GO TO DOXBIN.COM FOR THE FULL PASTE: /\ /\ /\ /\ _`=='_ _-~......~-_ _--~............~--_ __--~~....................~~--__ .___..---~~~................................~~~---..___, `=.________________________________________________,=' @^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@ | | I I II I I | | | |__I___I___II___I___I__| | | /___I_ I II I _I___\ | |'_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _`| __-~...~~~~~--------------~~~~~...~-__ ___---~~......................................~~---___ .___..---~~~......................................................~~~---..___, `=.______________________________________________________________________,=' @^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@ | | | | | | || | | | | | | | |____| |____| | || | |____| |____| | |__________________|____||____|__________________| _-|_____|_____|_____|__|------|__|_____|_____|_____|-_ ____ RAN BY CHERRY & FEDERAL ま FORMAT MADE BY CHERRY ま ま REASON : PEDO ま ま DOXER: fed#1234 ま ま FORMAT: keaton’s wife#0001 ま ま PROOF ま ~ 18 year old Andrew talking to a 14 year old girl: https://imgur.com/a/SSDyRqj ~ 18 year old Andrew talking to the 12 year old girl he dated: https://imgur.com/a/DrJNHIA ~ Jerking off to minors: https://imgur.com/a/A5i6vz5 ~ Downbad on twitter lmao: https://imgur.com/a/TooQA6i ~ Proof of address: https://imgur.com/a/TvY1vAF ~ Being a weird little nigger: https://imgur.com/a/i0pnjDW ╔————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╗ ▄████▄ ▒█████ ███▄ █ ▄▄▄█████▓▓█████ ███▄ █ ▄▄▄█████▓ ██████ ▒██▀ ▀█ ▒██▒ ██▒ ██ ▀█ █ ▓ ██▒ ▓▒▓█ ▀ ██ ▀█ █ ▓ ██▒ ▓▒▒██ ▒ ▒▓█ ▄ ▒██░ ██▒▓██ ▀█ ██▒▒ ▓██░ ▒░▒███ ▓██ ▀█ ██▒▒ ▓██░ ▒░░ ▓██▄ ▒▓▓▄ ▄██▒▒██ ██░▓██▒ ▐▌██▒░ ▓██▓ ░ ▒▓█ ▄ ▓██▒ ▐▌██▒░ ▓██▓ ░ ▒ ██▒ ▒ ▓███▀ ░░ ████▓▒░▒██░ ▓██░ ▒██▒ ░ ░▒████▒▒██░ ▓██░ ▒██▒ ░ ▒██████▒▒ ░ ░▒ ▒ ░░ ▒░▒░▒░ ░ ▒░ ▒ ▒ ▒ ░░ ░░ ▒░ ░░ ▒░ ▒ ▒ ▒ ░░ ▒ ▒▓▒ ▒ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ▒ ▒░ ░ ░░ ░ ▒░ ░ ░ ░ ░░ ░░ ░ ▒░ ░ ░ ░▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ╚————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╝ i luv genesis ままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままま まままままままままま-------まままままままままま み Introduction み み み み み Victim's Info み み み み み Parent Info み み み み み Property Info み み み み まままままままままま-------まままままままままま ままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままままま ╔——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╗ ██▓███ ▓█████ ██▀███ ██████ ▒█████ ███▄ █ ▄▄▄ ██▓ ██▓ ███▄ █ █████▒▒█████ ▓██░ ██▒▓█ ▀ ▓██ ▒ ██▒▒██ ▒ ▒██▒ ██▒ ██ ▀█ █ ▒████▄ ▓██▒ ▓██▒ ██ ▀█ █ ▓██ ▒▒██▒ ██▒ ▓██░ ██▓▒▒███ ▓██ ░▄█ ▒░ ▓██▄ ▒██░ ██▒▓██ ▀█ ██▒▒██ ▀█▄ ▒██░ ▒██▒▓██ ▀█ ██▒▒████ ░▒██░ ██▒ ▒██▄█▓▒ ▒▒▓█ ▄ ▒██▀▀█▄ ▒ ██▒▒██ ██░▓██▒ ▐▌██▒░██▄▄▄▄██ ▒██░ ░██░▓██▒ ▐▌██▒░▓█▒ ░▒██ ██░ ▒██▒ ░ ░░▒████▒░██▓ ▒██▒▒██████▒▒░ ████▓▒░▒██░ ▓██░ ▓█ ▓██▒░██████▒ ░██░▒██░ ▓██░░▒█░ ░ ████▓▒░ ▒▓▒░ ░ ░░░ ▒░ ░░ ▒▓ ░▒▓░▒ ▒▓▒ ▒ ░░ ▒░▒░▒░ ░ ▒░ ▒ ▒ ▒▒ ▓▒█░░ ▒░▓ ░ ░▓ ░ ▒░ ▒ ▒ ▒ ░ ░ ▒░▒░▒░ ░▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░▒ ░ ▒░░ ░▒ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ▒░ ░ ░░ ░ ▒░ ▒ ▒▒ ░░ ░ ▒ ░ ▒ ░░ ░░ ░ ▒░ ░ ░ ▒ ▒░ ░░ ░ ░░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ╚——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╝ ま LOCAL PD // (615) 862-7744 ま ; NAME // ANDREW ま ; LAST // GOINS ま ; AGE // 18 ま ; BIRTHDAY // N/A ま ; BIRTH PLACE // N/A ま ; SCHOOLING // N/A ま ; PHONE NUMBER // (615) 482-6845 ま ; SMS GATEWAY // 6154826845@tmomail.net ま ; SSN // 408-02-XXXX - 415-98-XXXX ま ; PAST PHONE NUMBERS // (615) 889-1122 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported June 2007 (615) 286-1569 Landline Dekalb Telephone Cooperative First reported October 2007 (615) 942-9529 Landline Comcast Phone of Tennessee LLC - TN First reported September 2008 (615) 754-0949 Landline Tennessee Telephone Company First reported July 2015 (615) 882-5893 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported October 1993 ま ; SOCIAL MEDIAS // SNAP ; wtfskiess INSTA ; 1scryy DISCORD ; atake#0004 ま ; ADRESS // 2322 Dennywood Dr Nashville TN 37214 ま ; PAST ADDRESSES // 2932 Twin Lawn Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded June 2008 35 Norene Rd Lebanon TN 37090 Wilson County Recorded October 2007 Home Phone: (615) 286-1569 2932M Twin Lawn Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded July 2007 ま ; NEIGHBORS // N/A ま ; ASSOCIATES // N/A ま ; RELATIVES // Ashley Goins Age 35 (Jul 1986) Brittney Goins Age 22 (May 1999) Darryl Goins Age 30 (Sep 1991) Darryl Goins Age 61 (Jul 1960) Deanna Braden Age 43 (Aug 1978) Donna Goins Age 64 (Mar 1957) Rebecca Goins Age 58 (Jan 1963) Sabrina Austin Age 44 (Jan 1977) Cheryl Pate Age 57 (Aug 1964) Christopher Moore Age 43 (Oct 1978) Daryl Braden Age 44 (Jan 1977) David Moore Age 65 (Apr 1956) Donna Moore Age 64 (Aug 1957) Earl Nelson Age 67 (Jan 1954) Fostena Goins Age 45 (Mar 1976) ま ; EDUCATION // N/A ま ; VOTER RECORDS // N/A ま ; COURT RECORDS // Butler County, Ohio Court Record AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT, JAMES GOINS FILED ATTORNEY: SCHEPER, ANDREW C (0082404 DISP DATE ADDRESS 6200 CHERRY LANE FARM DR WEST CHESTER , OH 45069 ALIAS GOINS ADDRESS SERVE ANY AGENT P.O. BOX 150769 NASHVILLE , TN 37215 ALIAS OHIO Tennessee Supreme Court Record MARNE S. MATHERNE, ASST. ATTY. GEN., NASHVILLE, FOR DEFENDANT IN ERROR. HOLMES JUROR GOINS, THE OTHER AFFIANT, WAS FIRST OFFERED BY THE DEFENDANT AS A WITNESS MR. GOINS STATED THAT THESE OCCURRENCES IN THE JURY ROOM DID NOT AFFECT HIS Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record WARLICK 01/03/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE DECEMBER 4 NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLANTS, DONALD BERGE, MARTHA BERGE, AND DAVID PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEY IN ALL OF THE TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS WAS ANDREW B. SANDERS Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record ROUSOS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ASSIGNED ON BRIEFS LING SHEA, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLEE, KRISTI L. BOREN. OPINION I QUESTIONED ANDREW ROUSOS EXTENSIVELY ABOUT MOTHERS TAX RETURNS AND TOLD HIM THAT Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record