Johnny Gant v. Suncom Wireless M2002-02574-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Paula Bowman v. State M2002-02616-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
This is an action against the State for damages for personal injuries sustained by the Appellant when she slipped on the icy surface of a State-owned parking lot. The single Commissioner found in favor of the State. The Claimant requested an en banc hearing which was granted with a concurrent Order entered affirming the single Commissioner, without notice to the Claimant. We vacate and remand.
Court of Appeals
M2002-00812-COA-R3-CV M2002-00812-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Davidson
Court of Appeals
W2002-01532-COA-R3-CV W2002-01532-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Gloria J. Guinn v. Lucious T. Guinn W2002-02225-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: George H. Brown
Gregory Morris vs. Shelby Co. W2002-01394-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This is a claim for on-the-job injury benefits. The plaintiff was a jailer in the defendant county sheriff department. While at work, the plaintiff fell down an escalator onto his knees. He did not receive medical treatment at that time. Over seven months later, the plaintiff began working a shift at the jail that required him to stand during the entire shift, causing pain and swelling in his knees. Consequently, the plaintiff underwent surgery on both of his knees. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking on-the-job injury benefits for the time he was off work recovering from the surgeries. The trial court held that he was not entitled to the benefits, finding that the expert medical testimony did not establish that the condition for which the plaintiff underwent surgery arose out of his employment. The plaintiff now appeals. We affirm, concluding that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's finding that the plaintiff had not proved causation.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Dennis Joslin Co. vs. William Johnson W2002-01427-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
This appeal arises from the order of the lower court denying Joslin's request for a deficiency judgment against Johnson. Joslin based its request upon a December 13, 1990 order of the Chancery Court of Madison County, Tennessee that obligated Johnson to repay a debt to FANB, Joslin's predecessor in interest. The lower court denied Joslin's prayer for relief, and discharged Johnson's obligation to satisfy the prior judgment, for two reasons. First, the lower court based its judgment on the failure of FANB to dispose of Johnson's collateral in a commercially reasonable manner. Second, the trial court found that the doctrine of laches bars Joslin's claim. For the following reasons, we affirm the ruling of the lower court.
Madison
Court of Appeals
Marcia McAlexander vs. Albert McAlexander W2001-02550-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Rita L. Stotts
This appeal involves two consolidated cases. The first case is a post-divorce proceeding initiated by wife as a Rule 60 motion and petition for contempt to modify and enforce the final decree of divorce as it pertains to the alimony award and division of marital property. In these proceedings, the parties consented to arbitration of all determinative issues, and the award of the arbitrator was confirmed by the trial court. Husband appeals. We affirm as modified. The second case is an appeal of the order of the trial court granting a summary judgment from husband's petition seeking a sale for partition of the parties' former marital home, now held by the parties as tenants by the entirety and with possession awarded to wife until she remarries. The trial court granted summary judgment decreeing a sale for partition. Wife appeals. We affirm, as modified, for a determination on remand of wife's interest in the property by virtue of the award of possessory rights awarded in the final decree.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Department of Children's Srvcs vs. B.L.K. & E.C.C. E2002-01724-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey
The State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services ("DCS") obtained temporary custody of the five minor children of B.L.K. ("Mother") after Mother requested assistance from DCS because of her inability to care for the children due to her mental and financial condition. DCS later sought to terminate Mother's parental rights. Custody of Mother's two oldest children was transferred to their biological father. After a trial concerning Mother's parental rights to her three youngest children, the Juvenile Court determined there were sufficient grounds to terminate Mother's parental rights and that doing so was in the best interests of the children. Mother appeals, claiming DCS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that there were sufficient grounds to terminate her parental rights. Mother also claims DCS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of her parental rights would be in the best interests of the children. We affirm the Juvenile Court's judgment.
The Appellant, Tracy Lebron Vick, appeals the Hamilton County Criminal Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Vick pled guilty to second-degree murder and received a forty-year sentence, as a range II multiple offender. On appeal, Vick challenges the validity of his guilty plea upon grounds of voluntariness and ineffective assistance of counsel. Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court dismissing the petition.
