COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

Tipton County Department of Public Instruction, et al., v. Delashmit Electric Company, et al.
02A01-9704-CH-00084
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor John Hill Chisolm

This is a breach of contract case involving the enforcement of an arbitration clause. We find the arbitration clause applicable, reverse the judgment of the lower court, and remand the case for
arbitration.

Jacqueline S. Whiteside, v. Jerry Whiteside
03A01-9707-CV-00272
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Samuel H. Payne

This appeal is from the action by the trial court on a contempt citation by the Appellant, hereinafter “Wife,” and a Petition to Modify the original Divorce Decree and a motion under Rule 60, Tenn. R. Civ. P., brought by the Appellee, hereinafter “Husband.”

Myra Jean McCorkle v. The County of Dyer Tennesseee
02A01-9701-CV-00020
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Steven Stafford

This is a premises liability case under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant governmental entity. We affirm.

In re: The Estate of Harold L. Jenkins, Hugh C. Carden and Donald W. Garis, as Co-Executors of the Harold L. Jenkins Estate, v. Joni L. Jenkins and Kathy L. Jenkins - Concurring
01A01-9709-CH-00500
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch

I concur with the Court’s decision on the ground that the summaries of Harold L. Jenkins’s financial records indicate a lack of trustworthiness because of their method of compilation and their incompleteness.

Brian Keith Feather, v. Dolly Dekrafft Feather
01A01-9704-CH-00183
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Buddy D. Perry

This somewhat protracted litigation began in August 1993 when Brian Keith Feather (Husband) filed for divorce from Dolly deKrafft Feather (Wife). A divorce decree was entered by the chancery court in September 1994, which, inter alia, dissolved the fifteen year marriage of the parties and determined custody of their four minor children. Separate orders pertaining to the case were entered by the trial court in August and October, 1995, respectively. Both parties appealed therefrom, but this Court in April 1996, determined that the parties’ respective appeals were from a nonfinal judgment. Litigation thereafter continued due to the parties’ filings of various petitions for contempt, to rehear and to modify custody. After additional hearings, the trial court entered its final judgment in December 1996 from which both parties have appealed.1 The primary issues before us concern the trial court’s decisions regarding child custody and classification and division of the marital estate. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we affirm as modified.

Joseph Anthony Gannon and Gloria C. Gannon, et. al., v. Robert Koch and Deborah Koch, et. al.
01A01-9708-CH-00404
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Alex W. Darnell

The defendants, Robert and Deborah Koch, have appealed from a non jury judgment that plaintiffs, Joseph and Gloria Gannon, have a private easement from their land across the land of
defendants for access to the public way.

Patty M. Richards v. O'Connor Management, Incorporated and Russ Hackett
01A01-9708-CV-00379
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

Plaintiff Patty M. Richards appeals the trial court’s order granting the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants/Appellees O’Connor Management, Inc., and Russ Hackett.In entering summary judgment in favor of the Defendants, the trial court dismissed Richards’ claims for outrageous conduct and false imprisonment. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Linda Lee Hollingsworth, v. James David Hollingsworth, Jr.
01A01-9706-CV-00252
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge Muriel Robinson

In this divorce case, the defendant-counter claimant husband has appealed from the judgment of the Trial Court dismissing the husband’s counterclaim; granting the wife a divorce on grounds of inappropriate marital conduct, $750 per month alimony until her death or remarriage, and $10,000.00 attorneys fees; and dividing the marital estate.

James B. Oliver v. Harriet C. Upton, et. al.
01A01-9705-CH-00197
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

Defendant Harriet C. Upton, now known as Harriet Cathey, appeals the trial court’s final judgment awarding Plaintiff/Appellee James B. Oliver the sum of $15,225.66, continuing in effect the lis pendens filed against the subject property pending Cathey’s satisfaction of the judgment, denying Cathey’s request for attorney’s fees, and assessing forty percent (40%) of the costs against Cathey. We affirm the judgment in part (with modifications), reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Steven Cobb v. Joseph Vinson, Chairman LCRCF Disciplinary Board, et al. - Separately Concurring
02A01-9707-CV-00144
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard

I agree with the majority’s analysis in this case. However, I concur separately to emphasize
that our review, under either the common law writ of certiorari or the statutory writ, should be
limited to hearing the petitioner’s claims regarding “the illegality of acts taken by the disciplinary
board.” Williams v. Tennessee Dept. of Correction, No. 02A01-9503-CV-00046 1995 WL 575142
(Tenn. App. Oct. 2 1995). Even if the requirements of a statutory writ of certiorari are met, our
review should not include the substance of the disciplinary proceeding, i.e. whether the petitioner
actually committed the acts with which he was charged.
 

Robert Utley v. Robert Orr-Sysco
M2000-02904-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This is a premises liability case. The plaintiff was shopping in a store owned by the defendant when the plaintiff slipped and fell on a clear liquid substance and sustained personal injuries. The plaintiff shopper sued the defendant store owner on a theory of premises liability. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff now appeals. We affirm, finding that the plaintiff submitted insufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the store had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition prior to the plaintiff's fall.

Lucas vs. Lucas
03A01-9707-CV-00298

Peele vs. Earl
03A01-9707-CV-00244

03A01-9708-CH-00376
03A01-9708-CH-00376

Isom vs. Knox Co.
03A01-9708-CH-00333

Casa vs. Musick
03A01-9708-JV-00368

Beck vs. Beck, Jr.
01A01-9710-CV-00547
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

Moody vs.Dist. Public Defenders Conference
01A01-9707-CH-00311

Moody vs.Dist. Public Defenders Conference
01A01-9707-CH-00311
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Waters vs. Layne
01A01-9708-CV-00402
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry

H.W. Jenkins Co. vs. G.T. Designs
02A01-9707-CH-00170
Trial Court Judge: C. Neal Small

Charles Dorse vs. Martin Kriger
02A01-9712-CH-00315

Estate of Bessie Holmes, Deceased
02A01-9707-PB-00158
Trial Court Judge: Leonard D. Pierotti

In the Matter of: Jamie, Janet & Jhanaid Murphy
02A01-9610-CV-00259
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood

Shankel vs. Morris
03A01-9710-CV-00478