HARGETT, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS TENNESSEE SECRETARY OF STATE; MARK GOINS, IN TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR STATE OF TENNESSEE APPELLEES THE TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR STATE OF TENNESSEE Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record BY THIS COURT. HOT BLAST COAL CO. V. WILLIAX, 10 TENN. APP. 226 ; NASHVILLE, C OF DEFENDANT HIMSELF AND MR. JOHN C. GOINS, ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO APPEARED THE SCENE OF THE ACCIDENT, ANDREW WALKER WHO WAS ALSO PRESENT AND SAW DEFENDANT Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record III, ASST. ATTY. GEN., NASHVILLE, WILLIAM S. DOSSETT, DIST. ATTY. GEN., DAVID DRIVEN BY PHILLIPS TO BE 75 MILES PER HOUR. AARON ANDREW, GENEVA ANDREW, HIS FROM THE BRIDGE. MR. ANDREW DROVE HIS 1972 MAVERICK TO AN EXIT LEADING FROM THE Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record APPEAL FROM THE CRIMINAL COURT FOR MCMINN COUNTY NO. 13-CR-144 ANDREW M. FREIBERG ABOUT THE MILITARY. MS. CAROLYN GOINS, THE VICTIMS NEIGHBOR, TESTIFIED THAT ON OUT, THE LAWNMOWER SHUT OFF, AND MS. GOINS HEARD SCREAMING AND YELLING. AFTER Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record DANIEL; JON ANDREW RUSSELL, ) M.D., ) ) APPELLEES-DEFENDANTS. ) BEFORE: GIBBONS DEFENDANT JON ANDREW RUSSELL M.D. (DEFENDANT RUSSELL) (DE 75). FOR THE REASONS COMPLAINT. GOINS V. CLOROX CO., 926 F.2D 559 , 561 (6TH CIR. 1991). THE PARTY OPPOSING Tennessee Supreme Court Record COURT OF TENNESSEE, AT NASHVILLE. NOVEMBER 1, 2011 SESSION. MARCH 9, 2012. ROBERT GENERAL, FOR THE APPELLANT, STATE OF TENNESSEE. SHAWN P. SIRGO, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SHORT, KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE; AIMEE D. SOLWAY, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE AMICUS District Court, E.D. Tennessee Record INC. 126 F. SUPP. 2D 1090 (1999) ANDREW A. DOWNS AND MARIA DOWNS, PLAINTIFFS, V R. OGLE, JR., LAW OFFICES OF CARL R. OGLE, JR., JEFFERSON CITY, TN, FOR ANDREW DONELSON, BEARMAN & CALDWELL, NASHVILLE, TN, STEPHEN E EMBRY, BROWN TODD & HEYBURN PLLC Tennessee Supreme Court Record THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE JUNE 2, 2015 SESSION VODAFONE ASHLEY N. BASSEL, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLANT, VODAFONE AMERICAS TALMAGE M. WATTS, SENIOR COUNSEL, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLEE Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record SUSAN JO WALLS IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ASSIGNED ANDREW C. COULAM, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL; ROBERT J. CARTER, DISTRICT CHEESES IN NASHVILLE, WHILE GEARHARDT AND STARRICK KILLED THE VICTIM, IN ORDER TO Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE NOVEMBER 10, 2010 SESSION STATE OF TENNESSEE V. DANITA COLAVECCHIO, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLANT, DANITA LANETTE WILSON, AND WENDY TUCKER, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLANT, TIFFANY NICOLE NORMAN Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record BENJAMIN DOUGLAS. ANDREW T. WAMPLER AND JOHN R. GRAHAM, KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE LOWER COURTS, HENRY V. GOINS, 104 S.W.3D 475 , 479 (TENN. 2003); MYINT V. ALLSTATE 249 S.W.3D AT 358 ; DOE 1 EX REL. DOE 1 V. ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF NASHVILLE Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record CLINTON ANDREW HACKER TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS AN INMATE IN THE BLOUNT COUNTY JAIL THE LAW PROSCRIBING THE CONDUCT. SEE STATE V. DEBORAH LEIGH GOINS, 2000 TENN NASHVILLE, MAY 25, 2000). THE DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE, CONSEQUENTLY, CANNOT PREVAIL Court of Appeals of Texas Record HOUSTON, TX, ANDREW J. MYTELKA, DANNENBERG ET AL, WHITE PLAINS, NY, ELIZABETH SALPETER, MARK MCLAUGHLIN, ANDREW FRANCISCO, CA, AUTRY W. ROSS, YETTER & WARDEN WAS NOT. ID. (AN ENRON EMPLOYEE WHO WORKED FOR ANDREW FASTOW) WAS MADE MANAGER Supreme Court of Tennessee,at Nashville. Victoria L. HENRY, et al. v. Timothy A. GOINS, et al. No. M2000-02663-SC-R11-CV. Decided: May 13, 2003 JANICE M. HOLDER, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C.J., ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., and WILLIAM M. BARKER, JJ., joined. Robert L. Whitaker, Nashville, Tennessee, for the plaintiffs-appellants, Victoria L. Henry and Peggy Henry. Paul M. Buchanan and Julie Bhattacharya Peak, Nashville, Tennessee, for the defendants-appellees, Jason M. Pope and Neal H. Dobyns d/b/a Residue Rescue. Eugene N. Bulso, Jr. and Julie Murphy Burnstein, Nashville, Tennessee, for the plaintiffs-appellees, Robert Orr-Sysco Food Services Company and Timothy A. Goins. OPINION The trial court entered an Order of Dismissal for failure to prosecute.   The order was entered with prejudice and without notice to the parties.   After the trial court reinstated Plaintiffs' claims pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 60.02”), Plaintiffs prevailed on the merits.   The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in setting aside the Order of Dismissal and vacated the judgment in Plaintiffs' favor.   We granted permission to appeal.   Because Plaintiffs presented adequate grounds for relief under Rule 60.02, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in reinstating their claims.   Therefore, we reverse that portion of the judgment of the Court of Appeals holding that the trial court erred in setting aside the Order of Dismissal.   Accordingly, we reinstate the jury verdict, and we remand this cause to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Factual and Procedural Background This case arose out of a traffic accident that occurred on November 18, 1996.   Three vehicles were involved:  a Ford Escort operated by Victoria L. Henry, in which Peggy Henry was a passenger;  a tractor-trailer operated by Timothy A. Goins and owned by Robert Orr-Sysco Food Systems Co. (“Robert Orr Sysco”); and a tractor-trailer operated by Jason M. Pope and owned by Neil H. Dobyns d/b/a Residue Rescue. Victoria and Peggy Henry filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee, seeking recovery for personal injuries against Robert Orr-Sysco, Mr. Goins, Mr. Pope, and Mr. Dobyns.   