Craig Charles, Et Al. v. Raymond Keith McCrary, Et Al.
Annotate this Case
Court Description: Authoring Judge: Judge Kristi M. Davis
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Lauderback
The trial court clerk notified this Court that a final judgment has not been entered. This
Court ordered the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed.
Appellant failed to respond to our show cause order. As no final judgment has been
entered, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE 04/25/2023 April 24, 2023 CRAIG CHARLES, ET AL. v. RAYMOND KEITH MCCRARY, ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County No. 37417 James E. Lauderback, Judge ___________________________________ No. E2022-01623-COA-R3-CV ___________________________________ The trial court clerk notified this Court that a final judgment has not been entered. This Court ordered the appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed. Appellant failed to respond to our show cause order. As no final judgment has been entered, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed KRISTI M. DAVIS, J.; D. MICHAEL SWINEY, C.J.; AND JOHN W. MCCLARTY, J. Russell L. Egli, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Raymond Keith McCrary. Alexis Irene Tahinci, Kingsport, Tennessee, for the appellees, Craig Charles, and Kennedy Pascal. MEMORANDUM OPINION1 The trial court clerk notified this Court that no final judgment has been entered in this case. This Court then directed the appellant, Raymond Keith McCrary, to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. “A final 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 When a case is decided by memorandum opinion it shall be designated “MEMORANDUM OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be cited or relied on for any reason in any unrelated case. 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 failed to respond to our show cause order. “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 a final judgment has not yet been entered, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal. The appeal is hereby dismissed. Costs on appeal are taxed to the appellant, Raymond Keith McCrary, for which execution may issue. PER CURIAM -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
