State vs. Eddie Taylor
W1999-01803-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.
Madison
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Timothy Higgs
W1999-01534-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree
The defendant appeals from a jury trial conviction for possession of contraband in a penal institution, a Class C felony. In this appeal, the defendant alleges the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction. Concluding that the evidence was sufficient, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Weakley
Court of Criminal Appeals
Willard Hawk, Jr., et al vs. Chattanooga Orthopaedic Group, P.,C., et al
E1999-00687-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
This is a medical malpractice case. We granted the plaintiffs' Tenn. R. App. P. 9 application for an interlocutory appeal in order to review an order of the trial court dismissing the amendments to the plaintiffs' original complaint and granting the defendants' motion in limine pertaining to evidence of a disabling hand condition of the defendant surgeon, Dr. David M. O'Neal. We reverse.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Knoxville's Community Development Corp. vs. Woodfam Investments, L. P.,
E1999-02317-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
Plaintiff sued to reform or void release of deed restrictions on property owned by defendant. The Trial Court ruled plaintiff failed to establish a basis for relief by clear and convincing evidence. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Investments, Inc. vs. Hackney Petroleum, Inc.
E1999-02665-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jacqueline E. Schulten
In a dispute over the meaning of a notice of termination provision in the Lease, the Trial Judge ruled the notice given did not comply with the Lease and awarded damages for breach. We reverse.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Vowell Ventures vs. City of Martin
W1999-01445-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree
Vowell Ventures, a partnership, sued the City of Martin alleging that the City denied Vowell Ventures' application for a building permit due to the fact that there was a sewer line and storm drain crossing the property. The complaint alleged that the denial of the application for the building permit constituted a taking of property without just compensation and sought judgment against the City for the taking. The trial court granted the City of Martin's Motion To Dismiss Or For Summary Judgment and we affirm.
Logan vs. Winstead
E1999-01056-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: John K. Wilson
This appeal arises from a prisoner's pro se action for legal malpractice against the attorney who represented him in criminal court on the charges underlying his sentence. The attorney filed a motion for summary judgment supported by an expert affidavit. The prisoner, relying upon Whisnant v. Byrd, 525 S.W.2d 152 (Tenn. 1975), filed a motion to hold the proceedings in abeyance until he was released from prison and able to appear in court. The trial court failed to rule on the motion for abeyance. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the attorney on the grounds that the prisoner had not offered an expert affidavit to rebut the attorney's proof. The Court of Appeals upheld the judgment. We granted review to determine under what circumstances an incarcerated plaintiff is entitled to have a civil action held in abeyance until he or she is released from custody.
Hawkins
Supreme Court
R. David Ashley and E. Diana Ashley vs. Thomas A. Snapp
E1999-00908-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
This appeal arises from a grant of summary judgment in the Knox County Circuit Court. On appeal, R. David Ashley and E. Diana Ashley, the Appellants, argue that there are genuine issues of material fact with respect to their suit for malicious prosecution and abuse of process against Thomas A. Snapp and Robin Gratigny, the Appellees, and thus, the Trial Court erred in granting summary judgment. We vacate the Circuit Court's grant of summary judgment on the issue of malicious prosecution and remand to the Trial Court on that issue, and we affirm the Trial Court's grant of summary judgment on the issue of abuse of process.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Dempsey vs. Dempsey
M1998-00972-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell
This appeal involves the award of alimony and the division of one particular piece of marital property at the dissolution of a nineteen year marriage. Mr. Dempsey appeals the award of alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony, the amount of alimony as beyond his ability to pay, and the award of a tax refund for the year of the divorce to Ms. Dempsey. We modify the award of alimony in futuro to an award of rehabilitative alimony and affirm the distribution of marital property.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Metropolitan Development & Housing Agency vs. Trinity Marine Nashville, Inc .
M1999-02162-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
In this eminent domain condemnation proceeding, the Trial Court granted partial summary judgment to the condemnor on the amount of relocation expenses to be awarded the property owner as incidental damages based upon deposition testimony of an officer of the property owner. The property owner argues on appeal that summary judgment is improper in condemnation proceedings, and that the Trial Court erred in excluding from incidental damages amounts for a "burden rate" the property owner added to its actual hourly labor costs incurred in relocating from the condemned property. As the issue is a question of law and there are no questions of disputed material fact, summary judgment is appropriate. As the "burden rate" claimed by the property owner is not recoverable under the applicable statute, the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
In re: K.A.H.