Mr. Goins and Robert Orr-Sysco filed a cross-complaint against Mr. Pope and Mr. Dobyns, seeking recovery for damages resulting from the same accident. The case had been pending for approximately fourteen months when Judge Walter Kurtz, on April 20, 1998, dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. The dismissal was in accordance with Rule 37.02 of the Local Rules of Practice of the Courts of Record of Davidson County.1  No prior notice was given to the parties that the trial court was contemplating such an action, and no hearing was held prior to the dismissal. The dismissal was with prejudice because the order failed to provide otherwise. See Tenn. R. Civ. P. 41.02(3) (stating that an involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute “operates as an adjudication upon the merits” unless the trial court otherwise directs). On May 19, 1998, cross-plaintiff Goins moved to set aside the trial court's dismissal of “the case.” Mr. Goins asserted that the judgment should be set aside because he was never notified that the court had contemplated dismissal.   The trial court heard argument on Mr. Goins' motion on June 5, 1998. The motion was unopposed.   On June 16, 1998, Judge Kurtz entered an order limiting reinstatement of the case to Mr. Goins' claims against Mr. Pope and Mr. Dobyns. On June 15, 1998, upon learning that the Order to Set Aside Dismissal would not apply to all of the plaintiffs, counsel for the Henrys filed a separate motion to set aside the dismissal.   The defendants opposed the motion.   The Henrys argued that their counsel of record was never notified that the court was contemplating dismissal and that a paralegal employed by their counsel “inadvertently misread the Motion [of Mr. Goins], assuming it to have been filed on behalf of all plaintiffs.”   As to the merits of the dismissal for failure to prosecute, the Henrys submitted an affidavit from their counsel stating that the parties had been actively negotiating alternative dispute resolution as a means of resolving the case. Judge Kurtz heard argument on the Henrys' motion to set aside the dismissal on July 17, 1998, and granted their motion for relief pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 60.02”) on August 27, 1998.   Robert Orr-Sysco requested an interlocutory appeal of the order reinstating the Henrys' claims.   Permission to appeal was denied. The case was set for trial before Judge Hamilton Gayden, and the Henrys prevailed on the merits. Robert Orr-Sysco appealed. The Court of Appeals held that under Rule 60.02 “the conduct of the paralegal cannot be treated as excusable neglect.”   On this basis, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's reinstatement of the Henrys' claims and vacated the judgment in their favor.   We granted permission to appeal. For the following reasons, we reverse the Court of Appeals' holding that the trial court erred in setting aside the Order of Dismissal, and we reinstate the jury verdict. II. Standard of Review In reviewing a trial court's decision to grant or deny relief pursuant to Rule 60.02, we give great deference to the trial court.   See Underwood v. Zurich Ins. Co., 854 S.W.2d 94, 97 (Tenn.1993). Consequently, we will not set aside the trial court's ruling unless the trial court has abused its discretion.   See id.   An abuse of discretion is found only when a trial court has “ ‘applied an incorrect legal standard, or reached a decision which is against logic or reasoning that caused an injustice to the party complaining.’ ” State v. Stevens, 78 S.W.3d 817, 832 (Tenn.2002) (quoting State v. Shuck, 953 S.W.2d 662, 669 (Tenn.1997)).   The abuse of discretion standard does not permit an appellate court to merely substitute its judgment for that of the trial court.   See Eldridge v. Eldridge, 42 S.W.3d 82, 85 (Tenn.2001). III. Analysis Rule 59.04 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed within thirty days of the entry of the judgment in question. Because the Henrys did not file a motion to set aside the dismissal of their claims within thirty days after the Order of Dismissal was entered, their sole avenue for relief from the dismissal of their claims became a motion in accordance with Rule 60.02.  Rule 60.02 provides relief from final judgments as follows: On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or the party's legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect;  (2) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (3) the judgment is void;  (4) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that a judgment should have prospective application; or (5) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.   The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1) and (2) not more than one year after the judgment, order or proceeding was entered or taken. It is clear from the content of the Henrys' Motion to Set Aside Dismissal that they sought relief pursuant to Rule 60.02, even though the motion did not mention this rule. Moreover, the trial court considered the Henrys' motion as a motion pursuant to Rule 60.02.   Because the Henrys' request for relief did not mention Rule 60.02, they also failed to specify the section of the rule upon which they were relying.   It is apparent, however, that the Henrys sought relief from final judgment under Rule 60.02(1). “[M]istake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect” is a ground for relief from a final judgment under Rule 60.02(1).   Among other reasons for relief, the Henrys alleged that the “excusable neglect and inadvertent mistake” of a paralegal employed by their counsel caused them to fail to join the Motion to Set Aside Dismissal filed by Mr. Goins. In an affidavit, the paralegal stated that she “inadvertently misread the Motion [of Mr. Goins], assuming it to have been filed on behalf of all plaintiffs.”   The Court of Appeals held that the paralegal's conduct was not a sufficient basis for post-judgment relief.   We agree that the paralegal's conduct in this case does not provide grounds for relief. Although Rule 59.04 and Rule 60.02 are distinct, there is considerable overlap between them.   