Levy v. Franks

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that neighboring property owner’s actions, viewed as a whole, rose to the level of outrageous conduct
• holding that Franks’ “entire course of conduct” was calculated “to suppress Plaintiff’s opposition to the Franks’ use of their property as a staging ground for their construction business, by intimidating the Levys into either submitting meekly or selling their home.”
• “mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppression [and] other trivialities” are insufficient bases for IIED claims
• “[T.C.A. §] 4–21–701 has consistently been interpreted as requiring [the plaintiff to be a member of] a protected class”
• ―The simple act of conspiracy does not furnish a substantive ground of action.‖ (quoting Tenn. Publ’g Co. v. Fitzhugh, 52 S.W.2d 157, 158 (Tenn. 1932))
• “In contrast [to criminal conspiracy], there is no liability under a theory of civil conspiracy unless there is underlying wrongful conduct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).