Anthony Parker v. SCG-LH Murfreesboro, LP Et Al.
M2021-00033-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Darrell Scarlett

Plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s decision to deny his motion for discovery sanctions after granting a motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Chad M. Varnell
E2020-01352-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Ross Dyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steven Wayne Sword

The defendant, Chad M. Varnell, appeals the order of the trial court revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his original
eight-year sentence in confinement. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for a new hearing.

State of Tennessee v. Amanda Dawn Freeman
E2020-00983-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert H. Montgomery, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

The Defendant, Amanda Dawn Freeman, appeals from the Sevier County Circuit Court’s revocation of probation for her aggravated burglary, theft, and drug-related convictions, for which she received an effective five-year sentence on probation. The Defendant contends that the trial court erred by revoking her probation and ordering her to serve the remainder of her sentence in confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Frederick J. Robinson
M2020-01004-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl Blackburn

The pro se petitioner, Frederick Robinson, Jr., appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, filed pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Snake Steel, Inc. v. Holladay Construction Group, LLC
M2019-00322-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Holly Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle

This appeal requires us to interpret provisions in the Prompt Pay Act, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 66-34-101 to -704, regarding retainage withheld on construction projects. The Prompt Pay Act requires the party withholding retainage—a percentage of total payment withheld as incentive for satisfactory completion of work—to deposit the funds into a separate, interest-bearing escrow account. Failure to do so results in a penalty of $300 per day. In this case, both parties agree the subcontractor’s retainage was not placed into an interest-bearing escrow account, and the retainage was not timely remitted to the subcontractor. Three years after completing its work on the contract, the subcontractor sued the contractor for unpaid retainage plus amounts due under the Prompt Pay Act. The contractor soon tendered the retainage; consequently, only the statutory penalty is at issue in this appeal. Tennessee Code Annotated section 66-34-104(c) states that, for persons required to deposit retainage into a separate interest-bearing escrow account, the penalty is assessed “per day for each and every day” retainage is not so deposited. Consonant with the statute’s language, its objective, the wrong the Prompt Pay Act seeks to prevent, and the purpose it seeks to accomplish, we hold that the $300 per day penalty is assessed each day retainage is not deposited in a statutorily-compliant escrow account. Consequently, while the subcontractor’s claim for the statutory penalty is subject to the one-year statute of limitations, if the subcontractor can establish that the contractor was required to deposit the retainage into an escrow account, the subcontractor is not precluded from recovering the penalty assessed each day during the period commencing 365 days before the complaint was filed. Accordingly, we reverse in part the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the contractor and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

Snake Steel, Inc. v. Holladay Construction Group, LLC - Concurring
M2019-00322-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Cornelia A. Clark with whom Chief Justice Jeffrey S. Bivens, and Sharon G. Lee Join, Concurring Separately
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle

We fully concur in the opinion of the Court but write separately to urge the General Assembly to clarify an issue that this decision does not address: whether Holladay Construction Group, LLC (“Holladay”), had a statutory obligation to deposit the retainage it received from 2200 Charlotte Avenue, LLC, (“Owner”) on May 27, 2015, into a separate, interest-bearing escrow account, or was obligated at that point only to pay subcontractors, such as Snake Steel, within ten days of receipt of the retainage from Owner.  

State of Tennessee v. Sergio Lara, In re: Debo's Bail Bond Company, LLC
M2020-00263-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barry R. Tidwell

This is an appeal by Debo’s Bail Bond Company, LLC, (“Debo’s”) of an order issued by the Circuit Court for Rutherford County denying Debo’s Petition for Relief from Bond. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in its application of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-11-201(c) because the State declined to commence extradition proceedings. Following our review, we affirm the denial of the petition.

Monique Davis v. Willie Thomas
M2021-00303-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge frank G. Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Brothers

The plaintiff has appealed from the dismissal of her complaint for property damage stemming from a water leak. Because the plaintiff did not file her notice of appeal within the time permitted by Tenn. R. App. P. 4, we dismiss the appeal.

James Justice v. Elizabeth Hyatt
M2019-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge David L. Allen

Two cars collided at a four-way stop. One driver filed a personal injury action against the other. At trial, the two sides presented conflicting descriptions of the accident. The jury found the defendant driver was not at fault. And the trial court, as thirteenth juror, approved the jury verdict. Because the jury verdict is supported by material evidence, we affirm.

