Latasha Whittington-Barrett vs. Jerry Hayes
E2001-01277-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson
LaTasha Marie Whittington-Barrett ("Plaintiff"), who is currently incarcerated by the State of Tennessee, filed a petition seeking a copy of Plaintiff's medical and psychiatric records. As grounds for the petition, Plaintiff cited a Tennessee Department of Corrections rule which requires a court order before TDOC will release copies of the inmate's health records directly to the inmate. The defendants, prison Health Administrator Jerry Hayes and prison Mental Health Psychological Examiner David Dobbins ("Defendants"), filed a Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment. The Trial Court granted Defendants summary judgment. Plaintiff appeals. We vacate the summary judgment and remand.

State of Tennessee v. Timothy Scott Barnes, David Grooms, and Richard Grooms
E2001-01390-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper, II

The defendants, Timothy Scott Barnes, David Grooms, and Richard Grooms, were convicted of attempted burglary, a Class E felony. The trial court imposed Range I sentences as follows: Timothy Scott Barnes, one year, three months; David Grooms, one year, six months; and Richard Grooms, one year, six months. In this appeal of right, the defendants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. The judgments are affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Tyce Hamblin
E2000-02804-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Shayne Sexton

The defendant pled guilty to aggravated assault and was sentenced as a multiple Range II offender. He appeals his sentence of nine years and requests an alternative sentence of probation or community corrections. Based upon our review, we conclude that the trial court misapplied enhancement factor (11) and failed to consider two relevant mitigating factors. Furthermore, the trial court did not make findings as to how the enhancement factors were weighed to determine the appropriate sentence. We conclude, however, that the trial court's sentence of nine (9) years is appropriate based upon the defendant's lengthy history of criminal behavior. Furthermore, the defendant is not entitled to an alternative sentence because the length of his sentence exceeds eight years.

State of Tennessee v. Charles T. Sebree - Order
M2000-02810-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
The appellant was convicted upon pleas of guilty of the offenses of aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, and theft of property valued under $500. He received a sentence of five years for aggravated burglary consecutive to a sentence of five years for aggravated assault. A sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days was ordered served concurrently with the five year sentences. In this appeal, he maintains that his five-year sentence should be reduced to three years because the trial judge failed to consider the testimony of his girlfriend in mitigation.

Minnie Long v. HCA Health Svcs dba Southern Hills Medical Center
M2001-00505-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This appeal involves a personal injury sustained by the plaintiff while a patient at defendant's nursing home facility. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendant for negligence and the case proceeded to trial before a jury. During the trial, the defendant filed several motions for a directed verdict, which were denied. The trial resulted in a hung jury and the court was forced to declare a mistrial. Before the second trial, the defendant renewed its motion for directed verdict. The court ruled that the plaintiff's cause of action should be considered a claim for medical malpractice, but that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the suit before the second trial took place and the defendant motioned the court for discretionary costs. The court awarded the defendant only some of the requested costs and this appeal followed. For the following reasons, we affirm the decisions of the trial court to deny defendant's last motion for a directed verdict and to award only partial discretionary costs.

State of Tennessee v. Brian Leiderman
M2001-01590-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Buddy D. Perry

The defendant was convicted in January 2001 of aggravated assault and sentenced to four years in community corrections. Subsequently, while confined in the Grundy County Jail, he was charged with assaulting another inmate, which generated a probation revocation warrant. Following a hearing, the court revoked the community corrections sentence and ordered that he serve the sentence imposed for his aggravated assault conviction. He appealed the revocation, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to justify it and that his due process rights were violated because the trial court did not provide in its revocation order a written statement as to the evidence relied upon. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Charles Kendall Duty, et al v. Farah Dabit, et al
M2001-00586-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: C. L. Rogers
This appeal involves a suit brought by the purchasers of a new home. The seller and purchaser entered into a contract of sale, wherein the seller agreed to construct a home on a parcel of real property. Having no construction experience, the seller hired a contractor to construct the home. Upon the completion of the home and closing on the property, the purchasers discovered numerous defects that were allegedly caused by a failure to construct the home in a workmanlike manner. The purchasers filed suit against the seller and the contractor. The seller and the contractor hired an attorney, but the attorney eventually withdrew from the case. Four months after the attorney's withdrawal, the case proceeded to trial. The seller, acting pro se, arrived at the trial several hours late. By the time the seller had arrived, the contractor and purchaser had completed voir dire and the contractor had been dismissed through a judgment on the pleadings. With the trial judge acting as finder of fact, the trial proceeded and a judgment was entered against the seller in the amount of $22,182.84. After the trial, in an attempt to amend his pleadings to assert a cross-claim against the contractor, the seller moved the court for a new trial or to set aside the judgment. The trial court denied the seller's motion and for the following reasons, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. James Bradley Warner
M2001-01371-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Russell
The defendant was convicted of theft of property over $500, after being observed leaving a Wal-Mart store with merchandise for which he had not paid. In his appeal, he alleges that the proof of the value of the items was insufficient and that the trial court erred in ruling that certain of his prior convictions could be used for impeachment and in sentencing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Anthony L. Rogers
M2001-01729-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge John W. Rollins

