IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

Assigned December 19, 2019

JEFF ROBINSON v. CODY HAYNES ET AL.

Appeal from the Chancery Court for Knox County

No. 193801-3 Michael W. Moyers, Chancellor

___________________________________

No. E2019-00477-COA-R3-CV

___________________________________

This is an appeal from a case involving a contract for the sale of real property. The Trial 

Court disposed of some of the claims by granting summary judgment. Other claims were 

dismissed or voluntarily non-suited, and the Trial Court attempted to render its judgment 

final by citing to Rule 54 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. The Trial Court, 

however, reserved disposition of a petition for attorney’s fees and an amended petition 

for attorney’s fees. As a result of the reservation of the disposition of the petitions for 

attorney’s fees there is no final judgment, and this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider 

this appeal.

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

D. MICHAEL SWINEY, C.J.; CHARLES D. SUSANO, JR., J.; AND THOMAS R.

FRIERSON, II, J.

Taylor Robinson Dahl, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jeff Robinson.

H. Stephen Gillman, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Cody Haynes.

William L. Waters, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Faye Messer and the Cody J. 

Haynes Trust.

Tyler D. Smith, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Furrow Strickland Real Estate 

Services, Rob Strickland, and Wes Cate.

12/27/2019
- 2 -

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

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.”). 

The appellant filed a response to the show cause order, which shows that the Trial 

Court reserved the petitions for attorney’s fees. As such, the order from which the 

appellant seeks review is not “a final judgment adjudicating all the claims, rights, and 

liabilities of all parties.” Tenn. R. App. P. 3(a); see e.g., E. Solutions for Buildings, LLC 

v. Knestrick Contractor, Inc. No. M2017-00732-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 1831116, at *4 

(Tenn. Ct. App. April 17, 2018), appl. perm. appeal denied Aug. 9, 2018 (finding that 

order directing parties to re-submit requests for attorney’s fees after appeal was 

“improvidently certified as final,” and holding that because trial court did not dispose 

fully and finally of claim for attorney’s fees, this Court lacked jurisdiction); City of 

Jackson v. Hersh, No. W2008-02360-COA-R3-CV, 2009 WL 2601380, at *4 (Tenn. Ct. 

App. Aug. 25, 2009), no appl. perm. appeal filed (“This Court has concluded on several 

occasions that an order that fails to address an outstanding request for attorney’s fees is 

not final.”); Grand Valley Lakes Property Owners’ Assoc., Inc. v. Gunn, No. W2008-

01116-COA-R3-CV, *3 (April 13, 2009), no appl. perm. appeal filed (stating “the circuit 

court did not resolve Grand Valley’s request for attorney’s fees . . .. As we have stated, 

except as otherwise permitted in Rule 9 and in Rule 54.02, an order adjudicating fewer 

than all the claims of the parties is not a final, appealable order.”); Headrick v. Headrick, 

No. E2004-00730-COA-R3-CV, 2005 WL 524807, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. March 7, 

2005), no appl. perm. appeal filed (“Our Supreme Court has held that ‘[a]n order made 

final pursuant to rule 54.02 must be made dispositive of an entire claim or party.’ 

 

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
- 3 -

Bayberry Assocs. v. Jones, 783 S.W.2d 553, 558 (Tenn. 1990). Since the trial court has 

reserved the issue of attorney’s fees, which is a claim by one or both parties in this 

lawsuit, there is no final order appealable at this time.”); Scott v. Noland Co., No. 03A01-

9407-CV-00248, 1995 WL 11177, at *1 (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 12, 1995), no appl. perm. 

appeal filed (“Since there is no order in the record before us finally disposing of the 

Plaintiffs’ claim for attorney fees at the trial level, the ‘Final Judgment’ from which this 

appeal is being pursued is not a final order and hence not appealable as of right under 

Tenn. R. App. P. 3(a).” (footnote omitted)); Spencer v. The Golden Rule, Inc., No. 

03A01-9406-CV-00207, 1994 WL 589564, at *1 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 21, 1994), no appl. 

perm. appeal filed (“Since there is no order in the record before us finally disposing of 

the Plaintiff’s claim for attorney fees at the trial level, the Order from which this appeal is 

being pursued is not a final order and hence not appealable as of right under Tenn. R. 

App. P. 3(a).” (emphasis in original) (footnote omitted)). 

Because it is clear that there is no 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