Nikki Bowie vs. Richard Bowie
E2001-02923-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
Richard Roy Bowie ("Husband") and Nikki Lynn Herrington Bowie ("Wife") were divorced in 2000. Wife was awarded sole custody of the couple's young child. Husband was granted visitation pursuant to a custody agreement filed March 1, 2000. The Trial Court found that Wife's monthly need was $7,200, but that Husband was unable to pay this amount. The Trial Court awarded Wife monthly child support in the amount of $1,057, and alimony in futuro of $1,500 per month. Husband appeals the type of alimony awarded to the Wife, the Trial Court's finding regarding the amount of Wife's monthly need, and the amount of alimony awarded. Wife raises an additional issue regarding whether the Trial Court erred in not awarding her attorney's fees. We affirm.

Betty Black & Barry Goins vs. State Farm Mutual
E2002-00206-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: John K. Byers
In action for breach of insurance contract, the Trial Court granted Summary Judgment on the ground insurance company had properly satisfied all claims under plaintiffs' policies. Plaintiffs have appealed. We affirm.

AAron Del Shannon vs. Darla Shannon
E2002-00518-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Michael A. Davis
In this post-divorce case, Aaron Del Shannon ("Father") filed a petition against his former wife, Darla Jean Shannon ("Mother"), seeking to modify the parties' divorce judgment, which judgment, inter alia, had awarded Mother custody of the parties' two minor children. In his petition, Father sought a change of custody and asked to be named primary residential parent of the children. The trial court found a substantial and material change of circumstances and granted Father's petition. We reverse.

Roger Harris v. State of Tennessee
E2001-00782-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

Petitioner appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. On appeal, petitioner alleges (1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel, (2) ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, (3) he was unconstitutionally denied bail, and (4) the indictment against him for first degree murder was unconstitutionally amended. We grant petitioner a delayed appeal, and we stay further proceedings on his remaining post-conviction claims.

State of Tennessee v. Robert Andrew Lewis
E2001-02305-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ray L. Jenkins

Defendant, Robert Andrew Lewis, pled guilty to two counts of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, first offense, in the General Sessions Court of Knox County. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of confinement for 11 months and 29 days, with all but 10 days of the sentences suspended. In addition, the trial court suspended Defendant's driving privileges for one year, and ordered him to pay a fine of $350.00 and attend DUI school. Within one year, a violation of probation warrant was issued, alleging that Defendant was driving on a revoked license, arrested for DUI, and had failed to complete DUI school. The General Sessions Court of Knox County revoked Defendant's probation and reinstated his sentences for both offenses. Defendant appealed to the Criminal Court of Knox County. On the date that his case was to be heard, Defendant's trial counsel did not appear in court. As a result, the criminal court dismissed the appeal for failure to prosecute and affirmed the judgment of the Knox County General Sessions Court revoking Defendant's probation. After a review of the record and applicable law, we reverse the judgment of the criminal court and remand this case for a de novo hearing on the probation revocation warrant.

2001-01175-COA-R3-CV
2001-01175-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Jean A. Stanley

Frank White & Sue White vs. Gerald Jenkins
E2002-00275-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The Trial Court awarded landlord a judgment against tenant for possession, rent owing, and attorney fees. On appeal, we affirm with modifications.

Kimberly Lewis vs. Timothy Lewis
E2002-00209-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson
In this divorce case, Timothy E. Lewis ("Husband") appeals the Trial Court's decision, arguing that it erred in classifying certain assets as marital rather than his separate property. Husband asserts that "the failure of the Trial Court to properly characterize separate property versus marital property [resulted in] an inequitable division of the parties' assets." We find that several of the assets classified by the Trial Court as marital property should have been classified as Husband's separate property. We also find that a portion of the Husband's credit card debt, which was incurred during the marriage, should be assigned to Kimberly G. Harmon ("Wife"). We affirm the Trial Court's judgment in all other respects.

Patricia Ridgeway vs. Jimmy Kimball
E2001-02577-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
The sole issue for our review in this divorce case is whether the Chancellor erred in ordering the Appellant, Jimmy Clarke Kimball ("Husband") to pay alimony in futuro in the amount of $1,000 per month to the Appellee, Patricia Anne Ridgeway ("Wife"). We find that the Chancellor properly considered the applicable statutory factors and that the evidence does not preponderate against his decision to award alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony. Consequently, we affirm the Chancellor's judgment.

Lassie Frazier vs. Brock's Open Air Market
E2002-00203-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
Clifford Frazier and Azeline Kittrell were sitting on a bench located in front of Brock's Open Air Market. Catherine Ottinger ("Ottinger"), who already had consumed six beers, was at the store to purchase a salad and more beer. As Ottinger was leaving, her car, for whatever reason, accelerated rapidly while in reverse and made a U-turn at a high rate of speed. While in reverse, Ottinger drove onto a public road and then came back onto the store's premises, jumped a concrete curb and hit Clifford Frazier and Azeline Kittrell, who later died from their injuries. Plaintiffs sued Brock's Open Air Market asserting, as relevant to this appeal, premises liability. The Trial Court granted summary judgment to Brock's Open Air Market on the basis that the accident in question was not reasonably foreseeable. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Ivan Ray Shirk
E2001-00460-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner
The defendant, Ivan Ray Shirk, appeals from the Knox County Criminal Court's denial of his motion to declare void the judgment proclaiming him to be a habitual offender pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Habitual Offenders (MVHO) Act. He contends that the MVHO judgment is void because the trial court improperly entered it nunc pro tunc before entry of the judgments on two of the three qualifying offenses. We affirm the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to void the MVHO judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Thomas H. Whaley
E2001-01476-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Vance

