In Re Estate of Linda W. Smith ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                       08/02/2022
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT JACKSON
    August 2, 2022
    IN RE ESTATE OF LINDA W. SMITH
    Appeal from the Probate Court for Shelby County
    No. PR016897      Karen D. Webster, Judge
    ___________________________________
    No. W2022-00052-COA-R3-CV
    ___________________________________
    Appellant, Frances Diane Weeks Wright, has appealed an order of the Shelby County
    Probate Court (the “Trial Court”) that was entered on January 3, 2022. We determine that
    the January 3, 2022 order does not constitute a final appealable judgment. Therefore, this
    Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the appeal.
    Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed
    KENNY ARMSTRONG, J.; ARNOLD B. GOLDIN, J.; CARMA DENNIS MCGEE, J.
    Olen M. Bailey, Jr., Memphis, Tennessee; Jared W. Eastlack, Memphis, Tennessee;
    Matthew A. Rhoads, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Frances Diane Weeks Wright.
    Steven Roberts, Collierville, Tennessee, for the appellee, William Hugh Buckingham Jr.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION1
    Pursuant to the requirements of Rule 13(b) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate
    Procedure, the Court directed Appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be
    1
    Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals provides:
    This Court, with the concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may affirm, reverse
    or modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum opinion when a formal opinion
    would have no precedential value. When a case is decided by memorandum opinion it shall
    be designated “MEMORANDUM OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be
    cited or relied on for any reason in any unrelated case.
    dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after it became clear that there was no final
    judgment from which an appeal as of right would lie. “A final judgment is one that resolves
    all the issues in the case, ‘leaving nothing else for the trial court to do.’” In re Estate of
    Henderson, 
    121 S.W.3d 643
    , 645 (Tenn. 2003) (quoting State ex rel. McAllister v. Goode,
    
    968 S.W.2d 834
    , 840 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997)). This Court does not have subject matter
    jurisdiction to adjudicate an appeal as of right if there is no final judgment. See Bayberry
    Assocs. v. Jones, 
    783 S.W.2d 553
    , 559 (Tenn. 1990) (“Unless an appeal from an
    interlocutory order is provided by the rules or by statute, appellate courts have jurisdiction
    over final judgments only.”). Appellant responded to the show cause order, but failed to
    show that a final judgment has been entered.
    Specifically, the Trial Court’s January 3, 2022 order, which is the order appealed,
    denied Appellant’s motion for a default judgment against Appellee, required Appellant to
    file an inventory, and assessed attorneys’ fees and costs against the estate. This does not
    constitute a final appealable judgment under Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate
    Procedure, nor does it fall within any of the exceptions for an immediate appeal of
    interlocutory orders in probate cases.2
    “Except where otherwise provided, this Court only has subject matter jurisdiction
    over final orders.” Foster-Henderson v. Memphis Health Center, Inc., 
    479 S.W.3d 214
    ,
    222 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). As the January 3, 2022 order does not constitute a final
    appealable judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Thus, the appeal
    is hereby DISMISSED. Costs on appeal are taxed to Appellant, Frances Diane Weeks
    Wright, for which execution may issue.
    PER CURIAM
    2
    To the extent Appellant, in her response to the show cause order, asserts that this Court should
    review this appeal under Rule 9 or Rule 10 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure if we determine
    that there is no final judgment, we decline to do so without prejudice to Appellant’s ability to later file a
    proper application for permission to appeal on those grounds.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: W2022-00052-COA-R3-CV

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 8/2/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2022