State of Tennessee vs. Jimmie C. Spratt
W1999-00611-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

Defendant Jimmie C. Spratt was convicted of aggravated rape by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court. Defendant was subsequently sentenced to a term of twenty-five years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Defendant challenges his conviction and his sentence, raising the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred when it ruled that he improperly struck potential jurors based on the jurors’ race; (2) whether the trial court should have dismissed the charges against him because there was an unnecessarily long delay between his arrest and his appearance before a magistrate; (3) whether the trial court erred when it refused to suppress a pretrial statement that he gave to police; (4) whether the trial court erred when it refused to suppress evidence that he had been identified by the victim during a physical lineup; (5) whether the trial court erred when it admitted an out of court statement by the victim into evidence; (6) whether the trial court erred when it admitted evidence about the results of a DNA probability test; (7) whether the trial court erred when it allowed the State to call a rebuttal witness; (8) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; (9) whether the trial court erred when it failed to instruct the jury on the potential range of punishment; and (10) whether the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. After a review of the record, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and we remand this matter for a new trial.

State of Tennessee v. James Nathan Wilkerson
W1999-00978-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed McGinley

The defendant pled guilty in Hardin County Circuit Court to a three count indictment for theft of property, possession of a prohibited weapon, and possession of a controlled substance. The defendant received an effective sentence of four years in the Tennessee Department of Corrections.  After seven months in Wayne County Boot Camp, he was placed on probation. A probation violation warrant was issued charging that the defendant had failed to make payments; failed to appear in court; left the state without permission; and been arrested on a new charge. Following a hearing, the probation was revoked, and the defendant timely appealed. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee vs. Charles Chesteen - Concur
E1999-00910-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kindall T. Lawson

I concur in the results reached and most of the reasoning used in the majority opinion. However, I respectfully disagree with its conclusion that the minor victims were particularly vulnerable because of their age as contemplated by Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-114(4). In my opinion, the fact that the defendant, as clerk and master, had control over the minors’ funds because they were minors rendered them no more vulnerable than any other litigant or party whose funds had been paid into court or otherwise put within the control of the clerk and master. I would not apply enhancement factor (4) to the offense of embezzlement in an official capacity.

State of Tennessee vs. Charles Chesteen
E1999-00910-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kindall T. Lawson

The defendant, Charles Chesteen, served as the Clerk and Master of the Cocke County  Chancery Court from 1984 to 1996. In 1997, he was charged with theft relating to his service in the capacity as conservator of funds of two elderly ladies and with unlawful conversion related to funds misappropriated by him in his official capacity. He pleaded guilty, with the sentencing determination to be made by the trial court. The court imposed an effective six-year incarcerative sentence along with restitution of $101,821.73. Upon review, we hold that the trial court erred in some of its sentencing determinations. We affirm in part, modify in part, reverse in part, and remand to the trial court for further determination regarding aspects of the sentencing issues.

Rudy Page, Roger Page, and Donald Hanafee, v. Robert Lynn Fuchs and wife, Brenda Ann Fuchs
W1999-00702-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor George R. Ellis

This appeal involves a dispute over the existence of an easement over Defendants Fuchs’ land. Plaintiffs Page and Hanafee brought suit seeking an easement by necessity or a prescriptive easement, as well as damages for Defendants’ alleged inducement of breach of contract. The court below found that Plaintiffs had a prescriptive easement across Defendants’ property, but did not find Defendants liable for damages. Defendants appeal.
 

Sue Zius v. Susan Shelton, Christian Millman, John Doe and The Bradley County Weekly, Inc., A/K/A Bradley Weekly, Inc., and The Bradley News Weekly
E1999-01157-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Herschel Pickens Franks
Trial Court Judge: Judge John B. Hagler, Jr.

Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiff’s defamation case for failure to state a cause of action. The Trial Judge overruled the motion and on interlocutory appeal, we affirm.

Nancy Elizabeth Taylor v. Mt. Juliet Health Care
M1999-00045-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
This case is before the Court upon motion for review pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann._ 50-6-225(e)(5)(B), the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which are incorporated herein by reference;

Miley R. Strong v. Royal Insurance Co.
M1999-00411-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Weatherford, Sr. J.
This case is before the Court upon the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which are incorporated herein by reference.

