VERRINA M. SHIELDS BEY
WILSON & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, ET AL.
Assigned on Briefs October 2, 2017
Appeal from the Chancery Court for Shelby County No.
CH-16-0783-2 Jim Kyle, Chancellor
an appeal challenging the trial court's order denying a
motion for interlocutory appeal. Due to the deficiencies in
Appellant's brief on appeal, we find that she waived
consideration of any issues on appeal and hereby dismiss the
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed
Verrina M. Shields Bey, Memphis, Tennessee, Pro se. Gerald
Morgan, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellee, Wilson &
Scott Sauer, Brian Robert Epling, and Erin Alexandra McFall,
Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Wells Fargo Bank,
Brandon O. Gibson, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in
which Charles D. Susano, Jr., and Richard H. Dinkins, JJ.,
BRANDON O. GIBSON, JUDGE.
Michelle Shields Bey ("Appellant"), filed a
"Petition [to] Quiet Title to Set Aside and Void
Foreclosure Claim and Declaratory  Injunction" on May
9, 2016, concerning real property located at 2486 Harvard
Avenue, Memphis, Tennessee, against Wilson & Associates,
P.L.L.C. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (collectively
"Appellees"). Although it is difficult to discern
from the sparse record, it appears that the trial court may
have orally ruled, on May 10, 2016, that Appellant's
complaint would be dismissed with prejudice. Nothing in the
record indicates that a written order was entered
memorializing the trial court's oral ruling. On May 11,
2016, Appellant filed a motion for an interlocutory appeal
with the trial court. The trial court denied the motion on
May 20, 2016. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on June 20,
November 8, 2016, this Court directed Appellant to obtain
entry of a final judgment or show cause why the appeal should
not be dismissed for lack of a final judgment. After
Appellant failed to respond to the November 8, 2016 order,
this Court issued a second order to show cause directing
Appellant to obtain a final order. Appellant again failed to
obtain a final order, and on March 20, 2017, the trial court
entered its written order, reflecting its sua sponte
dismissal of Appellant's complaint as being barred by the
doctrine of res judicata. For the reasons discussed
herein, we hold that Appellant's brief on appeal is
fatally deficient and hereby dismiss the appeal.
ability to review the merits of this appeal is greatly
hindered by the state of the brief submitted by Appellant.
Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 27 governs briefs
submitted to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
27(a)(7) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure
provides that an appellant's brief must contain an
argument setting forth "the contentions of the appellant
with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons
therefor, including the reasons why the contentions require
appellate relief, with citations to the authorities and
appropriate references to the record (which may be quoted
verbatim) relied on." Tenn. R. Ct. App. Rule 27(a).
According to the Tennessee Supreme Court, "[a]n issue
may be deemed waived, even when it has been specifically
raised as an issue, when the brief ...