COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Edna Cooksey, et al vs. HCA Health Services of TN
M2001-00303-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
The only question in this appeal is whether the injury a patient suffered during post-operative care resulted from a medical procedure and, therefore, required expert proof to establish the hospital's liability. The Circuit Court of Davidson County held that the complaint sought damages for professional negligence and that since the plaintiff did not rebut the hospital's motion for summary judgment with any expert proof, the complaint must be dismissed. We affirm.

W2000-02162-COA-R3-CV
W2000-02162-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Harold W. Horne

Elizabeth Ramsey vs. Larry Henson
W2000-02162-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Harold W. Horne
This is an appeal from a juvenile court proceeding regarding child support and visitation. The minor child was born in 1996; the mother and father never married each other. Mother filed a petition to establish paternity, and a blood test established the father's paternity of the child. On June 20, 1996, a consent order was entered providing that the mother would have full custody of the minor child, and that the parties would work out a child support agreement between themselves, as well as a visitation schedule. The consent order stated that if either party moved more than 90 miles from the permanent residence of the other party, both parties would share equally in transportation costs. After much litigation, including two prior appeals, the trial court entered an order which included inter alia the denial of several motions by the defendant father, an increase in the father's child support obligation, an awarding of attorney's fees to the plaintiff mother, and the setting aside of any future visitation by the father with the minor child until the father obtains substantial psychological counseling and demonstrates that the resumption of visitation is in the child's best interest. The father again appeals. We affirm, finding ample support for the order of the trial court.

Richard Johnson vs. Stoney Hunter
M2000-03099-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Brothers

Richard Johnson vs. Stoney Hunter
M2000-03099-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Brothers

In re: Rhoda Armster
M2000-00776-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Holloway
This appeal involves a conservatorship action and an effort to set aside a will and related documents. Mrs. Armster executed a living trust, in which she named herself as the beneficiary during her life time. She also executed a will, which devised her entire estate to the trust and named The Bible Hygiene New Direction Training Center as beneficiary of the trust upon her death. Appellant, a child of Mrs. Armster, filed suit in Chancery Court and sought to: (1) have a conservator appointed for his mother to manage her legal and financial affairs; (2) have the trust and will set aside on the basis that his mother did not have sufficient mental capacity to execute the documents; and (3) have the will set aside because it was obtained as a result of undue influence. The trial court did not appoint a conservator and found that Mrs. Armster had the requisite mental capacity to execute the documents. Further, the court found that the will was valid as it was not the result of undue influence. We affirm the decisions of the trial court.

Katy Wilson, et al vs. Dickson County
M2000-02680-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace
This is a GTLA action for damages for wrongful death caused by the admitted negligence of a paramedic, (who enjoyed no immunity) employed by the county, which enjoyed immunity. Pecuniary damages of $385,000 for the value of the decedent's life were awarded, together with a separate award of $500,000 for "consortium-type damages." As against the County and its ambulance service, the total award cannot exceed $130,000. As against the paramedic the award is limited only by the standard of reasonableness. The total award is reduced to $500,000.

Precision Mechanical Contractors vs. Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency
M2000-02117-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from a dispute over two construction contracts. One contract involved the replacement of furnaces at the Preston Taylor Homes Housing Project, and the other contract was for underground utilities and site work at the Tony Sudekum Homes Housing Project. Plaintiff filed suit seeking additional compensation based upon its performance of the two contracts with Defendant. The trial court granted Defendant's motion for an involuntary dismissal after the close of Plaintiff's proof. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Ancro Finance vs. Kevin Johnson vs. Dyncorp
W2000-02709-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This appeal involves the dismissal of a petition for writs of certiorari and supersedeas brought by a garnishee in circuit court. After the garnishee failed to attend a hearing in general sessions court, a final judgment was entered. Instead of appealing the judgment as a matter of right to the circuit court, the garnishee petitioned the court for writs of certiorari and supersedeas. The circuit court dismissed the garnishee's petition. Because the garnishee failed to show proper grounds for writs of certiorari and supersedeas in lieu of an appeal, we affirm the decision of the circuit court.

Richard Norton vs. Randy Eckman
W2001-00762-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
The Plaintiff, an inmate in a correctional facility, has appealed the trial court's grant of Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We reverse the order of dismissal and remand to the trial court to dispose of the Plaintiff's summary judgment motion.

Mickey Joe Hall vs. Kimberlie Kae Davenport Hall
E2009-01889-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.
Trial Court Judge: Michael W. Moyers, Chancellor
This is a post-divorce child support modification case. Kimberlie Kae Davenport Hall ("Wife") filed a petition against her former husband, Mickey Joe Hall ("Husband"), seeking an increase in child support. Wife's petition, filed October 23, 2001, was followed by numerous hearings before special masters over the course of several years. The masters filed reports from each of the hearings, all of which were objected to by one or both of the parties. Interspersed among the masters' hearings, the trial court addressed various matters including the issue of child support. On January 23, 2009, the trial court held a hearing at which it ruled that the Income Shares formula for calculating child support under the Child Support Guidelines ("the Guidelines") as they existed at the time of the hearing, i.e., on January 23, 2009, was applicable to the calculation of support for the period from November 1, 2001, forward. The final order being appealed by Wife applied the formula and determined that Husband had overpaid his child support by $27,377.25. The court allowed Wife certain offsets which reduced the final judgment against Wife to $24,810.65. We affirm in part and vacate in part and remand for an upward modification of Husband's support due to a "hardship" imposed on Wife by the rigid application of the Income Shares formula.