The defendant, Anthony L. Rogers, was indicted for attempted second degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault. He pled guilty to one count of aggravated assault, a Class C felony, and the remaining counts were dismissed. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range II, multiple offender to eight years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. As his sole issue on appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in ordering his sentence to be served consecutively to a federal sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Ralph Richards v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.
M2000-01255-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins
We granted review in this workers' compensation case to determine whether the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel erred in concluding that the evidence preponderated against the trial court's finding that the employee's injury did not arise out of and in the course of his employment. After reviewing the record and applicable authority, we conclude that the evidence did not preponderate against the trial court's finding that the employee's injury did not arise out of and in the course of his employment. We therefore reject the Panel's findings and conclusions and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Clement Bernard, M.D. v. Sumner Regional Health Systems
M2000-01478-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Trial Court Judge: Arthur E. Mcclellan
On or about March 26, 1999, the appellee Sumner Regional Health Systems, Inc. revoked appellant Clement F. Bernard, M.D. privileges to practice medicine at Sumner Regional Medical Center. Consequently, Dr. Bernard filed a complaint on March 29, 1999, alleging procurement of breach of contract and defamation. On February 9, 2000, Sumner Regional Health Systems filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that Dr. Bernard could not establish viable claims for procurement of breach of contract or defamation. The trial court granted Sumner Regional's motion. On June 12, 2000, Dr. Bernard filed a Notice of Appeal and this litigation resulted.

Robert Davis, et al v. Wilson County
M2000-00785-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wootten, Jr.
We granted this appeal to determine whether county employees had a vested interest after retirement in health care benefits provided under resolutions passed by the Wilson County Commission. The chancellor found that the appellants had a vested interest in health care benefits because they were county employees who met the requirement of ten years of service and eight years of continuous service with Wilson County under a 1992 resolution. The Court of Appeals reversed the chancellor's judgment, concluding that the health care benefits were welfare benefits in which the appellants did not have a vested interest. After reviewing the record and applicable authority, we hold that the health care benefits were welfare benefits that did not vest automatically and that there was no clear and express language in the resolutions that the health care benefits were intended to vest or could not be terminated. We therefore affirm the Court of Appeals' judgment.

E2001-01963-COA-R3-JV
E2001-01963-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey

T.H. Engineering & Mfg. & Ron Tourte vs. Chris Mussard
E2001-02406-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
Plaintiff sued on promissory note. Defendant counterclaimed on grounds of breach of contract, violation of Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, and fraud. The Trial Court entered Judgment for plaintiff and defendant has appealed. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Thomas Dee Huskey - Dissenting
2002-00030-CCA-R10-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

As acknowledged by the majority in its carefully considered opinion, trial judges are vested with broad discretionary powers in the conduct of a trial. Courts must monitor all attorney conduct and may direct a remedy if the performance impedes the orderly administration of justice. United States v. Dinitz, 538 F. 2d 1214, 1219 (5th Cir. 1976). That authority necessarily includes the supervision of appointed counsel for indigent defendants. Moncier v. Ferrell, 990 S.W.2d 710
(Tenn. 1998). An extraordinary appeal to this court on any issue relative to the supervision of the trial which requires immediate appellate review may be granted only in limited circumstances: (1) when the trial court has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings as to require intervention; or (2) if necessary for a complete determination of the case. Tenn. R. App. P. 10.