Loring Justice v. Vey Michael Nordquest, PH.D.
E2020-01152-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kristi M. Davis

Loring Justice (“Plaintiff”), individually and as next friend of N.N./N.J. (“the Child”) sued Vey Michael Nordquist, Ph.D. (“Defendant”) in the Circuit Court for Knox County (“the Trial Court”) over Defendant’s actions in connection with paternity litigation to which Plaintiff was a party. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, but never filed a responsive pleading to the original complaint. The Trial Court granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Before time for appeal expired, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint as he was entitled to do under Tenn. R. Civ. P. 15.01 given that Defendant never filed a responsive pleading to the original complaint. However, the Trial Court never ruled on Plaintiff’s amended complaint. The order appealed from is not a final judgment, meaning we lack subject matter jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal.

In Re James H., III
W2020-01423-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Chief Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor W. Michael Maloan

James H., II (“Father”) appeals the termination of his parental rights to the minor child, James H., III (“the Child”). In April 2017, Ashley P. (“Mother”) and Trinity P. (“Stepfather”) filed a petition to terminate Father’s parental rights in the Weakley County Chancery Court (“Trial Court”). Following a trial, the Trial Court terminated Father’s parental rights on two grounds of abandonment due to Father’s willful failure to visit the Child and willful failure to support the Child prior to Father’s incarceration. The Trial Court further found that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the Child’s best interest. Discerning no error, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Antonio Robinson
W2019-01313-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Paula L. Skahan

The Defendant-Appellant, Antonio Robinson, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of aggravated robbery, facilitation of aggravated assault, and criminally negligent homicide in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-13-402, 39-11-403, 39-13-102, and 39-13-212. On appeal, the Defendant-Appellant claims: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress, and (2) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Willie Austin Davis
M2019-01852-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

The Defendant, Willie Austin Davis, was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of aggravated criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor, based on his entering the property of a Nashville church from which he had been banned. On appeal, the pro se Defendant argues that he was denied a fair trial due to the trial judge’s failure to disclose his relationships with former and current members of the church and others. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tullahoma Industries, LLC v. Navajo Air, LLC Et Al.
M2019-02036-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Melissa T. Blevins-Willis

To collect on its judgment, a judgment creditor served a garnishment on a bank. The garnishee bank initially responded that it held funds belonging to the judgment debtor, a limited liability company. Later, the bank responded “no accounts found.” The bank had two deposit accounts purportedly belonging to a different entity that shared the same name, address, and principal as the judgment debtor. The bank also had an escrow account of which the judgment debtor was a beneficiary. The judgment creditor argued that these three accounts were subject to the garnishment. The trial court disagreed. We affirm. 

State of Tennessee v. Byron Sidney Doss
M2020-00934-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mark J. Fishburn

The Defendant, Byron Sidney Doss, was convicted after a bench trial of false imprisonment, a Class A misdemeanor, and aggravated assault involving strangulation, a Class C felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-102(A)(iv), -13-302. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of five years, suspended to time served plus five years on supervised probation. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court imposed an excessively long five-year sentence. After our review, we affirm and remand the case for the entry of corrected judgment forms.

Priority Waste Service, Inc. et al. v. Santek Environmental, LLC, et al.
E2020-01073-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas R. Frierson, II
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lawrence Howard Puckett

The plaintiffs in this action are operators of businesses that collect and transport municipal solid waste. The plaintiffs filed suit against the defendants, a company that operates a landfill and the county that is a partial owner of the landfill, alleging violations of certain statutes regulating solid waste disposal and landfill operations. Upon a motion to dismiss filed by the defendants, the trial court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims based upon, inter alia, the plaintiffs’ lack of standing and the court’s determination that the statutes did not create a private right of action. The plaintiffs have appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims.

Sherman Matthews v. UPS Store Center 3138 Et Al.
E2020-00255-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge J.B. Bennett
A store clerk packaged a customer’s personal property for shipment. When the property was damaged during shipment, the customer sued the store and the clerk for compensatory damages. At the close of the plaintiff’s proof, the defendants moved to dismiss because the plaintiff did not come forward with sufficient proof of damages. The trial court granted an involuntary dismissal. See Tenn. R. Civ. P. 41.02(2). On appeal, the plaintiff argues that the trial court erroneously excluded his evidence. We conclude that the excluded evidence, if admitted, would not have affected the outcome. So we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Paul Steven Murphy
M2019-01786-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge William R. Goodman, III

A Montgomery County Circuit Court Jury convicted the Appellant, Paul Steven Murphy, of rape and incest. The trial court ordered the Appellant to serve concurrent sentences of ten years for the rape conviction and four years for the incest conviction. On appeal, the Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence sustaining his convictions and the length of the sentences imposed by the trial court. Upon review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.  

