X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

Supreme Court

K-Testing Lab, Inc., v. Estate of Larry Kennon, Brenda L. Kennon, Executrix
02A01-9703-CH-00064
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor D. J. Alissandratos

At issue in this case is a stock redemption agreement executed by the owners of a closelyheld corporation. The Chancellor issued a mandatory injunction instructing the holder of the stock certificates to abide by the stock redemption agreement and turn over the shares to the corporation, and the holder appealed. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Virgil L. Hitchcock and Shirley R. Hitchcock, v. Allen S. Boyd, Jr., M.D., James D. Acker, M.D., and Semmes-Murphy Clinic, Inc., et al.
02A01-9705-CV-00107
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge D'Army Bailey

In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff alleges that counsel for the defendants committed misconduct during the trial and appeals the trial court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. We affirm.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Marie Puckett, et al v. Palma Diane Harrison and Tammy Harrison Kincer
02A01-9708-CH-00184
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor William Michael Maloan

This appeal involves a divorced couple who decided to forego certain provisions in 2 their marital dissolution agreement concerning ownership of the marital residence without the consultation of counsel or the court. This matter began as a divorce action in the Chancery Court of Weakley County, Tennessee, and was styled: Palma Diane Harrison vs. Robert E. Harrison. Robert (“decedent”) and Palma Diane Harrison (“appellee”) entered into a Marital Dissolution Agreement on June 27, 1994. The divorce was granted on September 12, 1994, and the final decree of divorce incorporated the Marital Dissolution Agreement therein. In pertinent part, the Marital Dissolution Agreement provided:

Weakley Court of Appeals

In the matter of Katherine C.
W2000-01714-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Christy R. Little
The trial court terminated the parental rights of Mother upon a finding that the grounds for termination were proven by clear and convincing evidence and that termination was in the minor child's best interests. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Madison Court of Appeals

Vann Stiffler vs. Kroger Co.
W2000-02200-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown
This is a premise liability action arising from an incident wherein Mrs. Stiffler was struck in the back by shopping carts, knocked to the floor, and sustained injuries as a result of the fall. At trial, the jury awarded Mrs. Stiffler $75,000 and awarded $5,000 to Mr. Stiffler on his loss of consortium claim. Kroger filed a motion to set aside the verdict, for a new trial, or, alternatively, for remittitur. The trial court denied Kroger's motion, and this appeal ensued. We affirm.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Susan Weiss vs. State Farm
W2000-02506-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
The Weisses procured supplemental insurance from State Farm through its agent, Mr. Brooks. In procuring such insurance, Mr. Weiss rejected uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Mrs. Weiss was involved in an automobile accident wherein she sustained damages exceeding the amount covered by her insurance policy. As the other driver involved in the accident was either uninsured or underinsured, the Weisses sought recovery from State Farm. State Farm denied the claim, determining that the Weisses did not have coverage under their umbrella policy. The Weisses brought an action against State Farm and Mr. Brooks. State Farm and Mr. Brooks filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. We affirm.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Emanuel Lewis vs. Dr. Dwight Moore
W2000-02682-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers
This appeal involves a claim of medical malpractice. The plaintiff's minor child suffered brain damage during delivery. The only remaining defendants, Dr. Moore and Dr. Lawrence, moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. Plaintiff appeals. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendants.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Jack Coleman vs. City of Memphis
W2000-02865-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos
This appeal arises out of a dispute over an annexation ordinance passed by the City of Memphis. The trial court granted summary judgment to Defendants due to its finding that Plaintiffs did not properly file a complaint contesting the annexation ordinance. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Bobbie Read, v. Home Depot, USA, Inc.
01A01-9803-CV-00121
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cornelia A. Clark

This is a premises liability case in which the captioned plaintiff tripped over an obstruction in the aisle of a retail store. The Trial Court rendered summary judgment for the store because the obstruction was open and obvious. Plaintiff has appealed and presented the following issues:

Williamson Court of Appeals

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

Supreme Court

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

Supreme Court

Wilma Lucchesi v. Alcohol And Licensing Commission Of
CH-00-1368-3
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.