In this case, the grounds that Mr. Goins successfully asserted in support of post-judgment relief were essentially the same grounds upon which the Henrys relied in seeking relief. Both Mr. Goins and the Henrys argued that their claims should be reinstated because they were never notified that the trial court was contemplating dismissal.   The motions of Mr. Goins and the Henrys requesting reinstatement of their claims were appropriately construed as motions pursuant to Rule 59.04 and Rule 60.02, respectively, according to the time when the motions were filed. That the Henrys' motion would be untimely under Rule 59.04 is of no consequence if they meet the requirements for relief under Rule 60.02(1).   Under Rule 60.02(1), the Henrys' request for relief must be evaluated to determine whether the court may “relieve [them] from a final judgment.”   The final judgment in this case was the Order of Dismissal that was entered without notice.   As relief under Rule 60.02 is available “from a final judgment” (emphasis added), generally speaking, the grounds for relief asserted under Rule 60.02(1) must have occurred at or before the entry of the final judgment and must have resulted in the judgment's entry.  Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02;  see also Thomas M. McInnis & Assocs., Inc. v. Hall, 318 N.C. 421, 349 S.E.2d 552, 555 (1986) (construing a rule identical to Rule 60.02(1) and observing that excusable neglect must have occurred at or before entry of the judgment and must have caused it to be entered). The final judgment from which the Henrys seek relief under Rule 60.02(1) obviously did not result from any “excusable neglect and inadvertent mistake” on the part of the paralegal because the paralegal's conduct occurred subsequent to the entry of the Order of Dismissal.   What occurred after the entry of the Order of Dismissal should not have been considered in determining whether relief pursuant to Rule 60.02(1) was justified, except as it might relate to whether the Henrys' Motion to Set Aside Dismissal was made within a reasonable time.2  See, e.g., Norton v. Sawyer, 30 N.C.App. 420, 227 S.E.2d 148, 152 (1976).   Thus, even if the Henrys' failure to file a motion pursuant to Rule 59.04 were the product of the paralegal's “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect,” such conduct would not provide grounds for relief under Rule 60.02(1).   Although the paralegal's conduct is not a basis for relief from the Order of Dismissal, the Henrys' Motion to Set Aside Dismissal sets forth other circumstances that may constitute excusable neglect under Rule 60.02(1).   In this case, the “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect” upon which the Henrys properly relied in seeking relief is the “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect” that resulted in the dismissal of their claims. When a party has no notice of a critical step in a court proceeding, the circumstances may make out a case of excusable neglect.   See, e.g., Tenn. Dep't of Human Serv. v. Barbee, 689 S.W.2d 863, 868 (Tenn.1985) (holding that failure of notice constitutes excusable neglect justifying relief from default judgment when combined with other requirements for such relief); Jerkins v. McKinney, 533 S.W.2d 275, 281 (Tenn.1976) (holding that failure to notify counsel of entry of an order overruling motion for new trial constituted excusable neglect justifying relief under Rule 60.02(1)).   The entry of the Order of Dismissal was a critical step in the Henrys' lawsuit because the order disposed of the case as completely as a judgment after a trial on the merits. In determining whether lack of notice of the impending dismissal demonstrates excusable neglect in this case, we will look to cases that decide whether default judgments should be set aside.  A dismissal for failure to prosecute is analogous to a default judgment.   When a defendant fails to answer a complaint, the plaintiff may obtain a default judgment without a hearing on the merits.   When a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case, the defendant may receive a judgment of dismissal without a hearing on the merits.   Both dismissals and default judgments are drastic sanctions.   See United Coin Meter Co. v. Seaboard Coastline R.R., 705 F.2d 839, 845 (6th Cir.1983);  Barish v. Metro. Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County, Tenn., 627 S.W.2d 953, 955 (Tenn.Ct.App.1981).   Neither dismissals nor default judgments are favored by the courts.   See Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 866;  Mfrs. Consolidation Serv., Inc. v. Rodell, 42 S.W.3d 846, 864 (Tenn.Ct.App.2000).   Dismissals based on procedural grounds like failure to prosecute and default judgments run counter to the judicial system's general objective of disposing of cases on the merits.   See, e.g., Childress v. Bennett, 816 S.W.2d 314, 316 (Tenn.1991) (observing that “it is the general rule that courts are reluctant to give effect to rules of procedure ․ which prevent a litigant from having a claim adjudicated upon its merits”); Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 866 (stating that in the interests of justice, courts express a clear preference for a trial on the merits).  Rule 55.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure permits trial courts to set aside default judgments in accordance with Rule 60.02.   Courts construe requests for relief pursuant to Rule 60.02 much more liberally in cases involving default judgment than in cases following a trial on the merits.   See Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 866;  Nelson v. Simpson, 826 S.W.2d 483, 485 (Tenn.Ct.App.1991).   A request to vacate a default judgment in accordance with Rule 60.02 should be granted if there is reasonable doubt as to the justness of dismissing the case before it can be heard on its merits.   See Nelson, 826 S.W.2d at 486.   A request to vacate an order of dismissal pursuant to Rule 60.02 should be granted under the same circumstances.   Such liberality is especially warranted when an order of dismissal is entered with prejudice and without such procedural safeguards as notice, considering that Rule 55.01 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure requires notice to be given before a default judgment is granted.   