State vs. Robin Dodson E1999-00387-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: J. Curtis Smith
Rhea
Court of Criminal Appeals
Harris vs. Hensley M1999-00654-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones
Wayne
Court of Appeals
State vs. Charles Eddie Hartman M1998-00803-CCA-R3-DD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
Montgomery
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. William Douglas Ellis M1999-783-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft
The appellant, William Donald Ellis, was convicted by a Sumner County jury of one count of rape of a child, two counts of aggravated sexual battery, and two counts of assault. The trial court imposed a sentence of twenty-five (25) years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the offense of rape of a child, ten (10) years incarceration in the Department for each count of aggravated sexual battery, and six (6) months incarceration in the Sumner County Jail for each count of assault. The trial court ordered that the appellant serve his sentences for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery consecutively to each other and concurrently with his sentences for assault, resulting in an effective sentence of forty-five (45) years incarceration. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained by police as a result of the warrantless search of his home; (2) whether the trial court should have required the State to elect between Counts One and Six of the indictment; (3) whether the evidence adduced at trial supports the jury's findings of venue; and (4) whether the evidence adduced at trial supports the jury's verdict of guilt of rape of a child. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm in part and reverse and remand in part the judgments of the trial court.
Sumner
Court of Criminal Appeals
State, ex rel vs. Xantus M2000-00120-COA-R10-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Davidson
Court of Appeals
State, ex rel vs. Xantus M2000-00120-COA-R10-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Linda Gage vs. Riley Gage W1999-01513-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: George R. Ellis
This is a divorce case. The wife filed for divorce approximately fourteen months after she moved out of the marital home. The husband filed an answer and counter-complaint for divorce. The trial court granted the divorce to the wife and awarded her half of the value of the husband's pension and alimony in futuro. Husband appeals. We affirm.
Crockett
Court of Appeals
State vs. Damion Carrick w1998-00655-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Tracy Davidson W1999-00080-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Michael Edwards W1999-00591-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
Henry
Court of Criminal Appeals
Purchased Parts vs. Royal Appl. Co. W1999-01550-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This appeal involves a dispute over jurisdiction. The court below dismissed the case for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant, Royal Manufacturing Corporation. Appellant Purchased Parts Group, Inc. appeals from the trial court's decision.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
State vs. Willie Douglas W1999-00282-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
Rebecca Cole-Turner vs. Christian Psy. W1999-00707-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
This appeal involves a dispute over money Plaintiffs paid into a reserve fund while they were employed by Defendant Christian Psychological Center. Plaintiffs believed that the money they contributed to the fund would later be refunded. However, when Plaintiffs resigned from the Center and requested that the money be returned, the Center refused to return the money. The Chancery Court held that Plaintiffs might be entitled to a refund of a portion of monies that they had paid into the reserve fund if the funds were not used by Defendant for ordinary and necessary operating expenses. The Chancery Court then referred the case to a Special Master for a determination of how the funds were spent by the Center. The Special Master held that the Plaintiffs were not entitled to a refund, as the Defendant Center used the reserve funds for ordinary and necessary operating expenses. For the reasons stated hereafter, we affirm.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
State vs. David Ryan Swanson E1998-00041-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Douglas A. Meyer
Hamilton
Court of Criminal Appeals
Martin, et al vs. Coleman E1998-00739-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull
Cumberland
Supreme Court
Globe Business Furniture, Inc. v. Edeltraub Ingrid Morris M1999-00393-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
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. The employer, Globe, initiated this action for a declaration of the extent of its liability, if any, to the employee, Morris, for an injury to her finger. The employee, Morris, filed a counterclaim seeking medical and disability benefits. After a trial on the merits, the trial judge found (1) that the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment and (2) the claimant was not permanently disabled to any extent. The counterclaim was dismissed at the cost of Ms. Morris. By this appeal, the employee insists the trial judge erred in finding that the claimant's injury did not occur while she was performing a "special errand" for the employer and in refusing to award any disability benefits. As discussed herein, the panel finds that the injury is compensable and remands the case to the trial court for further proceedings. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court reversed in part; and Remanded Loser, Sp. J., delivered the opinion of the panel, in which Drowota, J. and Gayden, Sp. J. joined. D. Stuart Caulkins, Stillman, Karr & Wise, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Edeltraub Ingrid Morris. Arthur E. McClellan, Gallatin, Tennessee, for the appellee, Globe Business Furniture of Tennessee, Inc. MEMORANDUM OPINION The facts are not disputed. The claimant came to the United States in 1988 from her home country of Germany. She graduated from high school in Germany and had three years of training in a hotel -2-
Sumner
Workers Compensation Panel
Lumbermen's Mutual Underwriting Alliance v. Ramon M1999-00453-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J.
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 employer contends (1) the trial court erred in awarding, as medical benefits, the fees of an unapproved chiropractor and (2) the award of temporary total disability benefits is excessive. The employee insists the trial court erred in denying him any permanent partial disability benefits. As discussed herein, the panel has concluded the award should be modified by disallowing the unapproved medical benefits, by reducing the award of temporary total disability benefits from fifty-four weeks to two weeks and by awarding permanent partial disability benefits based on fifteen percent to the body as a whole. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Modified LOSER, SP. J., in which DROWOTA, J., and CANTRELL, SP.J. joined. Richard C. Mangelsdorf, Jr., Leitner, Williams, Dooley & Napolitan, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Lumbermen's Mutual Underwriting Alliance, Appellant Martin S. Sir, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Ramon Sanchez MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Sanchez, is forty-five years old and has a seventh or eighth grade education. He moved to the United States from Puerto Rico in 1969. He has experience in construction labor. He began working for the employer, Concrete Form Erectors, in March of 1995. On April 23, 1996, while working for the employer, the claimant and another worker, Robert Garst, were constructing forms for a wall when it began to sway because of high winds. As the wall was -2-
Davidson
Workers Compensation Panel
Cassandra Myles vs. Peter Myles W1999-00495-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown
This is a divorce case. The husband failed to appear for the rescheduled hearing on the wife's motion for default judgment. The trial court granted default judgment and, at a subsequent final divorce hearing from which the husband was also absent, granted the wife a divorce and awarded her alimony in solido. The husband then filed motions to set aside the default judgment and for a new trial, asserting that he had not received notice of either the rescheduled hearing on default judgment or the final divorce hearing. The trial court denied both motions. The husband appeals. We affirm, finding that the husband's neglect was not excusable.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Billy Childress vs. Natasha Currie W1999-00471-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
Lauderdale
Court of Appeals
Roger Kaufman vs. State W1999-02449-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
Hardeman
Court of Appeals
State vs. Percy Farris W2001-01787-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
The Defendant, Percy Perez Farris, was convicted by a jury of attempt to commit first degree premeditated murder and especially aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to twenty-five years for each offense, to be served concurrently in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal the Defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the Defendant's motion to change venue; (2) whether the trial court erred in refusing to suppress identification testimony; (3) whether the trial court erred in refusing to suppress evidence concerning the victim's blood; (4) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions; and (5) whether cumulative error requires a new trial. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
