Diana Morris v. State of Tennessee 01S01-9804-BC-00076
Authoring Judge: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Commissioner W.R. Baker
This case requires us to determine whether the Tennessee Claims Commission has subject-matter jurisdiction over actions filed against the State for the tort of retaliatory discharge.1 Because we conclude that the Claims Commission does not have such jurisdiction, the judgment of the Court of Appeals vacating the Claims Commission’s award and dismissing the retaliatory discharge action is affirmed.
Davidson
Supreme Court
Bohannon v. Asplundh Tree Expert 03S01-9709-CH-00119
Authoring Judge: John S. Mclellan, III
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Earl Henley, Chancellor
This Worker's 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.
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
James v. Travelers Ins. Co. 03S01-9802-CV-00012
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. James B. Scott, Jr.,
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. Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial court in a workers' compensation case. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). The trial court awarded the plaintiff 55 percent vocational disability to the left leg. The defendant raises the following issues: I. Whether the evidence preponderates against the trial court's determination that plaintiff sustained vocational disability of 55% to the leg, where no medical restrictions were imposed on his activities, he was able to resume and sustain his pre-accident employment, and retained the ability to perform other pre-accident employments. II. Whether the evidence preponderates against the trial court's determination that plaintiff sustained vocational disability in the amount of 55% to the leg, where its decision was based on findings of fact that were either improper to consider or not supported by a preponderance of evidence. We affirm the judgment. The plaintiff, age 57 at the time of trial, graduated from high school and received vocational training as a hydraulic mechanic while serving in the U.S. Air Force. His employment history includes working as a roustabout, a truck crane oiler, a machine operator, a fork crane operator, and a tractor-trailer truck driver. In March 1975, he went to work for the predecessor of Titan Tire or Dico Tire, where he still works as a spray operator or green tire sprayer. The plaintiff testified that on May 21, 1996 the sprayer he was using malfunctioned and began spraying paint on the floor. He explained that he continued to work until his feet got twisted around and he fell with his left leg beneath 2
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
Ronald C. Tillman v. Madison County Sheriff's Department 02S01-9803-CH-00026
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Joe C. Morris,
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.
Madison
Workers Compensation Panel
Ralph Warren v. Tml Insurance Pool 02S01-9801-CV-00007
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Julian P. Guinn
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. In his complaint, the plaintiff charges that his "hypertension and heart problems" were caused or aggravated by stress of working as a law enforcement officer. After finding that "the record does not reveal any single triggering incident that would necessarily bring this case within the purview of _ 7-51-21 of the Tennessee Code Annotated," the trial court found "[t]here is, however, a series of events, any one of which standing alone would have sufficed." The defendant stipulated that plaintiff suffered permanent and total disability to the body as a whole and the court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff accordingly. On this appeal, the defendant, Tennessee Municipal League, presents issue attacking the trial court's finding that plaintiff's hypertension and heart disease were causally related to his employment as a police officer. Plaintiff began his employment with the City of Parsons, Tennessee Police Department in 1975 and was promoted to Chief of Police in 1992. On September 25, 1995, while en route to patrol the industrial park in Parsons, plaintiff fell asleep at the wheel of his patrol car and it left the roadway. Plaintiff awoke when the automobile was on the shoulder, and thus there was no accident or injury. Plaintiff was experiencing chest pain and had experienced chest pain for years prior to this occurrence. On October 3, 1995, he sought medial attention for chest pain. The plaintiff was first diagnosed with hypertension in 1977. He was hospitalized in May, 1989 and underwent heart catheterization and angiography which showed significant heart artery blockage. His blood pressure was "moderately elevated," and he continued to have hypertension. Plaintiff was placed on medication for hypertension control and for heart artery blockage. Plaintiff was treated in 1989 by Dr. Joseph Blankenship and plaintiff returned to Dr. Blankenship on October 3, 1995. Dr. Blankenship, a cardiologist,testifying by deposition, stated that hypertension has an effect on the heart in that it enlarges and damages the heart muscles, increases the risk 2
We granted this appeal to determine whether the plaintiff’s complaint states a cause of action for abuse of process. We conclude that the complaint fails to allege one of the essential elements of the tort -- an improper act in the use of process. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals which upheld the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6).