Because of the similarity between default judgments and dismissals, we find instructive those factors that are used to determine if a default judgment should be vacated under Rule 60.02(1). Those factors include:  (1) whether the default was willful;  (2) whether the defendant has a meritorious defense;  and (3) whether the non-defaulting party would be prejudiced if relief were granted.   See Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 866.   These same factors should apply in cases when relief from an order of dismissal is sought under Rule 60.02(1).   When a party seeks relief from a final judgment pursuant to Rule 60.02, the burden of proof rests with that party.   See Federated Ins. Co. v. Lethcoe, 18 S.W.3d 621, 624 (Tenn.2000);   Banks v. Dement Constr. Co., 817 S.W.2d 16, 18 (Tenn.1991).   Furthermore, the party seeking relief must offer proof of the basis upon which relief is sought. See Lethcoe, 18 S.W.3d at 624;  Banks, 817 S.W.2d at 18. Our review of the record indicates that there was ample evidence before the trial court to support its decision to reinstate the Henrys' claims pursuant to Rule 60.02.   Turning to the first factor, the Henrys were not personally at fault for the sua sponte dismissal of their claims.   The trial court's failure to provide notice that it was contemplating dismissal precluded the Henrys from addressing the merits of the dismissal for failure to prosecute before the final judgment was entered.   In support of their Motion to Set Aside Dismissal, the Henrys submitted proof that the parties had been actively negotiating toward settlement and that, contrary to the trial court's contention in its Order of Dismissal, the case had not actually been dormant for an extended period of time.   As to the second factor, it is clear that the Henrys had a meritorious claim.   When their claims were reinstated, the Henrys obtained a judgment in their favor.   As to the third factor, Robert Orr-Sysco did not assert any specific prejudice that would result if the Henrys' claims were reinstated.   Simply having to proceed to trial does not constitute prejudice, nor does the mere passage of time.   See Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 867; Nelson, 826 S.W.2d at 486.   The application of these three factors shows that the Henrys have demonstrated excusable neglect, a ground for relief pursuant to Rule 60.02(1).   In the case before us, the trial court exercised its discretion by determining that the dismissal should be vacated and that a hearing on the merits should be held.   We have recognized that “the trial court is in the best position to assess the various factors that should be considered in determining whether a default judgment should be vacated and its finding is entitled to great weight.”  Barbee, 689 S.W.2d at 867.   Similarly, we believe the trial court is in the best position to decide whether its Order of Dismissal should be set aside.   Although the “escape valve” of Rule 60.02 should not be easily opened, we have recognized that the purpose of Rule 60.02 is to protect parties “ ‘from possible inequity that might otherwise arise from the unrelenting imposition of finality imbedded in our procedural rules.’ ”   Toney v. Mueller Co., 810 S.W.2d 145, 146 (Tenn.1991) (quoting Thompson v. Firemen's Fund Ins. Co., 798 S.W.2d 235, 238 (Tenn.1990)).   In addition, this Court has observed that the power to order sua sponte the involuntary dismissal of an action “must be exercised most sparingly and with great care that the right of the respective parties to a hearing shall not be denied or impaired.”  Harris v. Baptist Mem'l Hosp., 574 S.W.2d 730, 731 (Tenn.1978).   Had the trial court dismissed the case without prejudice, the parties could have moved to reinstate the case or could have re-filed their claims within the time permitted by the savings statute.   We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in reinstating the Henrys' claims because the circumstances of this case create a reasonable, if not compelling, question of whether the dismissal should be set aside.   See Nelson, 826 S.W.2d at 486. The remainder of the issues raised by Robert Orr-Sysco are without merit. IV. Conclusion Because the record shows that the Henrys presented adequate grounds for relief under Rule 60.02, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in reinstating the Henrys' claims.   Therefore, we reverse that portion of the judgment of the Court of Appeals holding that the trial court erred in setting aside the Order of Dismissal.   The jury verdict is reinstated.   The Henrys did not appeal the Court of Appeals' award of discretionary costs to Robert Orr-Sysco, and this award is affirmed.   The cause is remanded to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.   Costs of this appeal are taxed to Robert Orr-Sysco and its surety, for which execution may issue if necessary. FOOTNOTES 1.  In 1997, Rule 37.02 of the Local Rules of Practice of the Courts of Record of Davidson County read, “To expedite cases, the court may take reasonable measures to purge the docket of old cases. The Presiding Judge, with the concurrence of the judges or chancellors affected, may make such necessary orders and take such actions as are required to see that the dockets are uniformly purged.” Rule 37.01 (1997) provided that “[a]ll civil cases must be concluded or set for trial within twelve months from date of filing unless the court has directed a shorter or longer period for specific cases. These time standards will be implemented by appropriate orders from the court.” 2.  Under Rule 60.02(1), a request for relief must be made within a reasonable time and not more than one year after the judgment was entered.   See Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02.   