Rebecca Day v. Travelers Insurance Company
03501-9808-CH-00096
Authoring Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Frank V. Williams
This worker's compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated _50-6-225 (e) (3) (1998 Supp.) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Trial Court, after considering all of the evidence, found the worker to lack credibility, and determined that she was not entitled to recover under the workers' compensation law, and after consideration of the entire record, we affirm the Trial Court's decision.

Rachel Jeanette Mccormick v. Yasuda Fire & Marine
M1998-00162-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Gayden, J.
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with the Tenn. Code Ann. Section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Appellant, Calsonic Yorozu Corporation (hereinafter "CYC") raises seven issues arguing that the trial court erred by (1) failing to find Plaintiff's claim was barred by Plaintiff's voluntary intoxication and willful disregard of safety procedures, (2) holding that part of Plaintiff's disability was due to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, (3) not applying the "concurrent injury rule", (4) holding Plaintiff gave adequate notice of her bilateral carpal syndrome to Defendants, (5) awarding compensation for unauthorized medical treatment, (6) improperly ordering a lump sum award, and (7) entering its judgment contrary to the Rules of Civil Procedure. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the General Sessions Court Affirmed GAYDEN, J., in which BIRCH, J., and WEATHERFORD, SP. J., joined. Bruce Timothy Pirtle, McMinnville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company and Calsonic Aeries Corporation, Inc. Frank D. Farrar and William J. Butler, Lafayette, Tennessee, for the appellee, Rachel Jeanette McCormick. MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 19, 1996, Plaintiff filed a complaint for workers' compensation. In the complaint -2-

State of Tennessee v. Jeffrey A. Burns
M1999-00873-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

The defendant appeals from his Class C felony conviction of possession of a controlled substance in an amount less than .5 grams. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417 (Supp. 1998).  After entering a best interest guilty plea, the defendant was sentenced to five years in the Department of Correction as a Range I standard offender and fined $2000. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sentence imposed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

John Herman Hutchings v. Methodist Hospital of McKenzie, et al.
W1998-00901-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn and Judge Karen R. Williams

This is a medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff filed two identical actions only days apart in Shelby County and Carroll County against the same defendants. The plaintiff non-suited and then re-filed the Carroll County action. Amended complaints were filed in both actions seeking to add a defendant. The plaintiff then asked the Shelby County trial court to transfer the action pending in Shelby County to Carroll County for consolidation. The defendant who was added argued that the Shelby County trial court should dismiss the case for improper venue and that the Carroll County trial court should grant his motion for summary judgment based on the statute of limitations. The Shelby County trial court granted the plaintiff’s motion to transfer to Carroll County and the Carroll County trial court denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The added defendant appealed. We reverse the Carroll County trial court’s denial of summary judgment and its acceptance of the Shelby County case for consolidation and remand to the Carroll County trial court to determine whether the Shelby County amended complaint was intended to supplement the original complaint or to completely replace it, and whether a named Shelby County defendant was still a defendant in the Shelby County suit when the amended complaint was filed, in order to ascertain if venue was proper as to the added defendant.

Martin Paschall v. Henry County Board of Education
W1999-0070-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ron E. Harmon

This is an employment discrimination case. The plaintiff is a white teacher who was disciplined for his role in an altercation with a black teacher. The plaintiff sued the county school board for discrimination, alleging that he was disciplined because of his race, in violation of the Tennessee Human Rights Act. The trial court granted the school board’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff appeals. We reverse and remand, finding that the plaintiff has proffered direct evidence of discriminatory intent.

Sandra Diane Moore, v. Danny Michael Moore
W1998-00379-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor George R. Ellis

This appeal arises from an action for divorce filed by plaintiff-Wife in the Crockett County Chancery Court. Following defendant-Husband’s answer and counter-complaint for divorce, the parties entered into a consent order for support and other relief. The court entered an order granting divorce and approving the parties’ agreement. Subsequently, the court entered an order awarding Wife alimony in futuro and a significant amount of the marital assets. The court also found that stock in a corporation was a marital asset and included the stock in Husband’s award of marital assets. Husband appeals both the award of alimony and the court’s characterization of the corporation stock as a marital asset. Tenn.R.App.P. Rule 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part and Remanded.
 

