Benjamin Douglas v. Frank Strada, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Correction, et al.
W2024-00753-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Chief Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor William C. Cole

This appeal stems from an inmate’s lawsuit seeking a transfer to another facility due to a claimed imminent risk of violence from other inmates.  Benjamin Douglas (“Plaintiff”) sued Frank Strada, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Correction, and the Tennessee Department of Correction (“TDOC”) (“Defendants,” collectively) in the Chancery Court for Hardeman County (“the Trial Court”), asking for injunctive and declaratory relief based on the safe prisons clause of the Tennessee Constitution.  Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which the Trial Court granted.  The Trial Court found that it lacked jurisdiction because Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.  Plaintiff appeals.  We hold, inter alia, that exhaustion of administrative remedies was not jurisdictional in this case; that the Trial Court abused its discretion in applying the exhaustion doctrine when Defendants failed to properly raise that affirmative defense; and that the Trial Court erred in considering matters outside the complaint at the motion to dismiss stage without converting the motion to one for summary judgment.  We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Franklin Community Development v. Darlene Lee
M2024-00191-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas R. Frierson, II
Trial Court Judge: Judge David L. Allen

This case involves an unlawful detainer action filed by a community development center against a tenant for failure to pay rent and for unruly conduct.  The detainer action ultimately resulted in the tenant’s eviction and a monetary judgment against the tenant for delinquent rent payments.  The tenant now appeals the judgment of the trial court.  Because the tenant’s appellate brief does not comply with Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 27 and Tennessee Court of Appeals Rule 6, we hereby dismiss the appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Artevious Moore, Jr.
W2024-00185-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Mark Ward

The Defendant, Artevious Moore, Jr., pled guilty to theft of property and was placed on judicial diversion. Thereafter, the Defendant pled guilty to aggravated assault, leaving sentencing to the trial court. He also agreed to have the trial court rescind his judicial diversion, enter an adjudication of guilt as to the theft charge, and allow the court to impose the sentence. After a consolidated sentencing hearing, the court denied alternative sentencing and sentenced the Defendant to three years for the aggravated assault conviction and two years for the theft conviction. The trial court ordered the sentences to be aligned consecutively for an effective sentence of five years to be served in confinement. The Defendant appealed, challenging the consecutive sentences and the denial of alternative sentencing. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the trial court’s judgments.

State of Tennessee v. Travis Andrew Harris
M2023-01625-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

Defendant, Travis Andrew Harris, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and
possession of a firearm by a felon convicted of a violent crime. The trial court imposed an
effective sentence of life plus twelve years. On appeal, Defendant contends that the
evidence at trial as to his premeditation and identity was insufficient to support his murder
conviction. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient and affirm Defendant’s
conviction. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Stacy Michelle Cochran
W2024-00219-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert L. Holloway, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bruce Irwin Griffey

Stacy Michelle Cochran, Defendant, entered an open plea of guilty to three felonies and one misdemeanor. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced her as a Range II multiple offender to an effective sentence of twenty-four years to be served at 35%, plus eleven months and 29 days to be served at 75%. Defendant claims that the State entered into a plea agreement for her to be sentenced as a Range I offender and that the trial court erred in sentencing her as a Range II offender. Because the record on appeal, which does not contain the transcript of the plea submission hearing or the transcript of the sentencing hearing, is inadequate for meaningful appellate review, we are precluded from addressing the issue. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. 

In Re Josclyn M., et al.
M2023-01485-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge John W. McClarty
Trial Court Judge: Judge John Meadows

This action involves the termination of a mother’s parental rights to her minor children. Following a bench trial, the court found that clear and convincing evidence existed to establish the following statutory grounds of termination: (1) abandonment for failure to provide a suitable home; (2) substantial noncompliance with the permanency plans; (3) persistence of conditions which led to removal; and (4) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody of the children. The court also found that termination was in the best interest of the children. We affirm the trial court’s termination decision.

Robert Eugene Callaway v. Linda Marie Callaway
E2024-00251-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas R. Frierson, II
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Michael Sharp

In this post-divorce action, the trial court partially granted the husband’s petition to modify or terminate spousal support, reducing the husband’s monthly alimony in futuro obligation to the wife from $1,750.00 to $1,500.00 upon finding that the husband’s retirement constituted a substantial and material change in circumstance warranting the reduction. The husband has appealed, arguing that the court erred by declining to terminate or further reduce his support obligation. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Eugenio Gomez Ruiz
E2023-01017-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steven Wayne Sword

A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Eugenio Gomez Ruiz, of furnishing alcohol to a person under twenty-one years of age, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days, ordering that the sentence be suspended after service of six months in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred (1) in finding that the crime is a strict liability crime and thereby erred in denying his requests for a jury instruction on mental states and to introduce evidence relevant to certain defenses; and (2) in sentencing him to serve six months in confinement. He also asserts that the State committed prosecutorial misconduct by charging him with a strict liability offense instead of one requiring a culpable mental state. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Jamie Scott Brock v. State of Tennessee
E2024-00510-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge Zachary R. Walden