The interval of time between the Order of Dismissal and the Motion to Set Aside Dismissal was approximately two months. We conclude that the Henrys' motion under Rule 60.02(1) was timely. JANICE M. HOLDER, J. ╔——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╗ █████▒▄▄▄ ███▄ ▄███▓ ██▓ ██▓ ▓██ ██▓ ▓██ ▒▒████▄ ▓██▒▀█▀ ██▒▓██▒▓██▒ ▒██ ██▒ ▒████ ░▒██ ▀█▄ ▓██ ▓██░▒██▒▒██░ ▒██ ██░ ░▓█▒ ░░██▄▄▄▄██ ▒██ ▒██ ░██░▒██░ ░ ▐██▓░ ░▒█░ ▓█ ▓██▒▒██▒ ░██▒░██░░██████▒ ░ ██▒▓░ ▒ ░ ▒▒ ▓▒█░░ ▒░ ░ ░░▓ ░ ▒░▓ ░ ██▒▒▒ ░ ▒ ▒▒ ░░ ░ ░ ▒ ░░ ░ ▒ ░▓██ ░▒░ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ▒ ░ ░ ░ ▒ ▒ ░░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░ ░░ ░ daddy genesis ░ ░ kt is my egirl ~ fed ╚——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————╝ ま MOTHER(DECEASED) ま ま ; NAME // DEBORAH ま ; LAST // GOINS ま ; AGE // 66 ま ; BIRTHDAY // N/A ま ; PICTURES // https://imgur.com/a/zx8Dmju ま ; BIRTH PLACE // N/A ま ; SCHOOLING // N/A ま ; PHONE NUMBER // (615) 889-1122 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported May 2003 ま ; PAST PHONE NUMBERS // (889) 889-1122 Landline First reported July 1993 ま ; SOCIAL MEDIAS // N/A BECAUSE THE BITCH IS A SKELETON ま ; ADDRESS // 2322 Dennywood Dr Nashville TN 37214 ま ; PAST ADDRESSES // 253 Clovernook Dr, Unit B Nashville TN 37210 Davidson County Recorded March 2003 2235 Weona Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded January 1998 ま ; NEIGHBORS // Carolyn Thompson (615) 889-8049 2925 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Bryan Shah (978) 869-2490 2924 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 T Gray 2927 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Shirley Tolbert 2928 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Teresa Barbro (205) 433-3571 2923 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Vera Fisk (615) 587-7751 2929 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Robert Meyer (615) 883-3531 2922 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Amelia Marley (817) 249-2285 2921 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 ま ; ASSOCIATES // N/A ま ; RELATIVES // Deanna Braden Age 43 (Aug 1978) Sabrina Austin Age 44 (Jan 1977) Timothy Goins Age 64 (May 1957) Alexandra Len Age 28 (Apr 1993) Ashley Goins Age 35 (Jul 1986) Brittney Goins Age 22 (May 1999) Christopher Moore Age 43 (Oct 1978) Darryl Goins Age 61 (Jul 1960) Daryl Braden Age 44 (Jan 1977) David Moore Age 65 (Apr 1956) Donna Goins Age 64 (Mar 1957) Edward Tillman Age 45 (May 1976) Fostena Goins Age 45 (Mar 1976) Fostena Kincaid Age 81 (Jan 1940) Gary Goins Age 32 (Jan 1989) Gregory Len Age 61 (Jul 1960) Jay Austin Age 26 (Apr 1995) Jessica Len Age 33 (Jan 1988) John Tillman Age 46 (Jan 1975) Kathleen Len Age 61 (Oct 1960) Lynn Moore Age 75 (Nov 1946) Matau Goins Age 45 (Aug 1976) Mataylin Goins Age 20 (Mar 2001) Matthew Mcdonald Age 61 (Jun 1960) Morgan Len Age 30 (Mar 1991) Rebecca Goins Age 54 (Jan 1967) Sabrina Goins Age 44 (Jan 1977) Sheri Moore Age 63 (Feb 1958) Stephanie Ellis Age 42 (Mar 1979) Stephen Moore Age 34 (Mar 1987) Willis Moore Age 63 (Dec 1957) ま ; EDUCATION // N/A ま ; VOTER RECORDS // N/A ま ; COURT RECORDS // Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record | COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE JONATHAN PATRICK HAYES V. DEBORAH INGRID HAYES IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE JUNE 29, 2007 SESSION JONATHAN PATRICK HAYES V. DEBORAH INGRID HAYES DIRECT APPEAL FROM THE Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) FILED PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, ) AUG 27, 2014 ) DEBORAH S NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE. THE TWO PIRU GANGS SOMETIMES COLLABORATED AND OPERATED IN THE GROUP. NEWSOME TOLD WILSON THAT MICHAEL GOINS A MEMBER OF A RIVAL GANG CALLED Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record DEBORAH LEIGH GOINS, NO. M1998-00758-CCA-R3-CD, 2000 WL 218206 , AT *10 (TENN. CRIM SENTENCING. IN GOINS, THE DEFENDANT WAS CONVICTED OF LEAVING THE SCENE OF AN DEFENDANT IN GOINS, THE APPELLANT DID NOT PRESENT ANY PROOF AT TRIAL OF HOW HIS Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record REPORTER, SUSAN ROSEN, STATE COUNSEL, NASHVILLE, PATIENCE BRANHAM, ASSISTANT RONNIE DAVIS AND DEBORAH BURNS ALSO WITNESSED THE INCIDENT. THEIR TESTIMONY AT 1995 WL 284048 (TENN. CRIM. APP., AT NASHVILLE, MAY 11, 1995); STATE V. JAMES E Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record GOINS IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE JULY 1999 CLERK V. * HON. FRANK CLEMENT, JR., JUDGE DEBORAH LEIGH GOINS, * (LEAVING THE | COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE STATE V. DEBORAH LEIGH Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record | COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE STATE V. GOINS IN THE L. HILL, JUDGE DSHANNON H. GOINS, ) ) (SENTENCING) APPELLANT. ) FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: DEBORAH HUSKINS JOHN KNOX WALKUP ASSISTANT PUBLIC DEFENDER Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record DEBORAH S. HUNT, CLERK BRIAN A. STARKS, ) ) PETITIONER-APPELLANT, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM 1999, PETITIONER AND TWO FRIENDS WENT TO A NASHVILLE HOUSING PROJECT TO SELL GOINS V. SMITH, 556 F. APPX 434, 440 (6TH CIR. 2014). BUT SEE MCKINLEY V. BUTLER Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record TENNESSEE; MARK GOINS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COORDINATOR OF ELECTIONS FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE. NO GENERAL, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR APPELLANTS. ON RESPONSE: EZRA D. ROSENBERG Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Record 16-5558 FILED JAN 27, 2017 DEBORAH S. HUNT, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF COMPLAINT. GOINS V. CLOROX CO., 926 F.2D 559 , 561 (6TH CIR. 1991). THE PARTY OPPOSING PRIOR TO THE INJURY-CAUSING EVENT. SEE AMOS V. METRO GOVT OF NASHVILLE AND Ohio Court of Appeals Record THE HEARING, DEBORAH HARRISON OF THE CLEVELAND POLICE DEPARTMENT TESTIFIED THAT EXCUSE HER. THE COURT IS EXCUSING HER FOR THIS VERY REASON. MR. GOINS: I UNDERSTAND FEBRUARY 24, 2001, FROM CLEVELAND, THROUGH NASHVILLE, AND TO LOS ANGELES. THE Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record DEBORAH A. TULLIS CHANDLER LAW FIRM ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL 2502 MT. MORIAH RD NASHVILLE, TN 37243 WILLIAM L. GIBBONS DISTRICT ATTORNEY GENERAL THOMAS D. HENDERSON 801.7, AT 498-99 (EMPHASIS IN ORIGINAL); SEE