Allen E. Hasty, Judy Darlene Hasty v. Thomas R. Throneberry, Ind., D/B/A Throneberry Properties and Sharon Clutter
Defendant Thomas R. Throneberry appeals the trial court’s judgment in the amount of $6,000 entered in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee Allen E. Hasty after a jury trial. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. |
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
Roger P. Hogan, Fred C. Dance, and Music City Dust-Tex Service, Inc., v. Coyne International Enterprises Corp. D/B/A Coyne Textile Services
This action is based on a series of contracts executed in the sale of an industrial dust control and laundry business. The Chancery Court of Davidson County dismissed the claims of the sellers, held that one of the sellers had breached one of the agreements but that the buyer had failed to prove its damages, and awarded the buyer attorneys’ fees. We reverse the dismissal of the sellers’ action and modify the award of attorneys’ fees. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carolyn Strickland
The Petitioner, Carolyn Strickland, appeals the order of the Jackson County Criminal Court dismissing her petition for post-conviction relief. In her sole issue on appeal, Petitioner argues she was incompetent to stand trial due to the medication she was taking during the trial and was, therefore , denied her right to due process and a fair trial. Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder and received a sentence of life imprisonment in the Jackson County Criminal Court. The conviction was affirmed on appeal. State v. Carolyn Strickland, No. 01C01-9212-CR-00390, Jackson County (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, March 23, 1995), perm. to appeal denied, (Tenn. 1995). Following the denial of her permission to appeal, she filed a petition for post-conviction relief. In post-conviction proceedings, the pe titioner bears the burden of proving the allegations raised in the petition by clear and convincing evidence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-210(f). Moreover, the trial court’s findings of fact are conclusive on appeal unless the evidence preponderates against the judgment. Tidwell v. State, 922 S.W.2d 497, 500 (Tenn. 1996); Campbell v. State, 904 S.W.2d 594, 596 (Tenn. 1995); Cooper v. State, 849 S.W.2d 744, 746 (Tenn. 1993). As the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the trial court, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition. |
Jackson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Alvin Ralph Mann v. Ckr Industries, Inc.
|
Franklin | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Donnie G. Smith v. Heritage Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, et al
|
Smith | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Margie Byers v. Calfee Company of Dalton, Inc.
|
Warren | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Linda Gerry v. Challenger Electrical Materials
|
Sumner | Workers Compensation Panel | |
James Darvin Harvey v. Mueller Company
|
Sequatchie | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Patricia Henley v. Ckr Industries, Inc.
|
Franklin | Workers Compensation Panel | |
State vs. Kessler
|
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Wright vs. State
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Donald Major v. Lincoln Brass Works
|
Wayne | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Erma Little v. Royal Ins Co
|
Davidson | Workers Compensation Panel | |
State vs. Alvin Robinson
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Joe Ivy
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Malcolm Mills, et al vs. Ken Hancock, Ind., et al
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Creative Research Mgt, Inc. vs. Barry Soskin, et al
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Monroe E. Davis vs. Donal Campbell, et al
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. Andrew Ewing
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Tyrone Sain
|
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Tyrone Sain
|
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State Farm vs. John White
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9612-CV-00397
|
Court of Appeals | ||
03A01-9803-CH-
|
Hamblen | Court of Appeals | |
Maples Homeowners Assoc., Inc. vs. T & R Nashville LP
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals |