COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Darrell Turner v. Brian W. Skelly
01A01-9708-CV-00376
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas Goodall

The plaintiff, Darrell Turner, has appealed from a jury verdict and judgment dismissing his suit against the defendant, Brian W. Skelly for personal injuries sustained when the right rear view mirror of a pick-up truck operated by defendant, Brian w. Skelly, struck plaintiff’s left elbow as he walked on the right edge of the road at 8:30 p.m. after dark.

ABC Supply Co., Inc. vs. U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty
01A01-9702-CH-00081
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell

Ferrell vs. McCrae, Jr.
01A01-9703-CV-00100
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz

Demontbreun vs. Demontbreun
01A01-9703-GS-00129
Trial Court Judge: Barry R. Brown

Rasmussen vs. Rasmussen
01A01-9705-CH-00211

Richardson vs. Richardson
01A01-9704-CH-00169
Trial Court Judge: Tyrus H. Cobb

Mulle vs. Yount
01A01-9704-CV-00161
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Mulle vs. Yount
01A01-9704-CV-00161
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Brumit vs. Summar
01A01-9703-CV-00109
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash

Rasmussen vs. Rasmussen
01A01-9705-CH-00211
Trial Court Judge: Alex W. Darnell

Robin vs. Seaton
03A01-9704-CH-00146
Trial Court Judge: Chester S. Rainwater

Newton vs. Tinsley
03A01-9706-CV-00204
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly

Terri Demilt vs. Methodist Hosp., et al
02A01-9611-CV-00283
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown

Suzanne Gibson vs. James Prokell
02A01-9701-CH-00006
Trial Court Judge: C. Neal Small

03A01-9708-CH-
03A01-9708-CH-

Watson vs. Ameredes
03A01-9704-CV-00129
Trial Court Judge: John B. Hagler, Jr.

Thurman vs. Thurman
03A01-9707-CH-00261

Oneida vs. Oneida
03A01-9707-CH-00264

McManamay vs. McManamay
01A01-9802-CH-00081

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

Wade Spurling D.C. v. Kirby Parkway Chiropractic, et al
02A01-9609-CH-00225
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor D. J. Alissandratos

The plaintiff, Wade Spurling, D.C., appeals from the order of the trial court granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Rule 12.02(6) T.R.C.P. Spurling filed a complaint titled “Complaint For Deceit in Inducement to Contract, Promissory Fraud, Fraud, Intentional Interference With Performance ofContractual Obligations and Breach of Contract.” The complaint alleges that Plaintiff owned and operated Spurling Chiropractic Clinic (SCC). He entered into negotiations with Defendant Michael K. Plambeck (Plambeck) for Plambeck to purchase SCC.

Gloria E. Hill-Evans v. Bredell Michael Evans, Sr.
02A01-9607-CV-00157
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge George H. Brown, Jr.

In this divorce action brought by Gloria E. Hill-Evans (Mother) against Bredell Michael Evans, Sr. (Father), the trial court awarded custody of the parties’ two minor sons to Mother with Father to have reasonable visitation. However, the trial court’s decree further provided that visitation be suspended “until both of the parties and the children have completed a counseling program which is satisfactory to the court, and the court has been furnished a report that the counseling course has been successfully completed. When the counseling process has been successfully completed, the court will consider the defendant’s visitation rights.”

Robert W. Bagby, v. Dean Russell Carricco
03A01-9705-CV-00183
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor G. Richard Johnson

In this case, the plaintiff claims that the defendant made an intentional misrepresentation in connection with the sale of a tract of unimproved real property. Following a bench trial, the court found that the defendant, Dean Russell Carrico (“Carrico”), had fraudulently misrepresented a material fact, resulting in a judgment of $21,911.97 for the plaintiff, Dr. Robert W. Bagby (“Bagby”). The trial court also found that Carrico’s conduct violated the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977, T.C.A. § 47-18-101, et seq. (“the Act”). Carrico appealed, raising three issues that present the following questions for our review:

Paul William McGaffic, v. Janice Elois McGaffic
03A01-9707-CV-00286
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge William L. Brown

This is a post-divorce case. Paul William McGaffic filed a petition seeking to modify his child support and periodic alimony in futuro obligations. As pertinent to the issues on
this appeal, the trial court refused to modify its existing child support and alimony in futuro decrees. Mr. McGaffic appealed, raising issues that essentially present the following questions: 1. Does the evidence preponderate against the trial court’s refusal to modify its alimony in futuro award by either terminating it, or reducing it and/or converting it to an award of rehabilitative alimony? 2. Does the evidence preponderate against the trial court’s refusal to modify its child support award?

Super Grip Corporation v. B & D Super Grip, Inc., - Concurring
03A01-9707-CV-00257
Authoring Judge: Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

In this contract action, the Trial Judge entered judgment for plaintiff against defendant in the amount of $50,431.29, and dismissed defendant’s counterclaim which had sought damages for plaintiff’s alleged breach of the distributorship agreement.