STATE V. GOINS, NO. 03C01-9502-CR Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record DEFENDER; AND DEBORAH BLACK HUSKINS, ASSISTANT DISTRICT PUBLIC DEFENDER, JOHNSON CRIM. APP. LEXIS 118, AT *14-15 (TENN. CRIM. APP., NASHVILLE, FEB. 9, 2001), THIS SIMILARLY, IN STATE V. DSHANNON H. GOINS, NO. 03C01-9704-CR-00154, 1998 TENN Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record THE LAW PROSCRIBING THE CONDUCT. SEE STATE V. DEBORAH LEIGH GOINS, 2000 TENN NASHVILLE, MAY 25, 2000). THE DEFENDANT IN THIS CASE, CONSEQUENTLY, CANNOT PREVAIL Court of Appeals of Texas Record & CAPPUCI LLP, CORPORATION'S VARIOUS FRAUDULENT PRACTICES AND NEW YORK, NY, DEBORAH SALKY, DEBORAH J. PA, THOMAS J. BLESSINGTON, OFFICE OF ATTY GEN, PHILADELPHIA BANK IN NASHVILLE V. WEDGE GROUP, INC., 882 F.2D 1087 , 1091 (6TH CIR.1989) (MOVING ま FATHER ま ま ; NAME // TIMOTHY ま ; LAST // GOINS ま ; AGE // 40 ま ; PHOTO // https://imgur.com/a/zx8Dmju ま ; SSN // 408-52-XXXX - 415-96-XXXX ま ; BIRTHDAY // N/A ま ; BIRTH PLACE // N/A ま ; SCHOOLING // N/A ま ; JOB // StorPlace Self Storage ま ; PHONE NUMBER // (615) 889-1122 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported June 2007 ま ; PAST PHONE NUMBERS // (615) 286-1569 Landline Dekalb Telephone Cooperative First reported October 2007 (615) 942-9529 Landline Comcast Phone of Tennessee LLC - TN First reported September 2008 (615) 754-0949 Landline Tennessee Telephone Company First reported July 2015 (615) 882-5893 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported October 1993 (615) 885-7452 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported September 2008 (615) 504-5392 Wireless Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless - TN First reported June 2008 (615) 482-5364 Wireless Powertel Nashville Licenses Inc First reported September 2021 (615) 586-7944 Wireless New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC - GA First reported August 2016 (615) 482-6845 Wireless Powertel Nashville Licenses Inc First reported March 2016 (615) 316-9637 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported March 2016 (615) 316-9744 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported March 2016 (615) 391-1717 Landline Bellsouth Telecommunications Inc dba South Central Bell Telephone First reported March 2016 ま ; SOCIAL MEDIAS // FACEBOOK // https://www.facebook.com/timothy.goins ま ; ADDRESS // 2322 Dennywood Dr. Nashville, TN 37214 ま ; PAST ADDRESSES // 2932 Twin Lawn Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded June 2008 2322 Dennywood Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded June 2007 Home Phone: (615) 889-1122 35 Norene Rd Lebanon TN 37090 Wilson County Recorded October 2007 Home Phone: (615) 286-1569 2932M Twin Lawn Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded July 2007 2920 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded August 2001 2926 Lakeland Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded September 2000 1417 N Magnolia Ave Ocala FL 34475 Marion County Recorded September 2008 2235 Weona Dr Nashville TN 37214 Davidson County Recorded January 1998 ま ; NEIGHBORS // N/A ま ; ASSOCIATES // Buford Moser Age 85 (Sep 1936) Joyce Moser Age 88 (Feb 1933) Jay Austin Age 26 (Apr 1995) Sheri Moore Age 63 (Feb 1958) Tyler Austin Age 24 (Dec 1996) ま ; RELATIVES // Deborah Goins Age 66 (Oct 1955) Spouse Ashley Goins Age 35 (Jul 1986) Brittney Goins Age 22 (May 1999) Darryl Goins Age 30 (Sep 1991) Darryl Goins Age 61 (Jul 1960) Darryl Goins Age 61 (Jul 1960) Deanna Braden Age 43 (Aug 1978) Donna Goins Age 64 (Mar 1957) Rebecca Goins Age 58 (Jan 1963) Rebecca Goins Age 54 (Jan 1967) Sabrina Austin Age 44 (Jan 1977) Sabrina Goins Age 44 (May 1977) Sabrina Goins Age 44 (Jan 1977) Cheryl Pate Age 57 (Aug 1964) Cheryl Pate Age 57 (Aug 1964) Christopher Moore Age 43 (Oct 1978) Daryl Braden Age 44 (Jan 1977) David Moore Age 65 (Apr 1956) Donna Moore Age 64 (Aug 1957) Earl Nelson Age 67 (Jan 1954) Fostena Goins Age 45 (Mar 1976) ま ; EDUCATION // Stratford Comprehensive High School, Nashville, TN ま ; VOTER RECORDS // N/A ま ; COURT RECORDS // Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record | COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE VICTORIA HENRY V. TIMOTHY GOINS L. HENRY, ET AL. V. TIMOTHY A. GOINS, ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR INJURIES AGAINST ROBERT ORR-SYSCO, TIMOTHY GOINS, NEAL DOBYNS AND JASON POPE. MR Tennessee Supreme Court Record VICTORIA L. HENRY, ET AL. V. TIMOTHY A. GOINS, ET AL. SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, ROBERT ORR-SYSCO FOOD SERVICES COMPANY AND TIMOTHY A. GOINS TRAILER OPERATED BY TIMOTHY A. GOINS AND OWNED BY ROBERT ORR-SYSCO FOOD SYSTEMS CO Davidson County, Tennessee Court Record COUNTY ELECTION COMMISSION TIMOTHY L WARNOCK RETAINED 615-320-3700(W) PLAINTIFF EMERGENCY MOTION TO RESET HEARING 07/05/2018 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE TIMOTHY L ISSUED TO: ASA ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC., NASHVILLE, TN - PERSONAL SERVICE Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record STAMPS, JR. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ASSIGNED ON THE CHANCERY COURT FOR WILLIAMSON COUNTY NO. 37591 TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JUDGE NO APPELLANT, KAREN D. STAMPS. ROSE PALERMO, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLEE, ROY Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record CHRISTOPHER S. LOVE IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR HICKMAN COUNTY NO. 04-5086CR TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JUDGE ROAD. NEAR MIDNIGHT, SHE CAME TO THE GOINS HOME AND BEAT ON THE DOOR. UPON Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record TIMOTHY BOWLES, ROBERT PAYNE, AND RANDY MILLS. PAMELA S. LORCH, NASHVILLE NASHVILLE DECEMBER 19, 2013 SESSION ANTONIUS HARRIS, ET AL. V. TENNESSEE APPELLATE COURTS. SEE THIRD NATL BANK IN NASHVILLE V. KNOBLER, 789 S.W.2D 254 , 255 Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record TIMOTHY THOMAS WARREN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE JULY 13, 2010 SESSION CRISTINA SUZANNE WARREN V. TIMOTHY THOMAS WARREN APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT