Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash
These parties were divorced in September 1995, and their Marital Dissolution Agreement was incorporated in the decree of divorce. They were parents of two children, and the court approved the agreement for shared physical custody of the children whereby each parent had custody of both children fifty percent of the time. The MDA provided, "[T]he parties have agreed to deviate from the child support award guidelines due to the shared physical custody of the children." Husband paid Wife $500 per month, which was not in accordance with the guidelines. In June 1999, Husband filed a motion to terminate his child support obligation because of a significant increase in Wife's income. The trial court denied the application, and Husband appeals. We vacate and remand for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Brothers
The Director of Food Service at the defendant retirement home injured her hand on the job, and was terminated by her supervisor. She filed suit against her employer, claiming that she had been discharged in retaliation for making a workers' compensation claim. At the close of the plaintiff's proof, the trial court granted the defendant's motion for directed verdict. We reverse.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
This appeal involves a hospital patient who was injured in a fall two days following surgery. The patient and her husband filed suit against the hospital in the Circuit Court for Davidson County alleging that her attending nurse had negligently permitted her to ambulate without adequate assistance and support. The hospital filed a motion for summary judgement supported by the attending nurse's affidavit stating that she had complied with the applicable standard of care for the post-operative ambulation of surgical patients. The patient did not submit any countervailing expert affidavits, and the trial court granted the hospital's summary judgment motion. On this appeal, the patient asserts that she should not have been required to file countervailing expert affidavits either because her complaint was based on simple negligence or because the attending nurse's negligence was so plain that no expert testimony was required. We find that the patient's complaint is for medical malpractice and that the attending nurse's conduct is not so plainly negligent that it obviates the necessity of expert proof. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
This appeal involves a dispute over the custody of three-year-old twins between their biological father and the former husband of their biological mother. The biological father intervened in the divorce proceeding between the twins' mother and her husband in the Circuit Court for Davidson County seeking custody of the children. Following a bench trial, the trial court declared the parties divorced and awarded custody of the parties' two biological children to the mother's former husband. The trial court also concluded that the mother's former husband was comparatively more fit than the twins' biological father to have custody of the twins. In response to the biological father's Tenn. R. Civ. P. 59.04 motion suggesting that it had applied the wrong legal standard when it determined the custody of the twins, the trial court found that placing the twins with their biological father would expose them to a "substantial risk and danger of great harm." On this appeal, the twins' biological father takes issue with the evidentiary foundation of the trial court's refusal to grant him custody of his children. We have determined that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that placing these children in their biological father's custody will expose them to substantial harm. Accordingly, we vacate the portion of the decree awarding custody of the twins to their biological mother's former husband.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace
This is an appeal from the trial court's modification of an order of visitation increasing the appellee's amount of summer visitation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
S.E.A., Inc. brought suit in Knox County Chancery Court seeking an injunction and alternatively, damages, against its lessor, Southside Leasing Company, and Southside's secured creditor, Moss W. Yater, regarding a non-disturbance agreement. Yater is also Southside's majority shareholder, president and director. S.E.A.sought to sublease a portion of the property. Pursuant to the terms of the lease between S.E.A. and Southside, Southside consented to the sublease and executed the requested non-disturbance agreement. However, Yater, Southside's secured creditor, refused to execute the non-disturbance agreement unless Southside received a portion of the rent from the sublease. Defendants filed motions for summary judgment which were granted by the Trial Court. S.E.A. appeals the Trial Court's granting of summary judgment to the Defendants. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This case involves the sale by auction of certain real property in Davidson County. The buyers brought suit in Davidson County Chancery Court seeking specific performance or, in the alternative, damages for breach of contract. From the trial court's grant of summary judgment for the defendants, the plaintiff buyers appeal. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart
Plaintiffs sued to terminate the mother's parental rights. The Trial Judge held plaintiffs failed to carry the burden of proof. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
In this divorce case, the trial court awarded the divorce to the Wife and divided the property. Husband appeals the award of the marital residence and its contents to Wife. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
This case involves a divorce ending a seven-year marriage. The divorce was awarded to the wife on grounds of the husband's inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court divided the property and debts according to the parties' stipulations. The court then awarded the wife alimony in futuro and ordered the husband to pay $750 of the wife's attorney fees. The husband appeals the awards of alimony and attorney fees. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: John J. Maddux
The Trial Court removed minor child from the parental home on grounds child was dependent and neglected. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
The Trial Court entered consent Judgment over objection of defendant. We vacate Judgment and remand.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
At the hearing where appellant's parole was revoked, the Hearing Officer admitted sworn statements of alleged victims. The Trial Court upheld the revocation. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
An inmate in a privately operated prison filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari against the disciplinary board at that facility. The trial court dismissed his petition for failure to state a claim. We affirm
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
The Circuit Court of Williamson County refused to issue a writ of certiorari to review a judgment of the General Sessions Court of that county because the petition was untimely and the same issues were already pending in an action in Maury County. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
This is a suit for specific performance. The plaintiffs entered into an agreement with the defendant to purchase certain real property for $80,000. Before the purchase was closed, a house on the property was destroyed by fire, and the defendant collected $35,000 as proceeds from her homeowners' insurance policy. The purchase of the property did not proceed to closing and the plaintiffs filed suit for specific performance of the contract at a purchase price of $45,000 -- this amount being the difference between the original purchase price and the insurance proceeds collected by the defendant. The trial court granted the plaintiffs summary judgment. The defendant appeals, contending that this case is not ripe for summary judgment. We affirm.