Curtis Pierce Et Al. v. State of Tennessee
M2020-00533-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Commissioner James A. Halton

This is a negligence case that was dismissed in the Tennessee Claims Commission for several articulated reasons, including that Tennessee’s recreational use statute barred the plaintiffs’ claims. For the specific reasons stated herein, we affirm the decision of the Claims Commission.

Jared Scott Aguilar v. State of Tennessee
M2019-01814-CCA-R3-ECN
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge William R. Goodman, III

The Petitioner, Jared Scott Aguilar, appeals the Montgomery County Circuit Court’s determination that his coram nobis petition, wherein he challenged his multiple child pornography convictions, failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the coram nobis court erred by finding that he had not presented newly discovered evidence entitling him to relief, specifically, evidence that the search warrant affidavit was deficient due to the investigating officer’s allegedly untrue statement therein that he discovered three child pornography files in the Petitioner’s shared computer folder, that the detective who performed a forensic examination of the Petitioner’s laptop allegedly committed perjury at trial by stating that he found the incriminating files in the Petitioner’s shared folder, and that the investigating officer had undisclosed contact with the Petitioner’s wife. Following our review, we affirm the denial of relief because the Petitioner is merely presenting “repackaged claims” that have been previously determined and which do not state a cognizable claim for relief in the coram nobis context.  

State of Tennessee v. Cedrick Leroy Shelton
W2020-00897-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jill Bartee Ayers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

Defendant, Cedrick Leroy Shelton, was convicted by a jury of simple possession of marijuana, possession of more than 0.5 ounces of marijuana with intent to deliver, possession of a firearm with intent to go armed during the commission of a dangerous felony, possession of drug paraphernalia, and improper display of a license plate. Defendant also pled guilty to two counts of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The trial court imposed an effective fourteen-year sentence, as a Range II multiple offender, to be served in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Defendant argues: that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for possession of more than 0.5 ounces of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of a firearm with intent to go armed during the commission of a dangerous felony; that the jury rendered inconsistent verdicts; and that his sentence was excessive. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgments of the trial court but remand for correction of a clerical error on the judgment forms for counts seven and eight to reflect that Defendant pled guilty to those counts rather than being found guilty by a jury. Additionally, the judgment form in count eight should reflect that it is merged with count seven.

Severiano Martinez Rubio Et Al. v. BB&J Holdings, Et Al.
E2020-00355-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge John W. McClarty
Trial Court Judge: Judge Alex E. Pearson

This is a case for the enforcement of a restrictive covenant prohibiting commercial use of lots in a residentially restricted neighborhood. The trial court awarded the plaintiffs nominal damages in the sum of $500 against one defendant and denied the plaintiffs’ requests for specific equitable performance and injunctive relief and for punitive damages. The plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

Federal National Mortgage Association v. Connie Mundy Et Al.
E2020-00825-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kyle E. Hedrick

Generally at issue in this litigation is the propriety of a foreclosure. The trial court held that summary judgment should be entered in the appellee’s favor due to, among other things, the appellant’s lack of standing. The appellant’s principal brief only raises issues connected to the trial court’s determination on standing, although even these issues have now been disclaimed by the appellant on appeal. We therefore affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Renee Downs v. Glenn J. Williams, M.D., et al.
W2020-00845-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Valerie L. Smith

This is an appeal of a health care liability case. Although the matters presented for our review were taken under advisement following oral argument, we hereby dismiss the appeal with prejudice pursuant to the stipulation of the parties.

Samuel Chandler, et al. v. Cynthia Perkins Frazier a/k/a Cynthia Edwards
W2020-01129-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Carma Dennis McGee
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter L. Evans

This case involves a pro se complaint to quiet title filed by several plaintiffs challenging a deed that was executed over twenty years ago. This is the second appeal in this matter. After the plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed in 2016, only one plaintiff/appellant appealed to this Court. The remaining plaintiffs did not participate in the first appeal. The matter was remanded for findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the appellant died at some point. After a second order of dismissal was entered containing the requisite findings, the instant appeal was filed by counsel purportedly on behalf of the original plaintiffs. We conclude that the appeal must be dismissed because the plaintiffs who did not participate in the first appeal are bound by the first order of dismissal, which became final as to them when they did not appeal. Also, the sole appellant from the first appeal has died, and the attorney who filed the notice of appeal has admittedly never communicated with the appellant or anyone acting on behalf of his estate. As such, this appeal is hereby dismissed.