State of Tennessee v. James M. Lane, Jr.
1999-00615-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Witt
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rebecca J. Stern

James M. Lane, Jr. appeals by permission of the trial and appellate courts. Indicted for two counts of aggravated perjury, he alleges that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to reverse the district attorney general’s denial of pretrial diversion. Because the prosecutor relied upon improper grounds for denying diversion, we reverse the trial court’s finding that the prosecutor did not abuse his discretion in denying diversion. We remand to the trial court with instructions that the prosecutor enter into a memorandum of understanding for pretrial diversion with the defendant.

Grandstaff vs. Hawks
M1998-00909-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Bobby H. Capers

Clark Earls vs. Shirley Earls
M1999-00035-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This extraordinary appeal involves the efforts of one party to effectuate an opinion of this court which the Tennessee Supreme Court declined to review. On the first appeal, this court reversed portions of the trial court's final decree and remanded the case with specific directions regarding the details of the order to be entered. After the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the wife's application for permission to appeal, the husband asked the trial court to enter an order consistent with the directions in this court's opinion. After conducting two hearings, the trial court declined to enter the proposed order. We have granted the husband's application for an extraordinary appeal because the trial court, by its refusal to enter a judgment consistent with this court's opinion, has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings that immediate review of its actions is required. We now (1) vacate the trial court's orders filed after March 29, 2001, (2) direct the clerk of the trial court to enter this opinion and the order accompanying it as the final order in this proceeding, and (3) direct that this case be assigned to another judge in the Twenty-First Judicial District for any further proceedings.

Clark Earls vs. Shirley Earls
M1999-00035-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This extraordinary appeal involves the efforts of one party to effectuate an opinion of this court which the Tennessee Supreme Court declined to review. On the first appeal, this court reversed portions of the trial court's final decree and remanded the case with specific directions regarding the details of the order to be entered. After the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the wife's application for permission to appeal, the husband asked the trial court to enter an order consistent with the directions in this court's opinion. After conducting two hearings, the trial court declined to enter the proposed order. We have granted the husband's application for an extraordinary appeal because the trial court, by its refusal to enter a judgment consistent with this court's opinion, has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings that immediate review of its actions is required. We now (1) vacate the trial court's orders filed after March 29, 2001, (2) direct the clerk of the trial court to enter this opinion and the order accompanying it as the final order in this proceeding, and (3) direct that this case be assigned to another judge in the Twenty-First Judicial District for any further proceedings.

Clark Earls vs. Shirley Earls
M1999-00035-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This extraordinary appeal involves the efforts of one party to effectuate an opinion of this court which the Tennessee Supreme Court declined to review. On the first appeal, this court reversed portions of the trial court's final decree and remanded the case with specific directions regarding the details of the order to be entered. After the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the wife's application for permission to appeal, the husband asked the trial court to enter an order consistent with the directions in this court's opinion. After conducting two hearings, the trial court declined to enter the proposed order. We have granted the husband's application for an extraordinary appeal because the trial court, by its refusal to enter a judgment consistent with this court's opinion, has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings that immediate review of its actions is required. We now (1) vacate the trial court's orders filed after March 29, 2001, (2) direct the clerk of the trial court to enter this opinion and the order accompanying it as the final order in this proceeding, and (3) direct that this case be assigned to another judge in the Twenty-First Judicial District for any further proceedings.

Richardson vs. TDOC
M1999-02796-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

Limbaugh vs. Coffee Medical Center
M1999-01181-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins

Beatrice Holiday vs. Shoneys South
W1999-01173-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.

Charles McDonald vs. Dixie White Ishee
W1998-00258-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris

Miltier, III vs. Miltier (Buhls)
E1999-00887-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Jean A. Stanley

Steven C. Mohn, et ux vs. Bernard Graff, et al
E1999-01015-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II