A Claiborne County jury convicted the Petitioner, Jamie Scott Brock, of first degree murder in 2006, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. More than thirteen years after his conviction was affirmed on appeal, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief in 2024. The post-conviction court summarily dismissed the petition after finding it to be untimely and concluding that principles of due process did not toll the running of the statute of limitations. The Petitioner appealed. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Re Land TN II, Inc. v. 840 Development Group, LLC
M2023-01692-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bonita Jo Atwood

Appellant appeals the denial of its motion to quash a notice of lien lis pendens. Because the trial court improvidently certified its order as final under Rule 54.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, we dismiss this appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Robert W. Halliman v. Austin Peay State University
M2023-01326-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ben Dean

This is an action for violation of the Tennessee Human Rights Act, Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 4- 21-101 to -1004 (“THRA”). The plaintiff, an associate professor at a state university, applied for promotion to the rank of full professor. While his application was under review, the plaintiff filed an age discrimination charge against the university with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). A short time later, the university denied the plaintiff’s promotion based on his alleged lack of high-quality scholarship. The trial court dismissed the action at the summary judgment stage, reasoning that the plaintiff had not produced evidence to rebut the university’s stated reason for denying his promotion. This appeal followed. The plaintiff contends that the trial court erred because there was evidence that the university’s administration knowingly violated university policy by reevaluating the merits of the plaintiff’s peer-reviewed scholarship. We affirm the trial court’s judgment in all respects.

Ronald Anson Wheeler v. Vincent Vantell, Warden
M2024-00615-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Michael Collins

In 2022, the Petitioner entered a best interest plea to one count of reckless homicide and two counts of selling fentanyl. By agreement, the State dismissed multiple other pending charges, and the trial court entered the agreed sentence of fifteen years. In 2024, the Petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus relief contending that, pursuant to the circumstances of the plea, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case, nullifying his convictions. The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the petition. The Petitioner filed an untimely appeal but claims that he improperly filed for appeal in the wrong court. On appeal, he maintains his subject matter jurisdiction claim. After review, we affirm the habeas corpus court’s judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph Sakai Hall
M2024-00254-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge Angelita Blackshear Dalton

Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Defendant, Joseph Sakai Hall, pleaded guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to one count of aggravated assault involving serious bodily injury, a Class C felony, and received a sentence of three to four years as a Range I offender with the trial court to determine the length and manner of service and whether to grant Defendant’s request for judicial diversion.  Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied Defendant’s request for diversion and sentenced him to four years with 180 days to serve and the remainder to be supervised on probation.  After a careful review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. 

State of Tennessee v. Raymond Mefford
M2024-00160-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Kyle A. Hixson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert T. Bateman

The Defendant, Raymond Mefford, was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault following a bench trial in the Robertson County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to serve four years in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the trial court’s denial of alternative sentencing, arguing that the trial court should have offered the elderly and homeless Defendant rehabilitative treatment in the form of housing assistance or work programs. Following our review, we affirm.

William G. Creasy v. Vincent Vantell
M2024-00531-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge Kyle A. Hixson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Michael Collins

The Petitioner, William G. Creasy, appeals the Trousdale County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus relief. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Axis Dynamics, Inc. Et Al. v. Sonja Hawk Et Al.
E2024-01805-COA-T10B-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Jeffrey Usman
Trial Court Judge: Judge William T. Ailor

The Petitioners seek accelerated interlocutory review of an order denying their motion to recuse. However, because the Petitioners’ filings fail to comply with Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B, we dismiss the appeal.

Doyle Wayne Mason, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
E2023-01559-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jill Bartee Ayers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steven Wayne Sword

Petitioner, Doyle Wayne Mason, Jr., appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition,
arguing that the post-conviction court erred in denying his claims that trial counsel was
ineffective by failing to object to the State’s closing argument, failing to adequately advise
him concerning the State’s plea offer, and failing to move to exclude discovery received
on the eve of trial. Petitioner further argues that appellate counsel was ineffective for
failing to raise on direct appeal the issue of Juror 2’s presence on the jury. Following our
review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the postconviction
court.

Laura Michael Hudson v. Steven Brian Hudson
M2023-00879-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny Armstrong
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kathryn Wall Olita

In this divorce case, Husband/Appellant appeals the trial court’s: (1) classification of the marital residence as marital property; (2) decision not to admit Tennessee Rule of Evidence 1006 summaries tendered by Husband; (3) finding of criminal contempt against Husband; (4) award of transitional alimony to Wife; and (5) award of a portion of Wife’s attorney’s fees and costs as alimony in solido. Wife asks for attorney’s fees and costs on appeal. We affirm the trial court’s order. Wife’s request for appellate attorney’s fees is granted.

