 (Tenn. 1905); see State ex rel. Herbert S. Moncier v. Nancy S. Jones, No. M2012-01429-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL 2492648, at *6 (Tenn. App. June 6, 2013), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Nov. 13, 2013).
State ex rel. Moncier v. Jones
No. M2012-00778-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 6, 2013) Cited 3 timesThis court heard oral arguments in three related cases involving Mr. Moncier's suspension. One is Herbert S. Moncier v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility, No. M2012-00779-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL ___ (June ___, 2013); the other is State ex rel. Herbert S. Moncier, et al., v. Nancy S. Jones, et al., No. M2012-01429-COA-R3-CV, 2013 WL __ (June_, 2013). In the complaint filed on July 20, 2011, Mr. Moncier challenged the disciplinary proceedings and sought to enjoin his suspension.