Yvette Porter Caira v. Ronald Stephen Caira
01A01-9709-CH-00508
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol A. Catalano

This case is before us on appeal from the trial court’s decree of divorce and grant of child custody and support to the Appellee, Ronald Steven Caira. In bringing this appeal, Appellant raises two issues for consideration. 1. Whether the trial court erred in failing to award primary custody of the minor children of this marriage with Defendant/Appellee. 2. Whether the trial court made an equitable property distribution of the debts, assets and retirement proceeds of this marriage.

Marvin E. Alexander, D/B/A Alexander Auctions & Real Estate Sales, v. John Hopkins and Rhonda Hopkins, Individually and D/B/A Richland Creek Sod Farm
01A01-9710-CH-00590
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jim T. Hamilton

A licensed auctioneer and real estate broker filed suit against the defendant landowners for breach of an auction contract, because the defendants sold their land prior to the scheduled auction without his participation. The trial court held that the auctioneer was entitled to the anticipated commission amount. We affirm the trial court’s holding that the property owners are liable, but we modify the amount of damages.

John Anderson Kinard v. Linda Kinard
01A01-9606-CH-00265
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert E. Corlew, III

This appeal involves a divorce ending a long-term marriage. The husband filed suit to divorce his wife of thirty years in the Chancery Court for Rutherford County, and the wife counterclaimed for a divorce from bed and board. The trial judge, sitting without a jury, declared the parties divorced, divided the marital property, and awarded the wife rehabilitative alimony for three years. The wife takes issue on this appeal with the decision to declare the parties divorced, the division of marital property, and the failure to award her long-term spousal support and attorney’s fees. She also insists that the trial judge should have recused himself because of his prior professional association with the husband’s lawyer. We conclude that the trial judge was not disqualified from hearing this case. While we also find that declaring the parties divorced was proper, we have determined that the division of marital property and the spousal support award should be modified but that the wife should not receive an additional award for her legal expenses.

Heather Alicia Roach Thomson v. Patrick James Thomson - Concurring
03A01-9705-CH-00165
Authoring Judge: Judge Don T. McMurray
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Billy Joe White

This is an appeal from a post-divorce proceeding wherein the appellant sought a change in custody of the parties minor child on the grounds that there had been a material change of circumstances justifying such a change. The trial court dismissed the complaint and this appeal resulted. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Jason Rains, Crystal L. Carney, and Kathy Carney v. Edwin Scott Sussdorff,III, a/k/a/ Ed Sussdorff, Vicky R. Sussdorff, E. Scott Sussdorff and Allstate Insurance Company - Concurring
03A01-9801-CV-00025
Authoring Judge: Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Neil Thomas, III

While riding as passengers in an automobile owned by defendant and driven by a close friend of defendant’s son, the intervening plaintiff was seriously injured in a one-car accident when the driver apparently fell asleep at the wheel. The passenger intervened in the driver’s petition and alleged that the vehicle had been driven with the express or implied permission of its owner and sought a declaratory judgment that his insurer was therefore liable for her injuries. The trial court found the driver did not have such permission and dismissed intervenor’s petition, and she appeals.

James G. Cooper v. Asarco, Inc.
03S01-9709-CV-00114
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Rex Henry Ogle,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer contends the award of permanent partial disability benefits based on seventy-five percent to the leg is excessive. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the award should be affirmed. The employee or claimant, Cooper, is sixty-one years old and has a fourth grade education, but cannot read. He has worked as garbage collector, laborer and welder. He suffered a compensable knee injury on January 19, 1995, but continued to work with pain and swelling until April of the same year when he consulted an orthopedic surgeon. When the pain and swelling persisted, the surgeon performed arthroscopic surgery and diagnosed mild spurring and joint effusion superimposed on degenerative arthritis. The claimant was returned to work with permanent restrictions. The employer has made accommodations and the claimant has returned to work with restrictions and limitations. The trial judge found the claimant entitled to permanent partial disability benefits based on seventy-five percent to the injured leg. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(2). Conclusions of law are subject to de novo review on appeal without any presumption of correctness. Presley v. Bennett, 86 S.W.2d 857 (Tenn. 1993). Where the trial judge has seen and heard the witnesses, especially if issues of credibility and weight to be given oral testimony are involved, considerable deference must be accorded those circumstances on review. Kellerman v. Food Lion, Inc., 929 S.W.2d 333 (Tenn. 1996). The appellate tribunal, however, is as well situated to gauge the weight, worth and significance of deposition testimony as the trial judge. Orman v. Williams Sonoma, Inc., 83 S.W.2d 672 (Tenn. 1991). Once the causation and permanency of an injury have been established by expert testimony, the trial judge may consider many pertinent factors, including age, job skills, education, training, duration of disability, and

State vs. Burl Jarrett
02C01-9710-CC-00418

State vs. Tammy Elliott
02C01-9803-CC-00070

State vs. Quentin Hall
02C01-9802-CR-00040

Conviction Was Affirmed By This Court. State v. Clonte J. Thomas, C.C.A. No.
02C01-9804-CR-00113

State vs. Mario Bowser
02C01-9803-CR-00093
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

The CIT Group/Sales Financing vs. Leslie Williams
02A01-9706-CH-00120
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris

Allstate vs. Daniel
03A01-9710-CV-00466
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly

Pigeon vs. Maples
03A01-9802-CV-00048

Renaissance vs. Billbury
03A01-9710-CH-00462

03A01-9708-CV-0365
03A01-9708-CV-0365
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm

State vs. Latoya Anderson
02C01-9707-CR-00251

State vs. Shirley Davis
W2000-00084-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
On December 3, 1998, a Shelby County Grand Jury indicted Shirley Davis, the Defendant and Appellant, for aggravated robbery. Following a jury trial, the Defendant was convicted as charged. After a subsequent sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to serve nine years incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant claims that the trial court erroneously enhanced her sentence. Although we find that the trial court erroneously applied a statutory enhancing factor, our de novo review reveals the existence of an applicable enhancing factor that was not applied by the trial court. This enhancement factor amply justifies the sentence imposed. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Edward Traughber, et al. vs. Kelly A. Kress, et al.
01A01-9709-CV-00525
Trial Court Judge: James E. Walton

Donald Davis vs. Sumner County Sheriff, J. D. Vandercook, et al.
01A01-9712-CV-00696
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

State vs. Jeffrey Pewitt
01C01-9706-CR-00202
Trial Court Judge: Thomas H. Shriver

State vs. Craig Hazlett
01C01-9708-CC-00321
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee

Donald Zseltvay vs. Metropolitan Government
01A01-9710-CV-00587
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.

Ashe vs. Radiation Oncology Associates
01A01-9710-CV-00563
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.

Ashe vs. Radiation Oncology Associates
01A01-9710-CV-00563
Trial Court Judge: Henry F. Todd