IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

ARIUM SHELBY FARMS v. NEDRA DRAYTON

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County

No. CT-002563-16 Robert Samual Weiss, Judge

___________________________________

No. W2016-01450-COA-R3-CV

___________________________________

Because the order appealed is not a final judgment, we must dismiss this appeal 

for lack of jurisdiction. 

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

ARNOLD B. GOLDIN, J., BRANDON O. GIBSON,J., AND KENNY ARMSTRONG, J.

Nedra Drayton, pro se. 

S. Joshua Kahane, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, Arium Shelby Farms.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that if multiple 

parties or multiple claims are involved in an action, any order that adjudicates fewer than 

all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties is not final or 

appealable. Except where otherwise provided, this Court only has subject matter 

jurisdiction over final orders. See Bayberry Assoc. v. Jones, 783 S.W.2d 553 (Tenn. 

1990). 

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

Procedure, we reviewed the appellate record to determine if the Court has subject matter 

jurisdiction to hear this matter. After this review, it appeared to the Court that it does not 

have jurisdiction. Specifically, on June 16, 2016, the Shelby County General Sessions 

 

1Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee 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opinion it shall be designated “MEMORANDUM OPINION”, shall not be published, and 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.

10/10/2017
- 2 -

Court awarded Appellee Arium Shelby Farms a monetary judgment of $ 2,606.82, as 

well as possession of the subject premises. Appellant Nedra Drayton filed a notice of 

appeal to the Shelby County Circuit Court on June 20, 2016. Then, on June 24, 2016, 

Appellee filed a motion seeking an order directing the Shelby County Court Clerk to 

issue a writ of possession, because Appellant had failed to post the statutory bond equal 

to one year’s rent of the premises. By Order entered on July 8, 2016, the trial court 

ordered the trial court clerk to immediately issue a writ of possession of the subject 

premises. Appellant filed a notice of appeal of that order on July 11, 2016. There is 

nothing in the record, though, indicating that the trial court considered the merits of the 

underlying claims for possession and damages.

Thus, by Order entered on July 21, 2017, the Court directed Appellant Nedra 

Drayton to either obtain entry of a final judgment or else show cause why this appeal 

should not be dismissed for failure to appeal an appealable order or judgment. Appellant 

filed a response to our Order on August 7, 2017. By Order entered on August 11, 2017, 

the Court directed Appellee Arium Shelby Farms to, within ten (10) days of the entry of 

that Order, submit a statement to the Court addressing whether the order appealed in this 

matter is a final judgment.

As of September 11, 2017, Appellee Arium Shelby Farms had not filed a response 

to our Order of August 11, 2017. Consequently, the Court entered an Order on that date 

directing Appellee to, within ten (10) days of the entry of that Order, submit a statement 

to the Court addressing whether the order appealed in this matter is a final judgment, as 

well as addressing why Appellee and its attorney, S. Joshua Kahane, should not be found 

in contempt of this Court’s order. Appellee submitted a response on September 21, 2017, 

in which Appellee agreed that the order appealed is not a final judgment. As of this date, 

Appellant has not responded to Appellee’s response.

Upon our review of Appellee’s response, the Court excuses counsel for failure to 

file a timely response to our Order of September 11, 2017. Also, it is apparent that the 

order appealed is not a final judgment. Consequently, this Court lacks jurisdiction and 

therefore, this appeal must be dismissed. 

Conclusion

Because the trial court has not yet entered a final judgment, the appeal is hereby 

dismissed without prejudice and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings 

consistent with this Opinion. Should a new appeal be filed, the Clerk of this Court shall, 

upon request of either party, consolidate the record in this appeal with the record filed in 

the new appeal. Costs of this matter are assessed to Appellant Nedra Drayton for which 

execution may issue, if necessary. It is SO ORDERED. 

PER CURIAM