Lemm vs. Adams 01A01-9607-CH-00330
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson
Court of Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Nathan Allen Callahan 03C01-9507-CC-00203
Authoring Judge: David H. Welles, Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. R. Jerry Beck
This is an appeal as of right pursuant to Rule 3, Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Defendant, Nathan Allen Callahan, was convicted by a Sullivan County jury of one count of first-degree murder and one count of second-degree murder, respectively, for the shooting deaths of his mother and younger sister. The jury set punishment for the first-degree murder conviction at life imprisonment and fined the Defendant $47,. for the count of second- degree murder. The trial court ordered twenty-two years imprisonment on the conviction for second-degree murder to be served concurrently with the life sentence.
Sullivan
Workers Compensation Panel
Carolyn Marie Drake v. David Carl Drake 03A01-9610-CV-00312
Authoring Judge: HERSCHEL P. FRANKS, J.
Trial Court Judge: HON. ROBERT M. SUMMITT
Petitioner and Respondent are sister and brother, and the Trial Court issued an order of protection in response2 to the petition filed, following an abbreviated trial. On appeal, respondent insists the Trial Court did not have jurisdiction pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated _36-3-61, et seq., or that the Court refused to permit respondent to present his evidence.
State vs. Skidmore 03C01-9502-CR-00039
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Blount
Court of Criminal Appeals
Blanken v. Philips 03S01-9607-CV-00081
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge John K. Byers
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Plaintiff injured her left arm at work on February 28, 1992. W hen surgery did not improve the condition or decrease her pain she became markedly depressed. The trial court found that plaintiff's depression was related to her arm injury and awarded her 1 percent permanent total disability based on the two conditions. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Plaintiff injured her left arm gradually at work in February, March and April of 1992. She was left hand dominant and her work required that she use a staple gun repetitively. Dr. Joseph C. DeFiore, Jr., orthopedic surgeon, treated her left elbow and shoulder from April 13, 1992 through January 24, 1994. When Dr. DeFiore first saw plaintiff, he found tenderness over the left lateral epicondyle area and in her left shoulder, with no specific abnormalities on x- ray. He diagnosed tendinitis of the left shoulder and lateral epicondylitis, or tennis elbow. Plaintiff also reported being extremely depressed, primarily because of the elbow problem. A work-related low back injury contributed to her depression, but we do not consider that injury, which was non-suited at trial. Dr. DeFiore advised plaintiff to avoid use of a staple gun at work, which he thought was causing some of her irritation, gave her a TENS unit for pain control and prescribed exercises. Plaintiff returned to work with the limitation that she do only nonrepetitive, non-overuse work with the left upper extremity. The work she was assigned, though much less harmful according to Dr. DeFiore, still required her to constantly reach with her left hand and arm in order to spray television cabinets with an air pressure gun. Plaintiff continued to have pain in the elbow and therefore had cortisone injections on three occasions, with no improvement. Bone scan found arthritis in the shoulder joint. Plaintiff was deposed by defendant on October 19, 1992, and it was apparently here that both parties' counsel learned from plaintiff about antidepressant medications given to her by her family physician on a continuing basis since her first 2
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
Stone Container Corporation v. Neil Griffith 03S01-9609-CV-00094
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. William L. Brown,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer, Stone Container Corporation, has perfected this appeal from a decision of the trial court to award the employee, Neil Griffith, 1% permanent partial disability benefits to the body as a whole. Temporary total disability benefits were paid until the employee returned to work during January, 1995, and the payment of medical expenses is also not an issue. The employer insists the evidence preponderates against a finding of permanent injury or disability. The short record contains the oral testimony of the employee, and the depositions of three orthopedic surgeons. Employee Griffith had worked for Stone Container Corporation for about twenty-five years when he sustained a work-related injury on November 28, 1994. On this day he was reaching down to pick up a heavy pallet when he felt pain across the top of his shoulder. The next morning he had pain in his left arm and was hospitalized a few days to determine if he was having or had a heart attack. Testing for this condition was negative and he was released. He first came under the care of Dr. Lester F. Littell III, who was one of the three designated physicians of the employer. He found he had sustained a work- related injury but was of the opinion it would eventually clear up. He found no permanent impairment and did not place any restrictions on the patient. Becoming dissatisfied with Dr. Littell, employee Griffith requested the company to furnish another physician for a second opinion. He was then seen by Dr. Neil H. Spitalny who found mild disc bulging at several levels as reported on a MRI report and said this was consistent with normal degenerative aging process of the cervical spine and discs. He was of the opinion there was no medical impairment. We do note his testimony indicates he saw him again on January 22, 1996, when he was still complaining of left shoulder pain and discomfort in the neck musculature. 2
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
Johnson v. Goodwill 03S01-9610-CV-00101
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. James B. Scott, Jr.
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appeal has resulted from the action of the trial court in dismissing the employee's claim for benefits. The Circuit Judge found plaintiff had failed to establish her injury was caused by an accident which arose out of and in the course of her employment. The sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence preponderates against the conclusion of the trial court. Plaintiff, Joy G. Johnson, testified on October 2, 1993, she stepped into a drainage hole while performing her work-related duties. She reported the incident to several management representatives and signed an accident report which indicated she did not receive any treatment for an injury. She did not miss any work and did not see a doctor until July 1994. Her family doctor then referred her to Dr. Gregory M. Mathien, an orthopedic surgeon. She saw Dr. Mathien on September 15, 1994, which was almost a year after the incident at work. In giving a history, she said she fell about a year earlier and had a second fall about eight months earlier. She never indicated either fall occurred at work. Dr. Mathien's testimony was by deposition and his diagnosis was a torn meniscus with secondary tendinitis. He said the articular cartilage lesion was not work-related but was due to the degenerative process. As to the torn meniscus, he testified causation was hard to say; she only told him she had pain about two and one-half months prior to seeing him, and he could not determine which fall caused the problem or if either event was the cause. Dr. Mathien performed surgery and continued to see her saying the result was not as good as expected. He did not assess any medical impairment as he had no reason to do so. The record indicates plaintiff incurred substantial medical expenses and all bills were submitted to her husband's medical insurance carrier. No medical expenses were ever submitted to defendant employer. She also admitted she never 2