State of Tennessee v. Bobby V. Summers
M2024-00881-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jill Bartee Ayers

The Defendant, Bobby V. Summers, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his motions to correct an illegal sentence. The State has filed a motion asking this Court to affirm pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20. Said motion is hereby granted.

Justin Quistopher Webb v. State of Tennessee
M2024-00833-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge William R. Goodman, III

The Petitioner, Justin Quistopher Webb, pled guilty to attempted first degree murder and theft of property and received a sentence of twenty years. Thereafter, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to advise him of the significant consequences of the plea. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition by finding that plea counsel was not ineffective. On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred in denying his petition, asserting that he proved his allegations by clear and convincing evidence. Upon our review, we respectfully disagree and affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment.

Brad Wigdor v. Electric Research & Manufacturing Cooperative, Inc., et al.
W2023-01733-SC-WCM-WC
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge W. Mark Ward
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert V. Durham

Brad Wigdor brings this appeal challenging the facial constitutionality of several aspects of the Workers' Compensation Reform Act of 2013. The appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. Because we conclude that Wigdor's constitutional arguments lack merit, we affirm.

In Re Traden R., et al.
M2023-00942-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Matthew Joel Wallace

In this parental termination case, the mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children. The trial court found that grounds for termination had been proven and that termination of her parental rights was in the children’s best interests. She appealed, raising several issues. We find that one ground for termination, abandonment for failure to support, was properly pled and proven by clear and convincing evidence; however, we reverse the ruling that the ground of abandonment by failure to visit had been proven. We also vacate the other grounds purportedly found by the trial court because they were not properly pled. We affirm the trial court’s determination that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests. Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

Kenneth Dale Carter v. Jessica Jones Fay
E2023-01581-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kristi M. Davis
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Douglas T. Jenkins

This appeal stems from a long-standing custody dispute between the mother and father of two minor children. The trial court entered a court-ordered parenting plan in February of 2022, but the parties experienced substantial difficulty co-parenting with one another. Numerous pleadings were filed by both parties, including a petition for modification filed by the mother in May of 2022 and motions for civil and criminal contempt filed by the father against the mother. The trial court held a hearing on all of the parties’ pending motions on April 14, 2023, and May 12, 2023. The trial court ultimately determined that no material change in circumstances occurred and left its previously ordered parenting plan and subsequent orders in place. The trial court also found the mother in civil and criminal contempt on eight counts. Further, the trial court declined any further jurisdiction over the case, as the mother and the children had resided in Florida for several years by the time the final order was entered. The father appeals, raising four issues. We affirm the trial court’s decision as to custody and contempt. While the father raises evidentiary issues, we conclude that any error by the trial court was harmless. We vacate and remand the trial court’s judgment as to continuing jurisdiction over the case.

Estate of Paul David Rowe Et Al. v. Wellmont Health Systems Et Al.
E2024-00431-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Katherine Leigh Priester

Paul David Rowe was not informed of a radiology report, which revealed two masses in his kidneys indicative of renal cancer, for five years. Mr. Rowe passed away after suit was filed, but his wife, Sharon K. Rowe, both individually and as the administrator ad litem of his estate, (“Plaintiffs”) maintained a health care liability action against the allegedly negligent parties, Wellmont Health System d/b/a Wellmont Bristol Regional Medical Center (“Wellmont”), Carl W. Harris, Jr., D.O. (“Dr. Harris”), and Northeast Tennessee Emergency Physicians (“NETEP”) (collectively, “Defendants”) in the Circuit Court for Sullivan County (“the Trial Court”). Defendants filed two separate motions for summary judgment, arguing that the three-year statute of repose barred Plaintiffs’ action. Plaintiffs raised the defense of fraudulent concealment. The Trial Court granted the motions for summary judgment finding that Defendants had no actual knowledge until 2015 that Mr. Rowe had or might have had cancer in 2010, and therefore, had nothing to fraudulently conceal. Plaintiffs appealed. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Bobby Daniel Pettie
M2024-00558-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge Forest A. Durard, Jr.

A Bedford County jury found the Defendant, Bobby Daniel Pettie, guilty of possession of a firearm with the intent to go armed during the commission of a dangerous felony, among other offenses. The court then imposed a six-year sentence for this conviction after implicitly finding that the Defendant had a qualifying prior felony conviction. Thereafter, the Defendant sought to have his sentence declared illegal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1, arguing that the jury did not find that he had a qualifying prior felony conviction. The trial court denied the motion, finding that the Defendant waived the jury’s determination of the issue. The Defendant appealed to this court. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court.