The Kroger Company, et al. v. Sara Cooper M1999-01120-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz, Judge
The employer has appealed contending the trial court's award of permanent partial disability benefits based on thirty-five percent to the leg for a torn meniscus is excessive.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of four counts of aggravated sexual battery and ten counts of rape of a child. In this direct appeal Defendant alleges he did not receive a fair trial because (1) the bill of particulars did not sufficiently inform Defendant of the charges, and (2) the prosecution violated Brady vs. Maryland when it failed to turn-over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial. Held: the bill of particulars adequately appraised Defendant of the crimes with which he was charged. Although the prosecution violated Brady when it failed to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial, the error was harmless. Judgment of the trial court affirmed.
We granted this appeal to determine: 1) whether private school tuition constitutes an extraordinary educational expense under the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines; and 2) whether the noncustodial parent should be required to pay those expenses in addition to child support based upon the percentage of net income of the noncustodial parent. We hold that pursuant to the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines private school tuition is an "extraordinary educational expense." We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals requiring the total amount of private school tuition to be paid by the obligor-father. We hold, however, that in appropriate cases a court may apportion the amount of tuition between the parties.
Hamilton
Supreme Court
Patricia M. Campbell v. City of Tullahoma, et al M1999-01235-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins, Judge
The appellant, Campbell, insists the trial court erred in granting the appellee's motion for discretionary costs because no equitable ground for such relief was asserted in the motion and accompanying affidavit. The panel concludes that the plaintiff's voluntary dismissal of her complaint is a sufficient ground for an award of discretionary costs.
Campbell
Workers Compensation Panel
Scholz vs. S.B. International M1997-00215-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from a dispute over the severance benefits in an employment contract. Following his termination, a corporate officer filed suit against his former employer in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking his severance benefits. The employer asserted that its former officer was not entitled to the severance benefits. Following a jury trial, the trial court entered a judgment awarding the officer $111,623.33 but denying his requests for prejudgment interest and discretionary costs. On this appeal, the officer asserts that the trial court erred by failing to award him prejudgment interest and discretionary costs. We agree and, therefore, remand the case for further proceedings.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Howard vs. Howard M1999-00670-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This appeal arises from a dispute over a contractual provision in a Marital Dissolution Agreement ("MDA") between the parties. Susan Trabue Howard ("Mother") filed a Petition for Enforcement of Contractual Obligation, alleging that Robert Mark Howard ("Father") had failed to abide with a provision in the MDA providing that Father would be responsible for Daughter's "related costs of education." The court below found in favor of Mother, holding that Father was responsible for all of Daughter's expenses for the time specified in MDA. Father appeals.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Sloan vs. Perryman M1999-00828-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
This appeal arises from a breach of contract suit and action to assert priority of a mechanics lien filed by Jason Sloan ("Contractor") against Shelby Ray Perryman ("Owners") and First Farmers & Merchants National Bank ("Bank"). Contractor sought recovery for labor and materials under the contract including expenses that exceeded Contractor's original bid price. In the alternative, Contractor sought recovery under quantum meruit. The court granted Bank's motion for summary judgment on the issue of priority of liens. Following trial, the court awarded Contractor damages under an implied contract theory, limiting Contractor's recovery to the bid price. In addition, the court denied Contractor's claim for alternative recovery in quantum meruit. Contractor appeals.
Miller vs. Miller M1999-00724-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
In this divorce, both Husband and Wife have appealed contesting the trial court's division of marital property and alimony awards. The division of marital property is affirmed, alimony awards are modified, and the case is remanded for a determination of the value of Husband's retirement plan and a proper division thereof.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Miller vs. Miller M1999-00724-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
In this divorce, both Husband and Wife have appealed contesting the trial court's division of marital property and alimony awards. The division of marital property is affirmed, alimony awards are modified, and the case is remanded for a determination of the value of Husband's retirement plan and a proper division thereof.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Kibby vs. Kibby M1999-00906-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
This appeal presents a dispute of custody, visitation, and attorney fees. The parties are parents of one child, Ian Kibby, who is the subject of this dispute. The father was awarded primary custody when the parties divorced in May of 1996. The mother filed a Petition for Contempt and Modification seeking primary residential placement of Ian and later requested that the court refer this matter to mediation. The father filed a counter-petition requesting a change in the mother's visitation privileges and attorney's fees. The trial court dismissed the mother's petition but granted the father's petition reducing the mother's visitation rights. The court also refused to refer this matter to mediation and did not award attorney fees to the father. The mother now appeals the court's dismissal of her petition, failure to refer the matter to mediation, and change in visitation; the father also appeals the failure of the trial court to award attorney fees to him. We agree with the trial court on all issues and affirm its ruling. We also award attorney's fees necessitated by this appeal to the father and remand to the trial court for a determination of this amount.
