Barry Robinson v. Donald Brooks
M2003-00185-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This case involves the sale by auction of certain real property in Davidson County. The buyers brought suit in Davidson County Chancery Court seeking specific performance or, in the alternative, damages for breach of contract. From the trial court's grant of summary judgment for the defendants, the plaintiff buyers appeal. We affirm.

State vs. Chris Wilson a/k/a Calvin Clark
M1998-00395-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
Following a "best interest" plea to one count of aggravated burglary, the appellant was sentenced to a term of five years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges (1) the length of the sentence and (2) the imposition of a sentence of total confinement. After review, we affirm.

Dudley vs. Dudley
M1998-00982-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
In this divorce case, the trial court awarded the divorce to the Wife and divided the property. Husband appeals the award of the marital residence and its contents to Wife. We affirm.

Turner vs. Turner
M1999-00482-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.

Turner vs. Turner
M1999-00482-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.

Lassiter vs. Lassiter
M1999-00374-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
This case involves a divorce ending a seven-year marriage. The divorce was awarded to the wife on grounds of the husband's inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court divided the property and debts according to the parties' stipulations. The court then awarded the wife alimony in futuro and ordered the husband to pay $750 of the wife's attorney fees. The husband appeals the awards of alimony and attorney fees. We affirm.

State Dept. of Children's Svcs. vs. L.S., In the Matter of D.S.
M1999-00847-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: John J. Maddux
The Trial Court removed minor child from the parental home on grounds child was dependent and neglected. We affirm.

Franklin Nat'l Bank vs. Prowell
M2000-00580-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
The Circuit Court of Williamson County refused to issue a writ of certiorari to review a judgment of the General Sessions Court of that county because the petition was untimely and the same issues were already pending in an action in Maury County. We affirm.

Moss vs. TN Board of Paroles
M2000-00128-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
At the hearing where appellant's parole was revoked, the Hearing Officer admitted sworn statements of alleged victims. The Trial Court upheld the revocation. We affirm.

Joiner vs. Metro Gov't
M2000-00413-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
The Trial Court entered consent Judgment over objection of defendant. We vacate Judgment and remand.

Wilson vs. So. Centr. Corr. Facility Disciplinary Bd
M2000-00303-COA-RM-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
An inmate in a privately operated prison filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari against the disciplinary board at that facility. The trial court dismissed his petition for failure to state a claim. We affirm

Paul Farnsworth, A/K/A Ronnie Bradfield v. Donita Moore,
01623-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Graham

Tammy Elizabeth Hickman & Danny Ray Hickman vs. Eugenia Darlene Hickman
E2000-00927-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart
Plaintiffs sued to terminate the mother's parental rights. The Trial Judge held plaintiffs failed to carry the burden of proof. We affirm.

Barry King v. City of Belle Meade, and
M1999-01432-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Turnbull, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr., Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this case, the employee contends the trial court erred in failing to award workers' compensation disability and/or medical benefits to the employee based upon his work-related hypertension and heart disease. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the trial court's dismissal of the employees workers' compensation claims should be affirmed. Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6-225(e)(3) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed Turnbull, Sp. J., in which Drowota, J., and Loser, Sp. J., joined. Daniel Carlton Todd, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Barry King. Teresa Reall Ricks, Farrar & Bates, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, City of Belle Meade and TML Risk Management Pool, Inc., Appellees. MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee, Barry King ("King"), was employed as a police officer for the City of Belle Meade from January 1988 to September 1997. The City of Belle Meade is insured by TML Risk Management Pool, Inc. On January 6, 1988, prior to his employment as a police officer for the City of Belle Meade, King underwent a physical examination which failed to reveal any presence of hypertension or heart disease. On August 12, 1995, King was diagnosed with an irregular heartbeat and high cholesterol. The following day, he was hospitalized with chest pains. King continued his duties as a police officer for the City of Belle Meade after his release from the hospital. Upon the advice of King's cardiologist nearly two years later, King was referred to and treated by Dr. Marcus C. Houston, M.D., for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, coronary heart disease, carotid artery obstruction, and a history of transient ischemic attacks since June 3, 1997. On September 4, 1997, Dr. Houston suggested to King that he no longer continue to work as a police officer because the stress related to King's job as a police officer constituted a danger to King's health. On September 5, 1997, King terminated his employment as a police officer and submitted his First Report of Work Injury. King claims workers' compensation disability and/or medical benefits based upon his work-related hypertension and heart disease. He argues that job stress caused high blood pressure which in turn caused his heart disease. The employee insists he suffers an occupational disease under Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-31[6]. Subsequent to King's filing for workers' compensation, an independent health examination was conducted by Dr. Hal M. Roseman, M.D., who evaluated King's medical records, checked the calibration of King's blood pressure monitor, performed a physical examination of King, and had a psychological test of King performed. Dr. Roseman concluded to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that King's medical condition was not proximately caused by his employment as a police officer. Neither Dr. Roseman nor Dr. Houston can be characterized as a professional witness who commonly testify in worker's compensation cases. Charles Vincent Perry, Jr., the Chief of Police for Belle Meade, testified that King's duties as a police officer for the City of Belle Meade consisted of general patrol duties, specifically as a DUI enforcement officer. King does not specifically claim that any particular incident or event in performing his duties as a police officer precipitated his hypertension or coronary heart disease. From the above summarized evidence, the trial judge found that sufficient medical evidence rebutted the presumption, supplied by Tenn. Code Ann. _7-51-21(a)(1), that King's hypertension and heart disease were "accidental injur[ies] suffered in the course of employment." The trial court held that the employee failed to cite to a specific event or occurrence that precipitated his hypertension and heart disease. ISSUES Did the trial court properly find and conclude that the employee's heart disease is not compensable? [2]

