BILLY HUGHES ET AL. v. LEE MASONRY PRODUCTS, INC. ET AL. - Articles

All Content

BILLY HUGHES ET AL. v. LEE MASONRY PRODUCTS, INC. ET AL.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Mar 25, 2026

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1: W. Timothy Harvey, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Billy Hughes, Tammy Hughes, and Hughes Construction Corporation.

Attorneys 2: Owen R. Lipscomb, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellee, Lee Masonry Products, Inc., d/b/a Lee Brick & Block.

Attorneys 3: Jack W. Robinson, Jr., and William C. Scales, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Acme Building Brands, Inc., and Acme Brick Company.

Judge(s): CLEMENT

The homeowners and a general contractor commenced this action for breach of contract, breach of express warranty, and breach of implied warranty against a brick manufacturer and its distributor. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants based on the plaintiffs’ failure to provide an opportunity to cure. We affirm in part and reverse in part. Having determined that Article 2 of Tennessee’s Uniform Commercial Code controls the sale of the bricks and that the bricks were accepted, it was unnecessary for the plaintiffs to provide an opportunity to cure before filing suit. Still, we conclude that the manufacturer was entitled to summary judgment on all claims because it had no privity of contract with the plaintiffs.

Attachments: