Marshall Moffett v. Dept. of Correction M2001-03011-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Petitioner filed, pro se, a "Petition for Nunc Pro Tunc" in which he asserted that he was presently confined and that the defendant added 1775 days to his sentence unlawfully. The trial court granted the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and we affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Deborah Coates v. Thomas Coates M2001-01928-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
This appeal arose after the trial court rejected the father's petition to reduce child support. Because the father showed a substantial variance between the amount of child support he was ordered to pay and the amount of child support called for under the guidelines, we reverse the trial court's order denying modification prospectively. Because the court originally awarded support from the father's property, we affirm the denial of modification of that portion of the child support award.
Maury
Court of Appeals
Jabari Issa Mandela v. Donal Campbell M2001-01956-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson County -After a federal court barred an inmate legal helper from submitting further filings, the warden removed the legal helper from his job. The prisoner filed a Petition for Declaratory Judgment against the Warden and the Commissioner of Correction in an attempt to have his job restored. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to name a proper party and failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. We affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Jerry L. Johns v. Donal Campbell M2001-02110-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Jerry L. Johnson, pro se, seeks a declaratory judgment that he is being held in the Tennessee Department of Correction without proper authority. The trial court sustained a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Commissioner and we affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Kelly Lee Crawford, et al. v. Brian C. Beatt M2001-01661-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
The Circuit Court of Davidson County granted summary judgment to the defendants on this medical malpractice case, holding that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The court also awarded the defendants their costs and attorney's fees as sanctions for the plaintiffs' false answers in discovery. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Wayne Fuller v. Donal Campbell M2001-01719-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Wayne Fuller v. Donal Campbell M2001-01719-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Behi Hamidy v. W. Dyrk Halstead M2001-02791-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: R.E. Lee Davies
This is a suit for breach of contract wherein the trial court held that a promissory note, rendered non-negotiable by provisions relating to payment prior to maturity by means other than money, was nonetheless a binding contract between the parties thereto. Holding that parol evidence was inadmissible to vary the unambiguous terms of the contract, the trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff. We affirm the action of the trial court.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Michael Danelle Harvey W2001-01164-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen
Defendant was convicted for one count of statutory rape and one count of criminal exposure to HIV. Defendant appeals alleging (1) that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions and (2) the imposition of consecutive sentences was excessive. We affirm the trial court judgment.
Madison
Court of Criminal Appeals
In Re: The Adoption of D.P.M. E2001-00958-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
This case started with competing petitions for adoption filed by the maternal and paternal grandparents of D.P.M., who is six years old. After the Trial Court terminated the parental rights of both natural parents on the basis of abandonment, the adoption of D.P.M. was awarded to the maternal grandparents. The parties agreed the paternal grandparents would be granted visitation, and the Trial Court set forth the amount of visitation and the rights and restrictions of the paternal grandparents when exercising visitation. Notwithstanding the maternal grandparents' agreement to this visitation, they appeal the granting of visitation, as well as the rights granted to the paternal grandparents when exercising this visitation. We affirm.
The appellant, Sanford & Sons Bail Bonds, Inc., appeals the judgment of the Hamblen County Criminal Court forfeiting $5,000 bail in the case of criminal defendant Florentino DeJesus Hernandez. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Washshukru Al-Jabbar A'La vs. State E2001-03133-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: D. Michael Swiney
Court of Appeals
Heather Lynn Key v. American Insurance Company M2001-00980-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond, Judge
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 trial court found the plaintiff to be 22 _ percent anatomically impaired, and applied a multiplier of 2 _ times in awarding benefits based upon a 56.25 vocational percent impairment. The evidence preponderates against a finding of 22 _ percent anatomical impairment. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed as Modified WILLIAM H. INMAN, SR. J., in which ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., J. and HOWELL N. PEOPLES, SP. J., joined. William R. Pigue and A. Allen Smith, III, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, American Insurance Company. William Joseph Butler and E. Guy Holliman, Lafayette, Tennessee, for the appellee, Heather Lynn Key. MEMORANDUM OPINION Background On March 18, 1999, the plaintiff filed a complaint for workers' compensation benefits resulting from alleged injuries to her right shoulder, arm and neck. On May 19, 1999, she filed another complaint for workers' compensation benefits resulting from alleged injuries to her left shoulder and arm. The defendant responded that the plaintiff continued to work, that her injuries were minimal, and that she suffered no significant anatomical impairment or vocational disability. The cases were consolidated for trial. The trial court found that the plaintiff sustained a 22 _ percent anatomical impairment resulting in a 56.25 percent vocational impairment and awarded benefits accordingly. The defendant appeals, insisting that the award is excessive because the findings are not supported by credible proof. Our review is de novo on the record with the presumption that the judgment is correct unless the evidence otherwise preponderates. Rule 13 (d) T.R.A.P. The Evidence The plaintiff is a 29 year old mother of two children, ages seven and nine. She is a high school graduate with some college work and vocational courses in computer science and various hobbies. She began working for Bosch Braking Systems in April 1995, doing assembly work. She resigned her job on March 7, 2 because "I didn't feel I was getting better." It is significant that she missed no time from work, and she testified that at the time of trial nine months after she left work her condition had improved. She was then under no medical treatment, and she "had no interest in working." She testified that she had difficulty in performing household chores, driving her car and other activities which required physical exertion. Her husband corroborated her testimony concerning her imposed work limitations. Plaintiff testified that she first began having difficulties in October of 1998 when she began experiencing discomfort in her right shoulder and arm. She was treated by Dr. Michael Bernui, whose notes indicate that he initially treated her left shoulder and arm. At a follow-up visit, she complained of discomfort in her right shoulder and arm, and Dr. Bernui treated her conservatively. She next saw Dr. Bernui several months later, shortly before filing suit, complaining of persistent pain in her right arm and shoulder. He continued to prescribe physical therapy and the use of anti- inflammatory drugs, but determined that a nerve conduction study would be useful in evaluating the plaintiff's condition. He referred her to a neurologist, Dr. Alan Bachrach, for a complete EMG study. The study was performed of the right upper extremity and revealed no evidence of abnormality. Dr. Bernui continued to treat the plaintiff on a weekly basis. With no objective evidence of physical dysfunction, he ordered an x-ray of her right shoulder which revealed no abnormality. He thereupon referred the plaintiff to an orthopedic specialist, Dr. Thomas Gautsch. -2-