State of Tennessee v. Jerry B. Graves
E2001-00123-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The defendant was convicted of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery and sentenced to concurrent punishment of life imprisonment and twenty-three years, respectively. In his appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in not remanding the matter for another preliminary hearing after it was discovered that the first hearing had not been recorded; in limiting his cross-examination of two prosecution witnesses as to pending matters; and in admitting an autopsy photograph of the victim's head, with the scalp pulled back, to show the gravity of his wound. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Thomas Dee Huskey
E2002-00030-CCA-R10-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The defendant, Thomas Dee Huskey, brings this extraordinary appeal in which he challenges the order of the Knox County Criminal Court removing his lead counsel of record for his retrial on four counts of first degree murder. The defendant asserts that the trial court’s action is an infringement on his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. We conclude that the trial court’s order violated the defendant’s right to counsel and exceeded its discretion. We vacate the trial court’s order and remand the case for further proceedings.

Flynt Engineering Company vs. William Cox
E2001-02457-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
This is a suit by Flynt Engineering Company against William Cox, seeking to recover the value of services rendered to Mr. Cox under the terms of a written contract. The trial judge granted a summary judgment in favor of Flynt Engineering in the amount of $115,753.15. We affirm.

Jeffery A. Wright v. Johnston Coca-Cola & Dr. Pepper
E2000-02542-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Jerri S. Bryant, Chancellor
The trial court found the plaintiff suffered a 5 percent permanent medical impairment as a result of an injury sustained while working for the defendant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Jeffery A. Wright v. Johnston Coca-Cola & Dr. Pepper
E2000-02542-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Jerri S. Bryant, Chancellor
The trial court found the plaintiff suffered a 5 percent permanent medical impairment as a result of an injury sustained while working for the defendant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Heirs of Neil Ellis v. Estate of Virgie Ellis
M1999-00897-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: David Loughry
The issue in this case is whether property held in a tenancy by the entirety is subject to the 120-hour survival rule contained in section 31-3-120 of the Tennessee Uniform Simultaneous Death Act. Three days after her husband's death, Mrs. Ellis died of unrelated natural causes, and her will was admitted to probate. The husband's heirs sought to intervene in the probate proceeding, claiming that because Mrs. Ellis did not survive her husband for 120 hours, section 31-3-120 deems both to have died "simultaneously." Consequently, they argued, Tennessee Code Annotated section 31-3-104 authorized them to seek a one-half interest in the entireties property. The trial court denied the motion to intervene, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. On appeal to this Court, we hold that section 31-3-120 does not require one spouse to survive the other by 120 hours in order to obtain fee simple title to property formerly held by the entirety. We also hold that the General Assembly, in enacting section 31-3-120, did not intend to define the term "simultaneously" in section 31-3-104 as meaning "within 120 hours." Instead, we conclude that the legislature intended that this term should continue to receive its ordinary construction, meaning "at the same time." The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Robin Davis
W2000-03137-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge John P. Colton, Jr.

The defendant was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and theft over $1000, receiving a life sentence for the murder conviction and a consecutive two-year sentence for the theft conviction. Following the denial of his motion for a new trial, he filed a timely notice of appeal to this court. In addition to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence as to his murder conviction, he argues that the trial court erred by allowing the prosecutor to misstate law during voir dire; in not allowing defense counsel to question potential jurors about their personal experiences with crime; in allowing hearsay evidence to be presented at trial; in allowing the State to introduce evidence of uncharged crimes; and in allowing the prosecutor to make improper statements during closing argument. Based upon our review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Lue J. Holcomb
W2001-00743-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. C. Mclin

The appellant, Lue J. Holcomb, was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of aggravated burglary. The trial court imposed a sentence of three and one-half years and ordered that six months of the sentence be served in confinement with the balance on probation. The appellant timely appealed, arguing that the evidence is not sufficient to support his conviction. After a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Tony Walker
W2001-00929-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

The Appellant, Tony Walker, appeals the verdict of a Fayette County jury finding him guilty of attempted aggravated robbery. On appeal, Walker raises the single issue of whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction. After a review of the record, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Gregory Scott Allison
E2001-00248-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant, Gregory Scott Allison, appeals from the Blount County Circuit Court's revoking his probation that was ordered for his sentences for burglary and theft. The defendant contends that although the trial court may have been justified in finding that he violated the terms of his probation, it erred in sentencing him to confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.