14 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1915–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Schnider v. Carlisle Corp.green2 sentences2016There is no question that several cases identify the partial performance doctrine as applicable to oral contracts “other than for the sale of land.” See, e.g., Schnider v. Carlisle Corp., 65 S.W.3d 619, 622 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001) (citations omitted). 2004See Schnider v. Carlisle Corp., 65 S.W.3d 619 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001); Baliles v. Cities Service, Co., 578 S.W.2d 621 (Tenn. 1979). | 3 | 3 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2004As Strickland states, when assessing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the performance inquiry must focus on “all the circumstances ” in determining whether counsel’s assistance was reasonable. 466 U.S. at 688 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 (emphasis added). 2004As Strickland states, when assessing an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the performance inquiry must focus on “all the circumstances ” in determining whether counsel’s assistance was reasonable. 466 U.S. at 688 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 (emphasis added). | 2 | 7 |
Buice v. Scruggs Equipment Co.green2 sentences2017The partial performance exception, however, does not apply to oral agreements affecting real property.7 Baliles, 578 S.W.2d at 624 ; Buice, 250 S.W.2d at 7 Mr. Key asks this Court to adopt a new exception to the statute of frauds that would allow enforcement of an oral agreement involving real property when one party has fully performed. 2016Co., 194 Tenn. 129 , 250 S.W.2d 44, 47 (1952) (“[W]e will enforce a verbal contract when theré has been partial performance as to personal property when we will not do so as to real property.”); Trew v. Ogle, 767 S.W.2d 662, 664 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988) (noting that, because the subject matter of the contract constituted personal property, the partial performance exception was available to take the agreement out of the Statute of Frauds), Based on this precedent, we fail to see ,how an oral agreement, involving, a transfer of interest ih land, including a leasehold interest gréater than one year, | 2 | 3 |
Goad v. Stategreen2 sentences2026The court found that, while Agent Christian’s opinion identifying the penis as Petitioner’s penis “might not have been the response that trial counsel had hoped to receive,” the court “does not find the performance of defense counsel in this aspect of the case to be deficient to such an extent so as to have prejudiced the defense of []Petitioner based on the standards of Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363, 369 (Tenn. 1996).” The court 10 found that Petitioner failed to prove that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel and concluded this issue was without merit. 2026The court found that, while Agent Christian’s opinion identifying the penis as Petitioner’s penis “might not have been the response that trial counsel had hoped to receive,” the court “does not find the performance of defense counsel in this aspect of the case to be deficient to such an extent so as to have prejudiced the defense of []Petitioner based on the standards of Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363, 369 (Tenn. 1996).” The court 10 found that Petitioner failed to prove that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel and concluded this issue was without merit. | 1 | 1 |
Trew v. Oglegreen2 sentences2016Co., 194 Tenn. 129 , 250 S.W.2d 44, 47 (1952) (“[W]e will enforce a verbal contract when theré has been partial performance as to personal property when we will not do so as to real property.”); Trew v. Ogle, 767 S.W.2d 662, 664 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988) (noting that, because the subject matter of the contract constituted personal property, the partial performance exception was available to take the agreement out of the Statute of Frauds), Based on this precedent, we fail to see ,how an oral agreement, involving, a transfer of interest ih land, including a leasehold interest gréater than one year, 2016Co., 194 Tenn. 129 , 250 S.W.2d 44, 47 (1952) (“[W]e will enforce a verbal contract when theré has been partial performance as to personal property when we will not do so as to real property.”); Trew v. Ogle, 767 S.W.2d 662, 664 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988) (noting that, because the subject matter of the contract constituted personal property, the partial performance exception was available to take the agreement out of the Statute of Frauds), Based on this precedent, we fail to see ,how an oral agreement, involving, a transfer of interest ih land, including a leasehold interest gréater than one year, | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Baliles v. Cities Service Co.
green
2 sentences2017The partial performance exception, however, does not apply to oral agreements affecting real property.7 Baliles, 578 S.W.2d at 624 ; Buice, 250 S.W.2d at 7 Mr. Key asks this Court to adopt a new exception to the statute of frauds that would allow enforcement of an oral agreement involving real property when one party has fully performed. 2004See Schnider v. Carlisle Corp., 65 S.W.3d 619 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001); Baliles v. Cities Service, Co., 578 S.W.2d 621 (Tenn. 1979). | 2 | 2004–2017 |
Siddarth Shah and Daksha Shah, Plaintiffs-Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Racetrac Petroleum Co., Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant
green
1 sentence2016The first case that Plaintiffs reference, Shah v. Racetrac Petroleum Co., 338 F.3d 557 (6th Cir. 2003), involved a dispute over a lessor’s decision to invoke termination clauses under a lease for a gas station. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Blasingame v. American Materials, Inc.
green
1 sentence2004In Blasingame v. American Materials, Inc., 654 S.W.2d 659 (Tenn. 1983), 11 our Supreme Court clarified the equitable nature and limited the purpose of the partial performance doctrine, stating: This doctrine of partial performance to take the verbal contract out of the operation of the Statute of Frauds is purely an equitable doctrine and is a judicial interpretation of the acts of the parties to prevent frauds. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Foust v. Carney
green
1 sentence2004Schnider v. Carlisle Corp., 65 S.W.3d 619 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001); Foust v. Carney, 329 S.W.2d 826 (Tenn. 1959). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Pedesky v. Bleiberg
green
2 sentences1972In that case the California Court said: “If appellant did not give his informed or knowledgeable consent, the performance of the myelogram would constitute a technical battery (Pedesky v. Bleiberg, 251 Cal.App.2d 119 , 59 Cal.Rptr. 294 ) for which the defendant would be liable for all damages proximately resulting, whether the myelogram was or was not skillfully performed. 1972In that case the California Court said: “If appellant did not give his informed or knowledgeable consent, the performance of the myelogram would constitute a technical battery (Pedesky v. Bleiberg, 251 Cal.App.2d 119 , 59 Cal.Rptr. 294 ) for which the defendant would be liable for all damages proximately resulting, whether the myelogram was or was not skillfully performed. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Mount Vernon Bank v. Porter
neutral
2 sentences1915Vernon Bank v. Porter, 52 Mo. App., 248 , 65 Mo. App., 448 , 148 Mo., 176 , 49 S. W., 982 , the facts were that the cashier of a° bank negotiated a sale of bonds and received $1,000 therefor and refused to account to the banking company on the ground that what he had done was beyond the scope of his duty as cashier and not within the line of the bank’s business, according to its charter. 1915Vernon Bank v. Porter, 52 Mo. App., 248 , 65 Mo. App., 448 , 148 Mo., 176 , 49 S. W., 982 , the facts were that the cashier of a° bank negotiated a sale of bonds and received $1,000 therefor and refused to account to the banking company on the ground that what he had done was beyond the scope of his duty as cashier and not within the line of the bank’s business, according to its charter. | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Mount Vernon Bank v. Porter
neutral
1 sentence1915Vernon Bank v. Porter, 52 Mo. App., 248 , 65 Mo. App., 448 , 148 Mo., 176 , 49 S. W., 982 , the facts were that the cashier of a° bank negotiated a sale of bonds and received $1,000 therefor and refused to account to the banking company on the ground that what he had done was beyond the scope of his duty as cashier and not within the line of the bank’s business, according to its charter. | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.