Robin Berry, et al vs. Wilson County Board of Zoning Appeals, et al M2000-01995-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith
The Wilson County Board of Zoning Appeals denied Petitioner's request to establish a flea market or a gift shop/deli shop in property zoned C-3 (Highway Commercial). The Board denied Petitioner's request, finding that the Petitioner's proposed businesses were neither permitted uses nor uses permissible on appeal. Petitioner appealed the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to the chancery court. The chancery court reversed the decision of the Wilson County Board of Zoning Appeals. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Jerry Wayne Adams v. Jimmy Dean Foods, et al 02S01-9804-CH-00037
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. George R. 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. This is an appeal by the plaintiff's employer, Jimmy Dean Foods, and its insurance carrier, The Travelers Insurance Company, presenting the sole issue as to whether the preponderance of the evidence supports the trial court's award to the plaintiff, based on a finding of 5 percent permanent partial disability to both arms. After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the findings and judgment of the trial court must be affirmed. We first summarize the evidence. The plaintiff testified in open court. He stated that he was 37 years of age with a high school education. He attended Lane College for six months. The only other education he had was vocational training as an automobile mechanic while in high school. The plaintiff's history includes three years employment at Brown Shoe Company operating a machine in the manufacture of shoes. He worked for ten years at Kellwood Plant using a mechanical press to press coats. He then went to work for the defendant, Jimmy Dean Foods, as a "blocker," which is a worker who takes the shoulders and the blade out of a hog using both hands and arms. He was terminated in January of 1997 because he was frequently absent from work. The plaintiff testified that in 1996, he began having swelling, throbbing, and tingling in his hands and arms and felt like little pins were sticking in them. He reported his difficulty to his employer and was ultimately seen by Dr. William Bourland, an orthopedic surgeon. When the plaintiff went to Dr. Bourland, in addition to the difficulty he was having with his hands and arms, his long finger and ring finger on the left hand were locking. He testified that Dr. Bourland operated on his right wrist and "did something" to the two fingers on his left hand. After his surgery, he returned to work at Jimmy Dean, earning a wage equal to the wage he earned before the accident. Since being terminated from Jimmy Dean, plaintiff testified that he has worked at 2
Wayne
Workers Compensation Panel
James Michael Richardson v. A. O. Smith Company 02S01-9804-CH-00039
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. George R. Ellis, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal was referred to the Special W orkers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6- 225(e)(3) (Supp. 1998) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. This case was tried on February 24, 1998. The chancellor found that there was no period of temporary total disability, but awarded the plaintiff fifteen percent (15%) permanent partial disability to the whole body as a result of a work-related accident in December 1988 or January 1989. Defendant, A. O. Smith Company, has appealed the chancellor's decision as not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. After careful review, we find that the judgment of the trial court must be reversed. At the time of trial, the Plaintiff, James Michael Richardson, testified that he was a 5-year-old man with a high school education and vocational training as an industrial electrician. His post-high school employment experience involved mostly electrical work. He was subsequently employed by the defendant as an electrical, mechanical maintenance man and was working as an appraiser for an insurance adjusting company at the time of trial. He recounted the events surrounding his back injury as follows. In late December of 1988 or early January of 1989, the plaintiff felt "a hurting" in his lower back while helping another employee lift a 25-horsepower electric motor onto a stand. He reported the injury to his supervisor immediately. Believing that the injury was a minor strain, the plaintiff sought two or three treatments from a chiropractor, but his symptoms worsened. He was ultimately seen by Dr. Jerry Engelberg, a neurosurgeon. After an MRI was performed, Dr. Engelberg told the plaintiff that he had a tumor, an ependymoma, in his spine that had caused some spinal damage. According to the plaintiff's testimony, Dr. Engelberg told him he needed immediate surgery, because there was a risk that he might never walk again if he were to stumble or miss a step. After surgery was performed, the plaintiff received radiation and chemotherapy treatments under the supervision of an oncologist, Dr. Kirby Smith. At the time of the trial, the plaintiff still had complaints of low back cramps, difficulty 2
