Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Anderson Lumber Company, Inc. v. Kinney

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Knoxville

August 21, 2019

ANDERSON LUMBER COMPANY, INC.
v.
WILLIAM KINNEY, ET AL.

          Assigned on Briefs August 12, 2019

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Blount County No. E-24747 David Reed Duggan, Judge

         This is an interlocutory appeal as of right, pursuant to Rule 10B of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, filed by William Kinney and Margaret Kinney ("Defendants"), seeking to recuse the trial judge. The case arises out of the indebtedness of Defendant's business, Kinney Custom Interiors, to the plaintiff, Anderson Lumber Company, Inc. ("Plaintiff"). Having reviewed the petition for recusal appeal filed by Defendants, and finding no error, we affirm.

         Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 10B Interlocutory Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed

          William F. Kinney, Maryville, Tennessee, appellant, pro se.

          Margaret E. Kinney, Maryville, Tennessee, appellant, pro se.

          John T. McArthur, Maryville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Anderson Lumber Company, Inc.

          Richard H. Dinkins, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which D. MICHAEL SWINEY, C.J., and ARNOLD B. GOLDIN, J., joined.

          OPINION

          RICHARD H. DINKINS, JUDGE

         This is the third motion for recusal appeal filed by the Defendants in this suit. The procedural history of this case was set out in this Court's Opinion affirming the Trial Court's denial of Defendants' first motion for recusal, which was filed in the proceedings below in 2016. See Anderson Lumber Co., Inc. v. Kinney, No. E2016-01640-COA-T10B-CV, 2016 WL 6248597, **1-3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2016).

         After we issued our Opinion in case No. E2016-01640-COA-T10B-CV, Defendants filed a motion seeking to recuse the panel of judges who had considered the case No. E2016-01640-COA-T10B-CV. By Order entered on November 14, 2016, this Court denied the motion after finding that there was no basis under the Tennessee Constitution or the Tennessee Code of Judicial Conduct that would require recusal or disqualification of any of the panel members. Defendants then filed a motion for court review, which this Court denied by Order entered on December 9, 2016. Defendants then filed an appeal of our December 9, 2016 Order to the Tennessee Supreme Court, which was denied by Order entered on January 1l, 2017. The Supreme Court's January 11, 2017 Order found that "Judges McClarty, Clement, and Armstrong did not err in denying the motion for recusal as it pertained to each of them and that the Court of Appeals, Eastern Section, did not err in denying the appellants' motion for court review."

         In February of 2018, Defendants filed a second recusal appeal again attempting to recuse the trial judge. In our Opinion entered on March 12, 2018, in case No. E2018-00322-COA-T10B-CV, this Court found no error in the Trial Court's denial of Defendant's Second Motion for Disqualification or Recusal.

         Defendants filed the instant motion, their third Motion for Disqualification or Recusal, in this Court on August 9, 2019, again seeking recusal appeal pursuant to Rule 10B. In this motion, Defendants allege among other things, "that the defendants have experienced bias of an extreme and even punishing nature throughout the proceedings," and "have been denied our civil ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.