Shelby Court of Appeals

David Rouse vs. Ira Rouse
W1999-02126-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
This is a divorce action wherein the trial court declared the parties divorced. Husband appeals the trial court's decision to admit evidence regarding his retirement plan; its valuation of the same; its award of rehabilitative alimony to Wife; its award of attorney's fees to Wife; its division of marital debt; its adopting Wife's proposed final decree of divorce; its division of marital property; its admitting evidence regarding Husband's use of pornography; and its refusal to permit Husband's Rule 15 Memorandum in the record on appeal. Additionally, Wife seeks her attorney's fees on appeal. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Patsy Oakley vs. James Oakley
W2000-02033-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown
This appeal arises from a divorce action. Husband and Wife divorced after 22 years of marriage. Both had received property by bequest during the marriage. Husband had received stocks and securities, real property, and Company, which he owned and operated. Wife received property which she subsequently sold. The proceeds of these sales were deposited in a separate investment account after first passing through a marital checking account and were later used to buy Condo. The trial court specifically found that Wife had not substantially contributed to appreciation of stocks and securities, but awarded her 25% of their appreciation. The appreciation of Husband's real property was found to be marital property, as well as the entire value of Company. Wife's Condo was found to be separate property. We affirm in part, reverse in part, modify and remand.

Shelby Court of Appeals

William Roberts vs. L. Land Bicknell
W2000-02514-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.
In this medical malpractice case, patient and wife sued physicians and their professional association for damages resulting from defendants' negligence, deviation from applicable standard of care, and lack of informed consent. The trial court granted defendants a partial summary judgment for all claims concerning incidents that occurred more than one year prior to the date suit was filed, as barred by the statute of limitations. Subsequently, the trial court granted summary judgment on the merits as to all remaining claims. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Madison Court of Appeals

Cliffer Saulsberry vs. Labcorp
W2000-02826-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: James F. Russell
Plaintiff truck driver was required to submit to a random urine drug test pursuant to his employer's drug policy and mandatory Department of Transportation (DOT) guidelines. After the specimen tested positive for the presence of cocaine metabolites, plaintiff was discharged from his employment. Plaintiff sued the laboratory that conducted the test, alleging negligence in the testing procedure that resulted in a false report. The trial court granted the laboratory summary judgment, and plaintiff appeals. We reverse.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Shirley Schulze, A/K/A Shirley Schulze Vires v. Jere Steven
W2000-02953-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Benham

Shelby Court of Appeals

Frank Donovan vs. National Bank
W2000-03064-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos
This is a breach of contract case. The defendant bank hired the plaintiff as a consultant to contact supermarkets about placing branch banks in their stores. In August 1988, the parties signed a written consulting contract which expired by its own terms in November 1988. In that contract, the plaintiff was to receive a salary plus $2,000 for each branch bank placed in a store as a result of his efforts. This contract expired, but the plaintiff continued to work for the bank for about ten years with no other written agreement. The plaintiff was never paid the $2,000-per-store bonus. In 1990, the plaintiff asked the bank to pay the $2,000-per-store bonus, and this request was ignored. The plaintiff's employment was terminated in 1998. In May 1999, the plaintiff sued the bank for breach of contract, claiming that they owed him the $2,000-per-store bonus under the original contract. The trial court granted the bank summary judgment based on the applicable statute of limitations. The plaintiff now appeals. We affirm, finding that the cause of action accrued, at the latest, in 1990 when the plaintiff requested the bonus and his request was ignored.

Shelby Court of Appeals

Gary Leon Cureton v. State of Tennessee
E2000-01638-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

On May 21, 1999, Gary Leon Cureton, the Petitioner and Appellant, pled guilty in the Greene County Criminal Court to two counts of rape and two counts of sexual battery and waived his right to appeal. Following the guilty plea, the trial court sentenced the Petitioner to serve seventeen years incarceration. On May 25, 2000, the Greene County Court Clerk received a post-conviction petition from the incarcerated pro se Petitioner and stamped the document to indicate that it had been filed on that date. On June 2, 2000 the trial court issued a preliminary order dismissing the petition on the ground that it was not timely filed. On June 12, the trial court received a pro se motion to reconsider the dismissal of the petition, but the trial court denied the motion on June 19, 2000. On August 2, 2000, this Court ordered the trial court to address the Petitioner's request for the appointment of counsel, and the trial court subsequently appointed counsel to assist with the Petitioner's appeal. The Petitioner appeals the trial court's dismissal of his petition and subsequent denial of his motion to reconsider, arguing that he carried his burden of proving that the petition was timely filed. Because the Petitioner was never afforded an opportunity to prove that he timely filed his petition, we remand for a hearing to determine whether the Petitioner's petition was timely filed.

