COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Parent vs. State
01A01-9702-BC-00055

Daniels vs. Davis
01A01-9702-CV-00068
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz

First American Bank vs. National Project Services
01A01-9702-CH-00051
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Collins vs. Wellbrook
01A01-9702-CH-00108
Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith

Goodwin vs. Hendersonville Police Dept., et. al.
01A01-9509-CH-00423
Trial Court Judge: Tom E. Gray

State., ex. rel. Sherry Mcallister vs. Goode
01A01-9510-CV-00452
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

Jacobsen vs. Flathe
01A01-9511-CH-00510
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell

Shepherd vs. Perkins
03A01-9701-CH-00015

W.J. Gray vs. State of TN
02A01-9703-BC-00055

Richard Deberry vs. Lexington Electric System, et al
02A01-9610-CV-00257
Trial Court Judge: Charles O. Mcpherson

Timothy v. Potter, Dickson, Tennessee, For Appellant, J.M.S.
01-98-001-CC
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

Jerel Hughes v. Dept. of Correction
M2001-00074-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Petitioner, a state inmate, filed the underlying action seeking review of actions taken by the Tennessee Department of Correction and the Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole, including the decision of the Board to deny parole and set the next parole hearing two years later. Petitioner had been convicted of an additional felony while on parole from a previous felony conviction. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6). For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

James Lowery, et al vs. Gary & Emily Franks
02A01-9612-CV-00304
Trial Court Judge: John Franklin Murchison

Gloria Spivey, et al vs. James Robinson, et al
02A01-9704-CV-00075
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree

Randall E. Deskins, et ux., v. Beulah M. Williams
03A01-9701-CV-00023
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

Randall E. Desksins and his wife Thelma Jean Deskins, appeal a judgment of the Circuit Court for Sevier County, entered pursuant to a juryverdict, which dismissed their claim against Beulah M. Williams for personal injuries suffered by Mr. Deskins and loss of consortium and services by Mrs. Deskins, resulting from an automobile accident occurring on June 3, 1989. Mr. Deskins also appeals a judgmentin favor of the original Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff, Beulah M. Williams.

Coy Hardaway, et al vs. William Burnett
02A01-9508-CH-00179
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos

02A01-0611-CV-00279
02A01-0611-CV-00279
Trial Court Judge: Wyeth Chandler

David Neal, et ux vs. Keith Boggs, et al
02A01-9612-CV-00305
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

Robert Mabon, et al vs. Jackson-Madison Gen. Hosp., et al
02A01-9702-CV-00039
Trial Court Judge: Whit A. Lafon

Eileen Smith vs. Shelby Co. Government
02A01-9701-CH-00024
Trial Court Judge: C. Neal Small

Dorothy R. W. Barham v. Diane W. Cooper
02A01-9608-CH-00200
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor D. J. Alissandratos

This case involves a complaint for an accounting and injunctive relief. Plaintiff, Dorothy R. W. Barham, appeals the order of the trial court affirming the report of the Special Master in favor of defendant, Diane W. Cooper.

James Chase, Jr., v. Physiotherapy Associates, Inc., F. Wiliam Hackmeyer, Jr., and Everett P. Hailey
02A01-9607-CV-00171
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge D'Army Bailey

This is premises liability suit. Plaintiff, James Chase, Jr. (Chase), appeals the trial court’s entry of a judgment on the jury verdict finding that the defendants, F. William Hackmeyer, Jr. 2 and Everett P. Hailey, were 50% negligent and that Chase was 50% negligent, therefore barring Chase’s recovery.

William J. Chase, Yr., as Administrator C.T.A of the Estate of Betty Lou Stidham, Deceased, v. The City of Memphis, Tennessee
02A01-211-CV-00327
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Swearengen

This appeal involves a suit for wrongful death based on negligence under the Tennessee governmental Tort Liability Act, T.C.A. § 29-20-101 et seq. (1980) and for wrongful death based on the creation of a special relationship and a nuisance. Defendant, the City of Memphis, 2 appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of plaintiff, William J. Chase, as Administrator C.T.A. of the Estate of Betty Lou Stidham. The trial court, sitting without a jury, found that plaintiff’s damages totaled $1,897,713.03, and that the City’s negligence caused 40 percent of those damages. However, because of the application of the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (hereinafter the Act), the court limited plaintiff’s recovery to $130,000.00, and entered a judgment in that amount.

Mary Ann Umstot v. Edward Shirer Umstot
02A01-9701-CV-00008
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams

This is a divorce case. Edward Shirer Umstot (Husband) appeals the order of the trial court awarding a divorce, alimony in solido, and child support to Mary Ann Umstot (Wife). 1 At the time of the divorce, one of the children was eighteen years old and the other child was fifteen years old. 2 Wife’s expert, who valued the plan, testified that a defined benefit plan is a plan in which a benefit is accumulated during one’s working years or tenure with a particular employer that will ultimately be paid out upon retirement or the attainment of so many years of service or a certain age. 3 The trial court accepted the lower value because the parties testified that the property occasionally floods. 2 The parties were married on August 16, 1977 and had two children during the marriage.1 At the time of the divorce, Wife was 52 years old, and Husband was 53 years old. Husband is in good health, but Wife was recently diagnosed with malignant melanoma. She testified that she has a 40% chance of living another five years.

Mary Ann Umstot v. Edward Shirer Umstot - Dissenting/Concurring
02A01-9701-CV-00008
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes

I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority's opinion which concludes that the trial court's award of alimony in solido was excessive. As noted by the majority, the trial court's order awarded 58% of the marital estate to the wife and 42% percent of the marital estate to the husband. This court's ruling, in its attempt to achieve “a more equitable division," awards 51% of the marital estate to the wife and 49% percent to the husband.