J.D. Hickman v. State of Tennessee
E1999-02756-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

State vs. Tracy L. Fry
E1999-02758-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
Tracy Fry, the Defendant and Appellant, pled guilty to driving under the influence, second offense. With the State's and trial court's agreement, however, she specifically reserved the right to appeal a dispositive question of law pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(1). The issue reserved for review is whether Officer Kyte "had reasonable suspicion based on specific and articulable facts, to approach and subsequently seize the defendant leading to the arrest of the defendant." We conclude that the initial encounter between Officer Kyte and the Defendant was not a seizure, that the encounter provided reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory detention of the Defendant, and that sufficient probable cause to arrest the Defendant developed during the course of the brief investigatory detention. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Walter E. Everette, et al vs. Hubert G. Berry, et al
E2000-00461-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
In this dispute over real estate, the Plaintiffs seek to have a quit claim deed conveying certain property to the Defendants declared spurious, as well as injunctive relief relative to rights-of-way adjacent to their property. The Chancellor granted the relief the Plaintiffs sought, resulting in this appeal. We affirm.

State vs. James E. Harman, Jr.
E2000-00437-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
In October of 1999, the defendant pled guilty to one count of theft over one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one count of possession of less than .5 ounces of marijuana. His plea form indicated that he agreed to receive concurrent sentences of five and one-half years as a Range II, multiple offender for the former offense and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the latter. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing to determine the manner in which these sentences were to be served. At the conclusion of such hearing, the trial court denied the defendant any form of alternative sentencing, and it is this denial that the defendant contests through his appeal. However, after having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find this contention to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's sentence.

State vs. James E. Harman, Jr.
E2000-00437-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck

In October of 1999, the defendant pled guilty to one count of theft over one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one count of possession of less than .5 ounces of marijuana. His plea form indicated that he agreed to receive concurrent sentences of five and one-half years as a Range II, multiple offender for the former offense and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the latter. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing to determine the manner in which these sentences were to be served. At the conclusion of such hearing, the trial court denied the defendant any form of alternative sentencing, and it is this denial that the defendant contests through his appeal. However, after having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find this contention to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's sentence.

Jimmy B. Hillard, et al vs. Buddie Ruth Franklin
E2000-00402-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
This is a suit for specific performance. The plaintiffs entered into an agreement with the defendant to purchase certain real property for $80,000. Before the purchase was closed, a house on the property was destroyed by fire, and the defendant collected $35,000 as proceeds from her homeowners' insurance policy. The purchase of the property did not proceed to closing and the plaintiffs filed suit for specific performance of the contract at a purchase price of $45,000 -- this amount being the difference between the original purchase price and the insurance proceeds collected by the defendant. The trial court granted the plaintiffs summary judgment. The defendant appeals, contending that this case is not ripe for summary judgment. We affirm.

John E. Carter vs. Howard Carlton
E2000-00406-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Cupp
John E. Carter seeks the writ of habeas corpus. He claims that he is entitled to immediate release from his two 1981 convictions for the first degree murder of his grandparents. Carter alleges that he is being illegally restrained because he had inadequate notice of the charges against him, because the trial court excluded relevant evidence at his trial, and because the jury instructions given at his trial were flawed. We agree with the court below that these issues do not entitle Carter to issuance of the writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, we affirm the lower court's dismissal of the petition.

Michael Bailey vs. State
E2000-00432-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
A Sullivan County jury convicted the petitioner of one count of second degree murder involving the death of his son. For this offense the petitioner received a sentence of twenty years as a Range I, standard offender, and a $50,000 fine. He unsuccessfully brought a direct appeal challenging both his conviction and sentence. Subsequently, he filed a pro se post-conviction petition and was appointed counsel from the public defender's office. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court took this matter under advisement and later issued a detailed order dismissing the petition. Thereafter, the petitioner requested that his appointed attorney withdraw from the case and that he be allowed to bring his appeal pro se. The trial court granted this motion, and the petitioner now brings this appeal raising three issues. More specifically, he asserts that (1) the jury instructions, when viewed overall, effectively denied him "a fair trial and a reliable verdict;" (2) the State engaged in misconduct and denied him a fair trial by withholding exculpatory material; and (3) the prosecuting officer made the result of the petitioner's trial unreliable because the officer perjured himself. After reviewing these issues, we find that all have been waived and/or lack merit. We, therefore, affirm the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief.

Michael E. Christian vs. State
E2000-00922-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The petitioner, Michael E. Christian, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He contends that he did not voluntarily enter his guilty pleas because he was experiencing panic attacks and confusion, which was a side effect of his medication, at the time he entered the pleas. He also claims that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorneys did not investigate the effects of his medication on his competency and scared him into pleading guilty. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition.

State vs. William Terrell Hampton
E2000-00582-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Carroll L. Ross
The defendant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual battery, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a fresh complaint, and the trial court erred in imposing a nine-year sentence. We affirm the defendant's conviction and sentence.

State sv. Marcus Anthony Parram
E2000-00581-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
The defendant appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, that the trial court erred in allowing hearsay statements into evidence, and that the trial court erred in allowing evidence of a prior robbery committed by the defendant. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.