Greene Court of Criminal Appeals

Billy George vs. Misty George Mullican
M2000-01106-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III
This appeal arises from a child custody action. After divorce, Mother was awarded custody of Child. Father later filed a petition for contempt charging that Mother was denying him visitation. Mother denied these charges and counter-filed claiming that Father had failed to meet his support obligations. While these matters were pending, Mother filed a report with the Department of Children's Services that Father had sexually molested Child. Mother later admitted these charges to be false, and as a result, Father gained temporary custody of Child. Mother later filed this petition requesting the return of Child to her custody. The trial court refused, instead finding that Father was the more fit parent and awarding him permanent custody. Mother appealed this decision. We affirm.

Cannon Court of Appeals

Estate of Nan Francis vs. Karl Francis
M2000-01110-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin
This appeal involves a dispute between a widow and her stepson regarding the disposition of a jointly owned certificate of deposit. After her stepson liquidated the certificate of deposit and used the proceeds to obtain another certificate of deposit in his own name, the widow filed suit in the Chancery Court for Cheatham County seeking her share of the funds. The stepson filed a counterclaim, alleging that the widow had contributed to his father's death by failing to provide needed medical care and seeking reimbursement for his father's funeral expenses. The widow died while the suit was pending, and her estate was substituted as a party. After dismissing the stepson's wrongful death claim, the trial court determined that the widow's estate and her stepson should receive equal shares of the proceeds of the account remaining after the payment of a joint debt of the widow's husband and her stepson and that the widow's estate should reimburse the stepson for the expenses he incurred in connection with his father's funeral. On this appeal, the widow's estate asserts that the trial court erred by ordering that the funds in the account be used to repay the joint debt and by ordering it to reimburse the stepson for his father's funeral expenses. We have determined that the trial court properly distributed the proceeds of the deposit account. However, we have also determined that the trial court erred by directing the widow's estate to reimburse the stepson for his father's funeral expenses.

Cheatham Court of Appeals

Virnie Fulks vs. J. Hulan Watson, et al
M1999-02800-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash
This declaratory judgment action was filed by a dissatisfied school system employee who was transferred from his position as Manager of Property, Plant, and Maintenance to the position of maintenance worker and ultimately was informed that he would not be rehired. The employee claimed these employment actions were improper because he was tenured and certified. He also sought additional compensation or compensatory time for extra hours he worked. The trial court determined that the employee was not tenured, could be transferred, and was entitled to only a limited amount of compensatory time. The court also found that the superintendent had authority not to renew the employment with proper notice, but that sufficient notice of nonrenewal had not been provided. We affirm.

Rutherford Court of Appeals

Gwendolyn Henderson vs. Dept. Children Serv .
W1999-01940-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Kenneth A. Turner
This is a suit for the termination of parental rights. The Appellee filed a petition to terminate the Appellant's parental rights to two of her children. Following a hearing, the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County entered an order terminating the Appellant's parental rights. The Appellant appeals the trial court's order terminating her parental rights. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court's decision.

Shelby Court of Appeals

In re: Estate of Fannie Mae Johnson
W2000-01510-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Benham
This appeal arises from the trial court's finding that a bank account was part of Decedent's estate and not the property of Executrix. In 1987, Decedent added Executrix to a bank account. Decedent failed to mark the portion of the card signifying that the account was to have rights of survivorship. After Decedent died, Executrix conducted an accounting in which she did not include the account. Beneficiary contested the accounting arguing that account should be part of the estate. Executrix argued that the addition of her name to the account created a presumption that the account's right of survivorship was a gift inter vivos. The trial court found that no presumption existed and that the account was part of the estate. We affirm.

Shelby Court of Appeals