M1999-02079-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Wayne C. Shelton
This case involves the termination of parental rights regarding a child who was removed from the mother's home by the Department of Children's Services in 1996 and placed in foster care. DCS devised a Plan of Care for the mother, which, among other things, required her to address her drug and alcohol addictions. During the two years between the removal from the home and the filing by DCS of the petition to terminate parental rights, the mother made some efforts to improve her situation, but her substance abuse continued. The trial court terminated the mother's parental rights on grounds (1) that the conditions that led to the child's removal continued to persist with little likelihood of remedy and (2) that the mother failed to comply with the Statement of Responsibilities as provided in the Plan of Care. Because DCS has established grounds for termination and has established that termination is in the best interest of the child, we affirm.
Montgomery
Court of Appeals
Bobby Ray Carper v. Ramer Wood Products
W1999-02147-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: William Michael Maloan, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _5-6-225(e) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The defendant, Ramer Wood Products (Ramer), appeals the judgment of the McNairy Chancery Court awarding permanent partial disability of thirty percent (3%) to the right arm and twenty-five percent (25%) to the left arm. For the reasons stated in this opinion, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified to a single award of twenty-seven and one-half percent (27-1/2%) permanent partial disability to both arms.
Larry Simpson vs. Donal Campbell, Commissioner, et al
M2000-00218-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Larry Simpson, a prison inmate, appeals the dismissal by the trial court of his Petition for Declaratory Judgment asserting that he was entitled to mandatory parole under former Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-3614 and Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-20-115. We affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
State vs. Jere Joseph
W1999-00651-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: J. Steven Stafford
The petitioner, Jere Lowell Joseph, Jr., appeals two post-conviction cases, claiming that the trial court erred in holding that the petitioner received the effective assistance of counsel in both cases. We affirm the trial court.
Dyer
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Barry Speck
W1999-00436-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: John P. Colton, Jr.
The petitioner, Barry L. Speck, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The state contends that the petition should have been dismissed because of the statute of limitations. The petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to use documents provided by the petitioner to impeach the state's witnesses and to provide an alibi for dates listed in the bill of particulars. We hold that the petition was properly considered on its merits, but we affirm the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief.
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
Michael Youmans vs. Samuel Coleman
W2000-00150-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
This is a construction case. The general contractor sued the homeowner for failing to make payment under the contract and for failing to pay for "extras" not contained in the original contract. The homeowner asserted that the general contractor failed to make certain corrections to the home, and that he did not agree to pay for "extras." After a bench trial, the trial court held for the homeowner. The general contractor appeals. We affirm, finding that the trial court's decision was based on its determination of the credibility of the witnesses.
Carroll
Court of Appeals
The Bogatin Law Firm vs. Hallum Motors
W2000-00409-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
Appellee, an Arkansas corporation, and Appellant, a Delaware corporation authorized to do business in Arkansas and Tennessee, entered into an asset sales agreement for the sale and purchase of assets relating to an automobile dealership in West Memphis, Arkansas. Earnest money was placed in escrow with the Bogatin Law Firm, PLC in Memphis, Tennessee. Dispute concerning the asset sales agreement arose, and both parties made claim to the earnest money. The Bogatin Law Firm filed a complaint for interpleader in Shelby County, Tennessee. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss based upon improper venue which the trial court granted. We reverse, finding that venue in Shelby County was proper and that Appellee submitted to jurisdiction in Shelby County, Tennessee.
First Utility District of Knox County vs. Eleanor Jo Jarnigan-Bodden
E1999-01674-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
The property owner objected to service of process and asserted due process violations relating to a utility district easement condemnation. Service of process by publication was proper notice to the non-resident Cayman Islands resident, there was no showing that the condemnation for public purpose was not necessary, and there was no right for the property owner to demand a jury of view to determine the proper easement for a water line. Judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the case remanded for determination of the compensation due the property owner for the taking.
The property owner objected to service of process and asserted due process violations relating to a utility district easement condemnation. Service of process by publication was proper notice to the non-resident Cayman Islands resident, there was no showing that the condemnation for public purpose was not necessary, and there was no right for the property owner to demand a jury of view to determine the proper easement for a water line. Judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the case remanded for determination of the compensation due the property owner for the taking.