Judith Thomas vs. William Thomas
E2001-00191-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Dennis W. Humphrey
This is a post-divorce proceeding. Judith R. Thomas ("Mother") filed a petition for contempt and for an increase in child support. William A. Thomas ("Father") answered and filed a counterclaim, seeking a decrease in his support obligation. Following a bench trial, the court below determined that while Father had failed to comply with some of the provisions of the parties' marital dissolution agreement ("MDA"), his failure to comply was not willful; therefore, the court declined to hold him in contempt. The court also held that Father's child support obligation should not be changed. Both parties raise issues on this appeal. We affirm.

Bill Campbell, Executor, vs. Blount Memorial Hospital
E2001-00717-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Dale Young
Patient sustained injuries in defendant's emergency room. The Trial Court granted a Tenn. R. Civ. P. Rule 41.02(2) Motion to defendant. Plaintiff appealed. We affirm.

In re: Estate of William D. Neely
M2000-01144-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III
The trial court set aside a will that was executed shortly before the testator's death, on findings of confidential relationship, suspicious circumstances and undue influence. We affirm.

Frederic R. Harris, Inc. vs. Metro Gov. of Nashville/Davidson County
M2000-02421-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Plaintiff sued for payments under contract. The Trial Court held defendant was not liable for additional payments under the contract. We affirm.

In re: Z.C.G.
M2000-02939-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Tom E. Gray
This case involves a request for termination of parental rights and adoption of a minor child. Appellees/Petitioners are the mother of the minor child at issue and her current husband. They petitioned for termination of the natural father's parental rights and for adoption by her current husband. The trial judge granted their petition finding that the father had abandoned his child by willfully failing to visit for four months preceding the filing of the petition and that termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the child. We find that the evidence did not clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the father willfully failed to visit and, thus, reverse the trial court.

Susan Vermillion vs. Guy Vermillion
E2001-00241-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Thomas J. Seeley, Jr.
Guy Houston Vermillion, an inmate in the State's penal system, appeals a judgment of the Chancery Court for Johnson County which awarded his wife a divorce. He insists that he was entitled to be present and present his defense, particularly as it applies to the division of property. We vacate the judgment and remand the case for the Trial Court to make a determination of whether it is appropriate to stay disposition of the case pending Mr. Vermillion's release.

Thelma Smith vs. David Riley
E2001-00828-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Jerri S. Bryant
The plaintiff, Thelma Agnes Smith, lived with the defendant out of wedlock for several years. When the relationship ended, she brought this action seeking to enforce two written agreements with him regarding the sale and assignment of property to her. The trial court enforced the agreements and divided the parties' property. The defendant appeals, arguing that the agreements lack consideration and are void as against public policy. We affirm.

Dept. of Children's Services vs. Frances Bates
W2001-01267-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Rachel J. Anthony
This is a termination of parental rights case. Francis Pyle Bates appeals from the final decree of the Probate and Juvenile Court of Lauderdale County which terminated her parental rights to her three minor children, T. M. P., born March 28, 1991; J. R. P., born August 15, 1992; and R. D. P., born July 25, 1994. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we affirm the trial court's final decree.

Paul Farnsworth vs. Richard Kenya
W2001-00961-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
This appeal arises from the Appellees' denial of the Appellant's request to marry during the Appellant's incarceration. The Appellant filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Lake County against the Appellees for breach of contract and retaliation. The Appellees filed a motion to dismiss claiming that the Appellant failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The Appellees filed a motion to stay discovery. The Appellant filed a motion for leave to amend his complaint. The Appellant sought to add new defendants and additional claims that were unrelated to his original claim. The trial court granted the Appellees' motion to dismiss. On appeal, this Court found that the trial court failed to rule on the motion to amend the original complaint. This Court dismissed the appeal on the basis that the order appealed from was not a final judgment. The trial court entered an order granting the motion to stay discovery, denying the motion to amend the original complaint, and dismissing the case. The Appellant appeals the decision of the Circuit Court of Lake County granting the motion to stay discovery, denying the motion to amend the original complaint, and dismissing the case. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court's decision.

E2001-00150-COA-R3-CV
E2001-00150-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Telford E. Forgerty, Jr.

Ed Davis vs. City of Milan
W2001-00801-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Clayburn L. Peeples
Farmer sued city for damages resulting from a fire that destroyed his barn alleging that the city's utility division was negligent in installing a pole and wire on his property and was also negligent in failing to prevent an electrical surge that caused the failure in the wiring. The trial court granted summary judgment to city, and plaintiff appeals. We reverse.

Kimberly Day v. John Day
M2001-01624-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This is a post-divorce case. It is before the Court on the application of John Arthur Day ("Husband") seeking relief from the interlocutory order of the trial court denying his motion for summary judgment. Husband's summary judgment motion was filed in response to the Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02(1) motion filed by his former wife, Kimberly Beard Day ("Wife"), in which she seeks relief from portions of the parties' judgment of divorce (sometimes referred to herein as "the judgment"), specifically the child support, division of property, and alimony provisions of the incorporated marital dissolution agreement. Husband's application to this Court was originally filed pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 10. Before his application was acted upon, he converted it to a request for relief pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 9. This change in approach followed the trial court's reversal of its earlier order denying him Rule 9 relief. We granted Husband's Rule 9 application. We find that the material facts are not in dispute and that those facts establish that Husband is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, we (1) reverse the trial court's order of April 24, 2001, denying Husband's motion for summary judgment and (2) dismiss Wife's Rule 60.02(1) motion.

2000-02837-COA-R3-CV
2000-02837-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II

William R. Varner vs. City of KnoxviIle
E2001-00329-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
By way of a complaint for writ of certiorari, the plaintiff challenges the decision of the Knoxville City Council ("the City Council") to deny his application to rezone his .5 acre lot from low density residential to commercial for the expansion of a used car lot located on adjacent property. Following a bench trial, the court below dismissed the complaint. We affirm.