Nancy Maureen Jarman v. Franklin N. Jarman - Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part
Syllabus
I concur in the conclusion that the Circuit Court for Davidson County correctly denied the petition of Ms. Nancy Maureen Jarman to increase her alimony. But I respectfully dissent from the affirmance of the award of attorney's fees to Ms. Jarman. I share the view of Franklin N. Jarman that the trial court lacked the authority to award attorney's fees in this instance.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- observing that “allegations concerning pictures downloaded from U.S. servers . . . do not implicate the Copyright Act—even under the predicate act test” because no act of infringement has been completed entirely in United States
- applying similar rule on appeal to the D.C. Circuit
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.