Forrest L. Whaley and Margaret Ann Whaley v. Jim Ann Perkins, et al.

197 S.W.3d 665 (Tenn. 2006) · Supreme Court of Tennessee · July 14, 2006

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court held that a claim for emotional-distress damages arising from an alleged injury to real property was governed by the three-year property-tort statute of limitations, rather than the one-year personal-injury limitations period. The court nevertheless affirmed the vacatur of the judgment against Mrs. Perkins for lack of material evidence supporting intentional misrepresentation and held that violation of the subdivision regulations did not constitute negligence per se. The case was remanded for a directed verdict in favor of Mrs. Perkins and a new trial concerning the claims against the Beshires.

Court
Supreme Court of Tennessee
Writing for the Court
Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.; William M. Barker, C.J.; E. Riley Anderson, J.; Janice M. Holder, J.; Cornelia A. Clark, J.
Jurisdiction
Tennessee
Decision date
July 14, 2006
Procedural posture
The plaintiffs obtained a jury verdict awarding compensatory and punitive damages. The Tennessee Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's judgment, directed a verdict for Perkins, and ordered a new trial on the claims against the Beshireses. The Tennessee Supreme Court reviewed the statute-of-limitations, Perkins-liability, and negligence-per-se issues.
Standard of review
Questions of law, including the applicable statute of limitations and negligence-per-se issue, are reviewed de novo with no presumption of correctness. A civil jury verdict is reviewed under Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 13(d) and must be affirmed if any material evidence supports it; appellate courts take the strongest legitimate view of the evidence favoring the verdict, assume the truth of supporting evidence, draw reasonable inferences in support of the verdict, and discard countervailing evidence.
Precedential value
Published Tennessee Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Forrest L. Whaley, Margaret Ann Whaley v. Jim Ann Perkins, Albert Lewis Beshires, Terry Lynn Beshires
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

real estatenegligencedamagesstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

real estatetortsremediesappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the one-year statute of limitations for personal-injury actions barred the Whaleys' claim for emotional-distress damages arising from injury to their property.
  2. Whether material evidence supported the jury's finding that Jim Ann Perkins made an intentional misrepresentation to the Whaleys.
  3. Whether the defendants' violation of Shelby County subdivision regulations constituted negligence per se.
  4. Whether the trial court's errors regarding Perkins's liability and negligence per se required vacatur of the judgment and a new trial.

Holdings

  1. The one-year personal-injury statute of limitations does not apply when emotional-distress damages are merely an element of a claim arising from injury to property. The three-year statute of limitations for injuries to property applies.
  2. There was no material evidence supporting the jury's finding that Jim Ann Perkins made an intentional misrepresentation to the Whaleys.
  3. The violation of the Shelby County subdivision regulation did not warrant application of the negligence-per-se doctrine because the Whaleys were not injured in the manner the regulation was designed to prevent.

Key quotations

In other words, the Whaleys' "claim" for damages for emotional distress was merely an element of their overall claim for damages for the injury to their property and not a stand-alone cause of action. (197 S.W.3d at 671)
The harm alleged by the Whaleys is not a harm the regulations were designed to prevent, but rather, it is an accidental consequence of a [regulation] enacted to prevent other harms to the community and its residents that could be caused by the unregulated subdivision of land. (197 S.W.3d at 673)

Factual background

The Whaleys purchased a home and two acres from Terry and Albert Beshires in 1988. The two-acre parcel had been illegally subdivided from a larger Shelby County tract, and the home's septic lines extended onto a separate two-acre parcel that had been transferred back to Jim Ann Perkins. The Whaleys first learned of the subdivision violation in 1995 and testified that the property's uncertain legal status caused emotional distress, reduced its value, and delayed their planned retirement move. They filed suit in 1998, and a jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages against several defendants.

Procedural history

The Whaleys sued Perkins, the Beshireses, real estate agents, a title insurer, and a closing attorney after discovering that their two-acre property had been illegally subdivided and that septic lines extended onto another parcel. The title-insurance claim was dismissed and affirmed on appeal, and the action against the closing attorney was nonsuited. After a jury found multiple defendants at fault and awarded $170,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages, Perkins and the Beshireses appealed. The Court of Appeals vacated the judgment and ordered a directed verdict for Perkins and a new trial against the Beshireses; the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated the trial judgment, and remanded.

Remand instructions

Vacate the trial court's judgment, direct a verdict in favor of Jim Ann Perkins, and hold a new trial on the Whaleys' claims against Terry and Albert Beshires. The Court of Appeals' ruling concerning the negligence-per-se issue remains affirmed, while its ruling applying the one-year personal-injury limitations period is reversed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…