The Sevier County Grand Jury returned a two count presentment alleging the defendant committed a vehicular homicide by intoxication for the death of one victim and a vehicular assault by intoxication for the serious bodily injury of another victim. The defendant pled guilty to the amended charges of vehicular homicide by recklessness and aggravated assault by recklessness for agreed concurrent sentences of six years and three years, respectively, with the issue of alternative sentencing to be determined by the trial court. The trial court sentenced the defendant to split confinement and ordered the defendant to serve nine months "day-for-day" in the county jail with the remainder of his six-year effective sentence on supervised probation. In this appeal, the defendant alleges he should have received community corrections, or alternatively, he received excessive confinement. We conclude the trial court improperly ordered the defendant to serve his nine months of confinement "day-for-day," thereby depriving him of the opportunity to earn good conduct credits. We remand for deletion of the day-for-day requirement; however, we affirm the trial court in all other respects.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Lynn Brabson
E2001-01730-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carroll L. Ross

The appellant, Christopher Lynn Brabson, was convicted by a jury in the McMinn County Criminal Court of one count of the sale of .5 grams or more of cocaine, a Class B felony. The jury also assessed a fine of $80,000. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of ten years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant alleges: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) the trial court erred in sentencing, and (3) the jury imposed an excessive fine. We affirm the judgment of the trial court but reduce the fine to $25,000.

State of Tennessee v. Brent Tod Perkins
E2001-01826-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Vance
The defendant, Brent Tod Perkins, was charged with driving under the influence. The trial court determined that the officer had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant's vehicle, but granted a defense motion to suppress the results of a breathalyser test, concluding that the officer failed to comply with the requirements of State v. Sensing, 843 S.W.2d 412 (Tenn. 1992). Both the state and the defendant were granted an interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rule 9 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The investigatory stop was conducted with constitutional safeguards. Because the state failed to establish adherence to the Sensing requirements by a preponderance of the evidence, the order suppressing the results of the breathalyser exam is affirmed.

Gale Emerson vs. Robert Emerson
E2001-02835-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Neil Thomas, III
In this post-divorce action, the Trial Court ordered an increase in child support and ordered the father to pay 85% of the son's private school tuition. On appeal, the father insists the Trial Court was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition, and the proof did not support the increases ordered by the Trial Court. We affirm.

Sandor Turucz vs. Betty T. Madewell
E2001-03134-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: L. Marie Williams
Sandor Turucz sued Betty T. Madewell seeking to recover for personal injuries and property damage sustained by him in a two-vehicle accident in Hamilton County. The case was tried to a jury, who found both parties 50% at fault. The trial court entered its judgment decreeing that "the plaintiff shall have and recover nothing from the defendant." The plaintiff appeals, arguing that errors were made by the trial court in its charge to the jury and that the verdict of the jury is not supported by material evidence. We affirm.

Mary Varner vs. Jason Varner
E2001-02917-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: L. Marie Williams
In divorce case the Trial Court divided marital property and debts, awarded alimony and designated debts to be paid by husband as alimony. On appeal, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Phillip Jessee vs. American General Life
E2002-00182-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
In this case of alleged age discrimination case from the Chancery Court for Sullivan County the Plaintiffs/Appellants, Phillip Jessee and James O. Morse, argue that the Trial Court erred in refusing to grant their request for a continuance, in its admission and exclusion of certain evidence and in its dismissal of their cause of action against the Defendant/Appellee, American General Life and Accident Insurance Company. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.

Christopher Hooven v. Johnnia Hooven
M2001-02108-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
The wife appeals from the Trial Court's placing primary custody of the parties' minor children with the father. We affirm.

Julia Wilkes v. Fred's, Inc.
W2001-02393-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
Plaintiff slipped and fell on liquid laundry detergent which had spilled in the customer service area in Defendant's store. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant. We affirm

Julia Wilkes v. Fred's, Inc.
W2001-02393-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
Plaintiff slipped and fell on liquid laundry detergent which had spilled in the customer service area in Defendant's store. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant. We affirm

State of Tennessee v. Ricky Ray Humphrey
E2001-00512-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Shayne Sexton

On October 19, 2000, the Defendant entered "best interest" guilty pleas to two counts of child abuse and neglect and three counts of indecent exposure. Pursuant to his plea agreement, the Defendant received five sentences of 11 months and 29 days to be served at 75%. The plea agreement apparently contemplated a hearing to determine the manner of service of the sentence. Following a hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve a split sentence on the first count with three months to be served on county work release and the balance of the sentence to be served on supervised probation. The court ordered each of the remaining sentences to be served on probation and consecutive to the split sentence, for an effective sentence of five years. It is from this order the Defendant now appeals as of right. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Chester Lee Smith, II
E2001-01099-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Douglas A. Meyer

A Hamilton County jury found the defendant guilty of DUI, third offense. On appeal, the sole issue is whether the trial court erred in not allowing the defendant to present testimony from a local health department nurse regarding the health department's procedures for storing and transporting blood samples, which are procured by the local health department for reasons unrelated to blood alcohol testing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Jeff L. Courtney, III
E2001-01258-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge James Edward Beckner
The Hamblen County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant, Jeff L. Courtney, III, for one count of driving under the influence, per se and for one count of driving under the influence, second offense. A Hamblen County jury convicted the Defendant of driving under the influence, second offense, and the trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days. The Defendant now appeals his conviction, arguing that the trial court improperly commented on the evidence at trial, that the trial court improperly instructed the jury, and that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the Defendant's conviction. We conclude that the trial court did not improperly comment on the evidence, that the jury instructions were proper, and that sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support the Defendant's conviction. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Terry Dew Ayne Ogle
E2001-02029-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant, Terry DeWayne Ogle, indicted for one count of aggravated assault, was convicted of the lesser included offense of assault. The trial court imposed a sentence of 11 months and 29 days. In this appeal of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.