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
In this dispute over real estate, the Plaintiffs seek to have a quit claim deed conveying certain property to the Defendants declared spurious, as well as injunctive relief relative to rights-of-way adjacent to their property. The Chancellor granted the relief the Plaintiffs sought, resulting in this appeal. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell
Union health and welfare funds brought an action against tobacco companies and their trade associations to recover the funds' costs of treating their participants' smoking-related illnesses. The tobacco companies moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the funds' economic injuries were derivative of the participants' physical injuries and, consequently, too remote for recovery. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss on the funds' antitrust claim but denied the motion on the funds' claims for fraud and deceit, misrepresentation, conspiracy and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Permission for interlocutory appeal was granted to the tobacco companies by both the trial court and the appellate court. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the antitrust claim and reverse the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss on the remaining claims, finding the plaintiffs' alleged injuries are too remote, as a matter of law, to permit recovery. The cause is remanded for entry of an order dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: L. Marie Williams
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted the parties a divorce on stipulated grounds; (2) divided the marital property; and (3) found that wife was not entitled to an award of alimony, but that funds withdrawn by her from a joint account immediately prior to her filing for divorce constituted necessary temporary support for her and the parties' daughter. Wife appeals the trial court's characterization of certain real property as marital property and the trial court's division of the marital property. Both wife and husband take issue with the trial court's treatment of the funds withdrawn by wife from the joint account. We affirm the judgment of the trial court, as modified.
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
Plaintiff, an insurance sales agent for New York Life Insurance Company, alleged that he entered into an oral agreement with another New York Life Insurance agent for the two agents to sell life insurance policies to a particular family and share the sales commissions. Some time later, a dispute arose between Plaintiff and the second New York Life Insurance agent over who was entitled to receive certain sales commissions. After Plaintiff did not receive a share of those sales commissions, he sought the assistance of New York Life in resolving his dispute with the second agent. New York Life accepted statements from both agents and then declined to intervene on Plaintiff's behalf. Plaintiff brought suit against the second agent and New York Life, but later non-suited the claim against the agent. Plaintiff alleged that New York Life was contractually required to make a decision in a commission dispute between its agents, and that if it had made a decision, the industry standard practice would have required the company to decide in his favor. He sought damages from New York Life for breach of contract and under a quantum meruit theory. The Trial Court granted New York Life's Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
This is a personal injury action arising out of an automobile accident. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the defendant and an unidentified driver were equally at fault in causing the accident. The defendant appeals, raising issues that require us to determine whether there is material evidence in the record to support the jury's verdict. We conclude that there is material evidence to support the verdict and thus affirm the judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this medical malpractice case brought by Clara Frazier, as Administratrix of the Estate of Josie Mae Blalock Pickens against East Tennessee Baptist Hospital, Inc., and Mark W. Jackson, M.D., the Trial Court sustained the motion of Baptist Hospital for summary judgment because the order granting an amendment to add Baptist Hospital as a party defendant after a non-suit had earlier been taken, was not timely and exceeded the one year mandated in T.C.A. 28-1-105(a). Ms. Frazier appeals, insisting that Rule 15.03 of the Tenn. R. Civ. P. is applicable and that the amendment related back to the date of the initial filing. We find the Trial Court acted properly and affirm.