Hamilton
Court of Criminal Appeals
Elizabeth Camilla Whitlow v. Milan Seating Systems, W2002-00451-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: George Ellis, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann._ 5-6-225 (e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome arising out of and in the course of her employment by the defendant. The trial judge found the plaintiff had sustained a 1 percent permanent partial impairment to each arm. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the trial court and says the trial judge erroneously excluded the deposition testimony of an orthopedic surgeon and further says the evidence preponderates in favor of an award in excess of 1 percent to each arm.1 We find the award should be set at 35 percent to each arm. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed as Modified and Remanded JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J. and JOE C. LOSER, SP. J., joined. Jay E. DeGroot, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Elizabeth Camilla Whitlow. P. Allen Phillips and Jay Dustin King, Jackson, Tennessee, attorneys for appellees, Milan Seating Systems, assumed name for Intier Automotive Seating of America, Inc. and American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania. MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 We need not pass upon the exclusion of the medical deposition in reaching a decision in this case. Facts The plaintiff was forty years of age at the time of trial, divorced, and the mother of one child who apparently is grown. She completed eleven years of school, does not have a GED and is trained only for sewing, the work she does for the defendant. There is no dispute concerning the compensability of the plaintiff's gradual injury (carpal tunnel syndrome). The plaintiff received medical treatment from the defendant and is continuing to do the same work for the defendant after treatment as she did before. In the course of her work, the plaintiff is required to use her hands, arms and fingers repetitively to fulfil her employment. She testified that after working as the day goes on she begins to experience numbness and swelling in her hands. She testified she was unable to perform the amount of work she did prior to developing carpal tunnel syndrome and that she had difficulty meeting production requirements. The plaintiff gave further testimony concerning her inability to do certain household chores. The plaintiff's supervisor testified the plaintiff had not shown any inability to do the work assigned to her nor did she know of any complaint concerning the plaintiff's lack of performance. The supervisor testified she had not checked the records to determine the amount of production the plaintiff was doing prior to testifying. Medical Evidence The only medical evidence considered by the trial judge was that of Dr. Claiborne A. Christian, an orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Christian testified he first saw the plaintiff March 8, 21. He diagnosed the plaintiff's condition as bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome with sensory and motor involvement. He testified this involvement made the reversal of the condition more difficult because the sensor and motor loss indicated the condition had existed for a longer time before treatment began than was usual. Dr. Christian testified surgery was necessary for release of the carpal tunnel syndrome. Surgery was performed on the plaintiff's left hand on March 23, 21 and on the right hand on April 27, 21, which included cutting of the carpel ligament. Dr. Christian testified the plaintiff did well with both surgeries. He placed her on restriction of no repetitive use of her hands until the incisions from surgery were healed. On June 7, 21 the plaintiff reported to Dr. Christian that the numbness and tingling she had previously had in her hands was "all right" but that she had no grip strength. On July 5, 21 the plaintiff saw Dr. Christian again. On this visit the plaintiff reported her left hand was doing fine but that she felt weakness and loss of grip in her right hand. Dr. Christian released the plaintiff to return to work on July 9, 21, without any restrictions. He testified the plaintiff reached maximum medical improvement on that date. He found she had suffered a 4 percent permanent partial impairment to both arms as a result of the carpal tunnel -2-
Gibson
Workers Compensation Panel
James Smith v. Patricia Caldwell M2002-02509-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Ross H. Hicks
In this action to enforce foreign judgment, defendant attempted to appeal the actions of the Trial Court. We dismiss the appeal.