On November 9, 1999, the Appellant, Jody Alan Ferguson, pled guilty to nine counts of forgery in the Obion County Circuit Court and was sentenced to two years of community corrections after service of thirty days confinement in the county jail. On March 9, 2000, Ferguson pled guilty to four counts of forgery and received an effective sentence of two years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Ferguson's placement in the community corrections program was revoked and his nine two-year sentences were ordered to be served in the Department of Correction concurrently with his March 9th sentences. On June 21, 2000, Ferguson was granted determinate release by the Department of Correction for the series of two-year sentences imposed on November 9, 1999, and March 9, 2000, and he was returned to supervised probation. On June 26, 2000, Ferguson again pled guilty to two counts of forgery and received concurrent two-year suspended sentences to be served concurrently to all outstanding sentences previously imposed. On August 28, 2001, probation violation warrants were issued against Ferguson. The warrants alleged that Ferguson had violated the following conditions: (1) failed to report to the probation officer; (2) failed to pay supervision fees; (3) failed to pay restitution and court costs; and (4) failed to perform community service work. On November 9, 2001, the trial court revoked Ferguson's probationary status and ordered him to serve the remainder of his two-year sentences in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, Ferguson does not contest the trial court's finding that he violated the terms of his probation. Rather, Ferguson argues that the trial court abused its discretion by not again placing him on probation or community corrections. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Obion
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Terrance Burke W2001-01462-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft
A Shelby County jury convicted the defendant, Terrance Burke, of aggravated robbery. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and the trial court's denial of his pretrial motion to suppress the victim's identification of him via a photographic line-up. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm the conviction.
William J. Burns appeals from his aggravated burglary and theft convictions. He was convicted at a jury trial in the Sevier County Circuit Court, and he is presently serving an effective fifteen-year sentence as a persistent offender for these crimes. He claims in this appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support his aggravated burglary conviction and that the lower court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial. Because we disagree, we affirm.
A Sullivan County jury convicted the defendant of theft over $1,000 for stealing a car. On appeal, he argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State v. David Troxell M2000-01100-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Burch
Dickson
Supreme Court
State of Tennessee v. Carl G. Dodd E2001-01304-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Graham
Carl G. Dodd appeals his rape conviction from the Rhea County Circuit Court. Dodd's conviction stems from a sexual assault upon a mentally retarded adult man. He is presently serving an eleven-year sentence in the Department of Correction for this crime. In this direct appeal, he claims that the trial court erred in admitting a psychological report as a business record even though it was not prepared by the agency through whose employee it was admitted, that the lower court erred in admitting evidence of the victim's statements to a caseworker about the crime, and that he was sentenced too harshly. Because we are unpersuaded of harmful error, we affirm.
Rhea
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Stevie Lawson E2001-01841-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner
Convicted of facilitation of aggravated burglary, theft, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, the defendant appeals and claims that (1) the trial court erroneously admitted the videotape deposition of the aggravated burglary and theft victim, (2) the jury's verdicts were inconsistent, and (3) the testimony of an accomplice was not adequately corroborated. On the issue of the admission of the victim's videotape deposition that was taken to preserve his testimony, we hold that the assistant district attorney general who took the deposition lacked authority to administer the oath to the deponent and that the lack of authority effectively resulted in no deposition being taken. However, we hold that the resulting videotape was a hearsay statement that was admissible into evidence for lack of a timely objection and that no plain error review is warranted. We also hold that the verdicts are valid despite any apparent inconsistency among them and that the testimony of an accomplice was adequately corroborated. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
Hawkins
Court of Criminal Appeals
Pamela H Arvey v. Aztex Enterprises E2001-01262-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Frank V. Williams, III, Chancellor
The employer contends the trial court erred in refusing to cap the award at two and one-half times the medical impairment and that the award is excessive under the facts. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Defendant, James Robert Wilson, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of first degree felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. He was ordered to serve concurrent sentences of life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction and twenty years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. Defendant appeals his convictions and presents the following five issues for review: (1) whether the trial court erred by admitting audio taped threat evidence; (2) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on a witness's characterization of Defendant as a "robber"; (3) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on the State's comment that Defendant failed to call a witness; (4) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's request for a jury instruction on accomplice testimony; and (5) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge all applicable lesser-included offenses. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
Julia Beth Crews v. Buckman Laboratories W2000-01834-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: D'Army Bailey
The sole issue in this case is whether an in-house lawyer can bring a common-law claim for retaliatory discharge when she was terminated for reporting that her employer's general counsel was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. We granted permission to appeal to the plaintiff and hold that in-house counsel may bring a common-law action for retaliatory discharge resulting from counsel's compliance with a provision of the Code of Professional Responsibility that represents a clear and definitive statement of public policy. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