Sequatchie
Court of Appeals
State vs. Delwin Keith O'Neal M2000-00650-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
In 1997, the defendant pled guilty in Marshall County to aggravated assault. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, he was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender and received a six-year sentence, consecutive to a prior Montgomery County sentence. The defendant now claims his sentence does not comport with the plea agreement and asks this court to modify the sentence. Upon our review of the record, we conclude the defendant did not timely challenge his sentence and deny relief.
Gerome Smith vs. State M1999-02511-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft
The petitioner, Gerome Smith, appeals the trial court's disposition of his petition for post-conviction relief. While granting the petitioner 60 days within which to file an application for permission to appeal to our supreme court this court's affirmance of the original conviction and sentence, the trial court otherwise denied post-conviction relief. The single issue presented for review is whether the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. Because the petitioner has been unable to meet his burden of proof, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Sumner
Court of Criminal Appeals
Zettersten vs. Zettersten M1999-01186-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
This appeal arises from an action for divorce and division of marital assets. The court below granted Linda Jean Zettersten ("Wife") a divorce on grounds of Rolf Birger Zettersten's ("Husband's") stipulation of inappropriate marital conduct; awarded Wife alimony in futuro and rehabilitative alimony and child support for the parties' minor child; awarded Wife $11,923.50 in attorney's fees, discretionary costs and court costs. Wife appeals.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
State vs. Theron L. Boyd M1999-01125-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Seth W. Norman
The Defendant, Theron L. Boyd, appeals as of right from an "Agreed Final Judgment Granting Delayed Appeal" entered by the trial court upon the trial court's finding that the Defendant was entitled to post-conviction relief. The "Agreed Final Judgment Granting Delayed Appeal" purports to modify the original judgment of conviction by explicitly reserving certified questions of law which would be dispositive of the case and then to grant a delayed appeal of those issues. The Defendant argues that his convictions pursuant to his guilty pleas should be reversed because the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found as a result of illegal searches by police. The State, however, argues that we lack jurisdiction to address the merits of the Defendant's contentions because the trial court did not have jurisdiction to amend the final judgment which did not reflect the reservation of certified questions of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b). We conclude that this appeal is not properly before us. Accordingly, we must dismiss this appeal and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
Union Planters Bank vs. Choate M1999-01268-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arises from a breach of contract case filed against Mickie Davis ("Davis") by Carole Choate ("Choate"). Choate alleged that Davis breached her contractual and fiduciary duties by authorizing release of funds to Rochford Realty ("Rochford") for a construction project. The trial court granted Davis' motion for summary judgment. Choate appeals.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Shuman vs. Parkhurst M1999-02043-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
James Parkhurst d/b/a Parkhurst Home Improvement appeals the trial court's final judgment awarding Ken Shuman $8,021.14 in actual damages for breach of oral construction contract and $2,406.33 in attorney's fees based upon a finding of fraud in violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Parkhurst raised two issues on appeal, contending that the damages awarded in this home construction dispute were not legally warranted and that the trial court erred in finding fraud, therefore justifying an award for attorney's fees under the Act. We conclude that Shuman presented sufficient proof to find a violation of the Act and to support his claim for damages and for attorney's fees. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
State vs. Tywan Faulk M1999-01124-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
The appellant, Tywan Faulk, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Montgomery County Circuit Court of one count of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver and within 1,000 feet of a school, a class A felony. Prior to trial, the appellant pled guilty to driving on a revoked license, a class B misdemeanor. Pursuant to the appellant's conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, the trial court imposed a sentence of fifteen years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Additionally, the trial court imposed a sentence of thirty days incarceration in the county jail for the driving on a revoked license conviction. The trial court further ordered that the appellant's sentences be served concurrently. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issues for review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of an unlawful detention; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion for judgment of acquittal with regard to possession with intent to sell or deliver at the close of the State's case in chief as the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction; (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the arresting officer to testify that the passenger in the appellant's car had a certain amount of cash in his possession; (4) whether the trial court erred by giving supplemental instructions to the jury without first putting the instructions in writing; (5) whether the trial court erred by repeatedly referring to the prosecutor as "General" in the presence of the jury throughout the proceeding; and, (6) whether the prejudicial effect of these errors cumulatively requires reversal of the appellant's conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Spurlock vs. Jackson Co. M1999-01407-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wootten, Jr.
The appellants were hurt in a collision with a subject allegedly being pursued by county officers in a high speed chase. They sued the county, and the Circuit Court of Jackson County granted the county summary judgment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Cruse vs. Peak M1999-02228-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
This appeal arises from the trial court's refusal to grant the appellant's request for visitation with her granddaughter. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Streeter vs. TDOC M1999-02267-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
A prison inmate claimed that he was entitled to be released, because he had earned the required sentence reduction credits. The Department of Correction disagreed. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Department on the basis of laches. We affirm the trial court's judgment, but upon a different basis.