Appellant, Clara Jean Neblett, was indicted by the Robertson County Grand Jury for aggravated assault and unlawful possession of a weapon. A jury found Appellant guilty of both counts. Appellant was sentenced to four years for her aggravated assault conviction and thirty days for her possession of a weapon conviction, to be served concurrently. In this appeal, Appellant challenges: (1) the trial court's ruling that defense counsel could not impeach the victim's testimony using extrinsic evidence of a prior bad act; (2) the trial court's denial of post-trial diversion; and (3) the trial court's refusal to apply mitigating factors to Appellant's sentence. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Defendant, Hughes D. Cadwell, was convicted in the Williamson County General Sessions Court for driving on a suspended license on December 23, 1997. He received a ninety-day suspended sentence and six months probation. On June 22, 1998, a probation violation warrant was issued, alleging that Defendant had failed to maintain monthly contact with his probation officer and that he had failed to pay probation fees and respond to a written request for action. Defendant was not arrested on the warrant until February 6, 2002. At the February 13, 2002, hearing in Williamson County General Sessions Court, Defendant pled true to the probation violation, and the court ordered him to serve the ninety-day sentence. Defendant appealed to the Williamson County Circuit Court on February 15, 2002. The circuit court conducted a hearing to determine whether to reinstate Defendant's probation. The court then dismissed the appeal on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction because Defendant had pled true to the probation violation. We conclude that the circuit court had jurisdiction to hear Defendant's appeal from the general sessions court, de novo, and therefore, we remand the case to the circuit court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Williamson
Court of Criminal Appeals
Security Fire Protection v. Joe B. Huddleston W2002-01175-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
Security Fire Protection Company challenged the Commissioner of Revenue's assessment of sales and use taxes arising from an audit of Security Fire's transactions with out-of-state customers from January 1, 1990, through March 31, 1993. The Shelby County Chancery Court granted the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment, holding 1) material purchased in Tennessee under a certificate of resale were not resold for purposes of the sales tax exemption; 2) material purchased by Security Fire out of Tennessee, stored and partially fabricated in Tennessee, and utilized by Security Fire in performance of contracts out of Tennessee was subject to Tennessee use tax; and 3) no credit was due for taxes paid out-of-state. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
W2002-02092-COA-R3-CV W2002-02092-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: George R. Ellis
W2003-00361-COA-R3-CV W2003-00361-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
Fayette
Court of Appeals
CH-01-1306-3 CH-01-1306-3
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos
Shelby
Court of Appeals
CH-01-2271-2 CH-01-2271-2
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Condy Wilson vs. Charlsa Wilson E2002-01636-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Conrad E. Troutman, Jr.
In this divorce case, the husband's issues on appeal are the distribution of marital property and the allocation of marital assets and debts made by the Trial Court. We affirm.
A Cumberland County jury convicted the Defendant for possession of a handgun while under the influence, a Class A misdemeanor. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Because we conclude that the evidence is sufficient, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The Defendant was indicted for first degree premeditated murder and a Monroe County jury convicted him of the lesser-included offense of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced him to twenty years' incarceration. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues (1) that he was denied his right to a speedy trial; (2) that the trial court erred by refusing to allow the defense to question police officers about the victim's reputation for violence; (3) that the trial court erred by excluding from evidence an audiotape of a pretrial statement by witness Casey Miller; and (4) that the trial court erred in instructing the jury regarding first degree murder and second degree murder. After a careful review of the jury instructions in this case, which fail to define "knowingly," we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for a new trial.
Monroe
Court of Criminal Appeals
Randall Carver v. State of Tennessee M2002-02891-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft
On February 9, 2002, the petitioner pled guilty to aggravated assault and attempted especially aggravated kidnapping and was sentenced, respectively, to concurrent six- and eight-year sentences.On October 22, 2002, he filed a pro se “Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis and/or Writ of Habeas Corpus,” seeking relief because of newly discovered evidence that, at the time of his pleas of guilty, the victim “was under numerous felony charges,” which “information was flagrantly kept from the defense,” and because he pled guilty to aggravated assault which is not a lesser-included offense of attempt to commit first degree murder, for which he was indicted. Additionally, he argues on appeal that the post-conviction court erred in dismissing his petition without appointing counsel or conducting an evidentiary hearing. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s dismissal of the petition.
