December 21–December 27, 2024

  • Plaintiff seeks a declaration that provisions of her settlement agreement with Fellowship Bible Church of Williamson County that have the purpose or effect of concealing the details relating to a claim of child sexual abuse are unenforceable under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-34-103, which provides that: “Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, any provision of a settlement agreement that has the purpose or effect of concealing the details relating to a claim of child sexual abuse . . . is void and unenforceable as contrary to the public policy of this state[.]”  Afterward, despite a veritable %*$#ton of authority instructing trial courts not to do this, one the most statistically reversed trial court judges in Tennessee (who also has an unusual history of bizarre errors in child sex abuse cases) dismisses Plaintiff’s declaratory judgment action for failure to state a claim.  Tennessee Court of Appeals, just nineteen days after argument: “The trial court erred in granting the motion to dismiss because there was an actual controversy. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s decision that no controversy existed,” vacate the rest of its merits ruling, and remand.  [This is a Horwitz Law, PLLC case.]
  • Nightmare (and unlicensed) contractor convinces Plaintiffs to let him build them a custom home; afterward, he does crappy work and then walks off the job.  After trial, the trial court rules in favor of the Plaintiffs under multiple theories.  Contractor appeals.  Tennessee Court of Appeals, in a tidy 12-page opinion that should count for CLE: Based on a bunch of breach of contract, constructive fraud, damages, and waiver principles, most of the trial court’s judgment—but not its duplicative constructive fraud ruling and part of its damages award—must be affirmed.
  • Grandmother petitions for visitation under Tennessee’s Grandparent Visitation Statute (editorial note: which shouldn’t exist) and wins.  Mother, who doesn’t want Grandmother visiting her child, appeals.  Tennessee Court of Appeals: The “proof presented does not establish a likelihood of severe emotional harm to the Child. . . . [T]he court appeared to make a judgment that a child of divorce would benefit from a large circle of family members.  That may be true, but it cannot substitute for the need to show a harm to the child, which ‘is the sole protection that parents have against pervasive state interference in the parenting process.’”  So we reverse.
  • Testator establishes a generation-skipping trust that provides for a per-stirpes distribution.  After Testator’s child dies, conflict ensues over whether the trust’s proceeds go to the Testator’s grandchildren only or both Testator’s grandchildren and great-grandchildren.  Tennessee Court of Appeals: For probate law reasons that your summarist barely understands, the money goes only to the grandchildren.  And for several reasons—including that the Appellees withdrew their request for attorney’s fees below, didn’t obtain a necessary finding to support attorney’s fees below, and fail to develop their argument for attorney’s fees on appeal—no attorney’s fees are due here, either.
  • “This appeal arises from a complaint . . . entitled ‘Petition for Criminal Conspiracy to Petition David Margulies for Representations.’”  Tennessee Court of Appeals: And with the benefit of that sentence alone, if you guessed that the pro se appellant involved in this case would see his appeal dismissed for major briefing deficiencies, you guessed correctly.  And his appeal is deemed frivolous, so he gets to pay ReMax’s attorney’s fees, too.

Firm Updates

Congratulations to Horwitz Law, PLLC client Melissa Salmon!  The victor in the first case summarized above, Mrs. Salmon will soon return to the trial court that improperly dismissed her case to vindicate the promise of Tennessee’s anti-child sex abuse concealment statute: something no other litigant has done in the six years since the statute was enacted.  Three cheers for bravery.

And congratulations to you, reader, for reading a full year of Intermediate Scrutiny newsletters!  We wouldn’t continue producing this newsletter if you weren’t continuing to read it, and we are grateful for your readership, your shares, and your clicks.  Here’s to 2025.