Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1950–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
City Finance Co. v. Perrygreen2 sentences2024Id.[] Thus, “‘[w]hatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.’” City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81, 84 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953) (citation omitted). 2024Id.[] Thus, “‘[w]hatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.’” City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81, 84 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953) (citation omitted). | 6 | 6 |
Blevins v. Johnson Countygreen2 sentences2024Blevins, 746 S.W.2d at 683 . 2009Williams, 212 S.W.2d at 901 ; see also Texas Co. v. Aycock, 190 Tenn. 16 , 227 S.W.2d 41, 46 (1950) (stating “whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that *280 inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.” [emphasis in original]); City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953); Blevins v. Johnson County, 746 S.W.2d 678, 682-83 (Tenn. 1988). | 2 | 3 |
Texas Co. v. Aycockgreen2 sentences2013Accordingly, “‘[w]hatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry[] is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.’” Id. (quoting City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81, 84 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953) (citation omitted)). 2009Williams, 212 S.W.2d at 901 ; see also Texas Co. v. Aycock, 190 Tenn. 16 , 227 S.W.2d 41, 46 (1950) (stating “whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that *280 inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.” [emphasis in original]); City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953); Blevins v. Johnson County, 746 S.W.2d 678, 682-83 (Tenn. 1988). | 1 | 4 |
War Finance Corp. v. Readygreen2 sentences1994This is emphasized in the quotation from 21 Am. & Eng.Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), 584 made in the case of War Finance Corp. v. Ready, 2 Tenn.App. 61, 67 . 1985This is emphasized in the quotation from 21 Am. & Eng.Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), 584 made in the case of War Finance Corp. v. Ready, 2 Tenn.App. 61, 67. | 1 | 2 |
Milledgeville United Methodist Church v. Jimmy G. Meltongreen1 sentence2016See also Milledgeville United Methodist Church, 388 S.W.3d at 290 (“record notice is only one of many ways by which a subsequent purchaser may be put on notice of another’s interest in land . . . one cannot be a good-faith purchaser if a reasonable investigation of the property would have revealed the existence of a conflicting claim.”) (quoting 112 Am. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Covington v. Anderson
green
2 sentences1994In Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310, 319 , the rule is thus stated: “The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry mil lead, which prosecuted with reasonable diligence and in good faith.” (Emphasis supplied.) If the rule were not as stated by the cases to which reference has just been made, a reward would often result by declining to make inquiry about a matter as to which a party was given notice. 1985In Merritt v. Duncan, 54 Tenn. 156, 164 , 19 Am.Rep. 612 , it was held: “It is considered that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry is equivalent to notice; and that when he has sufficient information to lead him to the knowledge of a fact, he shall be presumed to be cognizant of the fact.” (Emphasis supplied.) In Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310, 319 , the rule is thus stated: “The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry mil lead, which prosecuted with reasonable diligence | 6 | 1950–1994 |
Merritt v. Duncan
neutral
2 sentences1985In Merritt v. Duncan, 54 Tenn. 156, 164 , 19 Am.Rep. 612 , it was held: “It is considered that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry is equivalent to notice; and that when he has sufficient information to lead him to the knowledge of a fact, he shall be presumed to be cognizant of the fact.” (Emphasis supplied.) In Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310, 319 , the rule is thus stated: “The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry mil lead, which prosecuted with reasonable diligence 1966In Merritt v. Duncan, 54 Tenn. 156, 164 , 19 Am.Rep. 612 , it was held: ‘It is considered that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry is equivalent■ to notice; and that when he has sufficient information to lead him to the knowledge of a fact, he shall be pre sumed to be cognizant of the fact.’ (Emphasis supplied.) In Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310, 319 , the rule is thus stated: ‘The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligen | 2 | 1966–1985 |
Williams v. Title Guaranty & Trust Co.
green
1 sentence2009Williams, 212 S.W.2d at 901 ; see also Texas Co. v. Aycock, 190 Tenn. 16 , 227 S.W.2d 41, 46 (1950) (stating “whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that *280 inquiry will lead, when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and good faith.” [emphasis in original]); City Finance Co. v. Perry, 195 Tenn. 81 , 257 S.W.2d 1, 2 (1953); Blevins v. Johnson County, 746 S.W.2d 678, 682-83 (Tenn. 1988). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Woodfolk v. Blount
neutral
2 sentences1968In the case of Woodfolk v. Blount, 4 Tenn. 147 (1816), the Court said: "When anything appears which would put a man of ordinary prudence upon inquiry, the law presumes that such inquiry was actually made, and therefore fixes notice upon him as to all legal consequences." Again, in Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310 (1886), the Court said: "The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry would lead when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and in good faith." It was said in the Gatlinburg case: 1968In the case of Woodfolk v. Blount, 4 Tenn. 147 (1816), the Court said: “When anything appears which would put a man of ordinary prudence upon inquiry, the law presumes that such inquiry was actually made, and therefore fixes notice upon him as to all legal consequences.” ■ Again, in Covington v. Anderson, 84 Tenn. 310 (1886), the Court said: “The rule upon the question of notice is, that whatever is sufficient to put a person upon inquiry, is notice of all the facts to which that inquiry would lead when prosecuted with reasonable diligence and in good faith. ’ ’ It was said in the G-atlinburg | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.