SUZANNE WARREN. MARK R. OLSON, CLARKSVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLEE, TIMOTHY Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE HOLLY D. BUTLER V. TIMOTHY K. VINSANT JUVENILE COURT FOR | COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE HOLLY D. BUTLER V. TIMOTHY K VINSANT IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE MARCH 26, 2013 SESSION District Court, M.D. Tennessee Record STATES DISTRICT COURT, M.D. TENNESSEE, NASHVILLE DIVISION. MAY 3, 2006. FREDERICK RUDMAN & ROBBINS, LLP, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, TIMOTHY L. MILES, BARRETT, JOHNSTON & PARSLEY, NASHVILLE, TN, JEFFREY A. BARRACK, LEONARD BARRACK, BARRACK, RODOS Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record | COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE TADD TIMOTHY BROWN V. DAWN VERONICA BROWN IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ASSIGNED ON BRIEFS JULY 1, 2016 TADD TIMOTHY BROWN V. DAWN VERONICA BROWN APPEAL FROM THE CHANCERY Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record AND JOSH PASCHALL IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ASSIGNED ON FROM THE HICKMAN COUNTY CHANCERY COURT NO. 11-CV-4446 TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JUDGE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, NASHVILLE TENNESSEE, FOR THE RESPONDENT/APPELLEES TURNEY Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Record DAVIDSON, III, JOINED, CONCURRING SEPARATELY. JUDGE TIMOTHY W. CONNER DISSENTED LOCATION IS ROYAL INSURANCE . . . IN NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE. . . . THIS WAS DECISION IN HUDGINS V. NASHVILLE BRIDGE CO., 113 S.W.2D 738 (TENN. 1938) IN WHICH IT District Court, M.D. Tennessee Record COLUMBUS, OH, TIMOTHY K. GARRETT, BASS, BERRY & SIMS, NASHVILLE, TN, FOR NASHVILLE DIVISION. MARCH 31, 2010. DAVID W. SANFORD, SANFORD, WITTELS & HEISLER, LLP DRESCHER & SHARP, P.C., NASHVILLE, TN, FOR PLAINTIFF. ADAM CARL WIT, KEITH C. HULT Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Record BOARD IN WHICH JUDGE TIMOTHY W. CONNER JOINED. PRESIDING JUDGE MARSHALL L CASES ON THE MERITS. HENRY V. GOINS, 104 S.W.3D 475 , 481 (TENN. 2003). EMPLOYER NASHVILLE, TN 37243 TELEPHONE: 615-253-1606 ELECTRONIC MAIL: WCAPPEALS.CLERK Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Record WHICH JUDGE DAVID F. HENSLEY JOINED. JUDGE TIMOTHY W. CONNER DISSENTED. ARTHUR C NASHVILLE. THE APPEALS BOARD EXTENDS ITS APPRECIATION TO THE LAW SCHOOL FOR OF CASES ON THE MERITS. HENRY V. GOINS, 104 S.W.3D 475 , 481 (TENN. 2003 Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE, AT NASHVILLE. DECEMBER 8, 1994 NASHVILLE, FOR APPELLEE. RICHARD MCGEE (APPEAL ONLY), R.N. "BO" TAYLOR (TRIAL ONLY NASHVILLE, FOR APPELLANT. NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL APPLIED FOR TO THE SUPREME Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record THE JUVENILE COURT FOR KNOX COUNTY NO. F9235 TIMOTHY IRWIN, JUDGE NO. E2011-00292 GOINS, 104 S.W.3D 475 , 479 (TENN. 2003); MYINT V. ALLSTATE INS. CO., 970 S.W V. ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF NASHVILLE, 154 S.W.3D AT 42. TO AVOID RESULT Tennessee Supreme Court Record ESPOSITO. GEORGE H. CATE, III, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, TIMOTHY J. RIVELLI, CORNELIUS THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE SEPTEMBER 3, 2009 SESSION HEARD AT JOINED. RON H. PURSELL AND EDWARD A. HADLEY, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, FOR THE Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record APPE LLANT. ) RECKLESS ENDANGERM ENT) FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: TIMOTHY CHARLOTTE AVENUE NASHVILLE, TN 37243-0491 JOH N W. P IERO TTI DISTRICT ATTORNEY SEPARATE AND DISTINCT. STATE V. GOINS, 705 S.W .2D 648, 650 (TENN. 198 6 Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Record STE. 1-B NASHVILLE, TN 37243 TELEPHONE: 615-253-1606 ELECTRONIC MAIL JUDGE TIMOTHY W. CONNER DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE APPEALS BOARD, IN WHICH JUDGE MERITS). HENRY V. GOINS, 104 S.W.3D 475 , 481 (TENN. 2003) (EMPHASIS ADDED). THE Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record 2010. CHARLES TIMOTHY TISHER, COLUMBIA, TN AND WILLIAM NELSON BATES, NASHVILLE NASHVILLE. MARCH 25, 2009 SESSION. JUNE 1, 2009. ORDER ON DENIAL OF REHEARING JUNE TN, FOR THE APPELLANT, CITY OF COLUMBIA. PHILLIP LEON DAVIDSON, NASHVILLE, TN Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record TIMOTHY TISHER, COLUMBIA, TN AND WILLIAM NELSON BATES, NASHVILLE, TN, FOR THE THE CITY OF COLUMBIA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE MARCH 25 APPELLANTS, CITY OF COLUMBIA PHILLIP LEON DAVIDSON, NASHVILLE, TN, FOR THE APPELLEES Court of Appeals of Tennessee Record TIMOTHY SCOTT MESSER 09/27/2019 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON JUNE 18, 2019 SESSION ANDREA (MESSER) SCHWAGER V. TIMOTHY SCOTT MESSER APPEAL FROM TAYLOR AND JOHN N. BEAN, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, FOR THE APPELLEE, TIMOTHY SCOTT Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record | COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE TIMOTHY TERELL MCKINNEY JUNE 3, 2008 SESSION TIMOTHY TERELL MCKINNEY V. STATE OF TENNESSEE APPEAL FROM W2006-02132-CCA-R3-PD - FILED MARCH 9, 2010 THE PETITIONER, TIMOTHY TERELL MCKINNEY Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record DAVID LEON GRAVES IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE OF THE COURT, IN WHICH ROBERT H. MONTGOMERY, JR., AND TIMOTHY L. EASTER, JJ U.S. 386 , 391-92 (1958)). IN STATE V. GOINS, 705 S.W.2D 648 , 651 (TENN. 1986 Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee Record HAYES, JJ., JOINED. ROBERT BRANNON (AT TRIAL AND ON APPEAL) AND TIMOTHY FRANCAVELLA SEE STATE V. LEON GOINS, NO. W1999-01681-CCA-R3-CD, 1999 WL 1531111 , AT *2 AT *15 (TENN. CRIM. APP., AT NASHVILLE, MAY 13, 2003), PERM APP. DENIED (TENN Court of Appeals of Texas Record KAPLAN & VESELKA, RICHARD BRUCE DRUBEL, JR., BOIES SCHILLER TIMOTHY PFEIFER TIMOTHY HAUSER, ROBIN SPRINGBERG SPAEDER LLP, WASHINGTON, DC, BARNES H. ELLIS, DAVID BANK IN NASHVILLE V. WEDGE GROUP, INC., 882 F.2D 1087 , 1091 (6TH CIR.1989) (MOVING