IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

June 3, 2019 Session

IN RE CONSERVATORSHIP OF JOHN MARTIN MULDOON

Appeal from the Probate and Family Court for Cumberland County

No. 2018-PF-6184 Larry Michael Warner, Judge

No. E2018-02116-COA-R3-CV

This is an appeal from a final order entered in a conservatorship proceeding. There was no 

court reporter present for the final hearing in the case. The Trial Court concluded, 

following a hearing on the parties’ competing Statements of the Evidence, that it could not 

resolve the parties’ differences regarding what transpired at the final hearing for purposes 

of appeal and, therefore, granted a new trial. As a result, there is no longer a final judgment 

in the proceedings below and this Court no longer has jurisdiction to consider this appeal. 

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed

D. MICHAEL SWINEY, C.J., JOHN W. MCCLARTY, J., AND THOMAS R. FRIERSON, II, J.

Kevin Poore, Crossville, Tennessee, for the appellant.

Jeffrey A. Vires, Crossville, Tennessee, for the appellee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

Pursuant to the requirements of Rule 13(b) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, the Court directed the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be 

dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after it became clear that there was no

 

1Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals provides as follows:

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.

06/06/2019
longer a final judgment from which an appeal as of right would lie. The appellant has filed 

no response to the show cause order. 

“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.”). Moreover, despite the 

appellee’s arguments to the contrary, the Trial Court appropriately granted a new trial in 

the proceedings below after determining that it was unable to resolve the parties’ 

differences, pursuant to Rule 24(f) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, 

regarding a Statement of the Evidence for inclusion in the record. See Bellamy v. Cracker 

Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., 302 S.W.3d 278, 282 (Tenn. 2009). 

Because it is clear that there is no longer a final judgment in this case, the appeal is 

dismissed. Costs on appeal are taxed to the appellant, for which execution may issue if 

necessary. 

PER CURIAM