Charles Walton Wright v. State of Tennessee
01S01-9709-CR-00196
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

We granted this appeal to determine whether the appellant’s due process rights were violated when the lower courts dismissed his post conviction petition as timebarred by the three-year statute of limitations since the asserted violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963), did not arise until after expiration of the three-year statute of limitations.

Davidson Supreme Court

Estate of Foster Hume, III, Deceased, The University of the South v. Meredith Klank
01S01-9709-PB-00182
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.

We granted this appeal to determine whether the probate rule of ademption by extinction applies to the specific bequest of a house, where the house is sold at foreclosure before the testator’s death and sales proceeds representing the testator’s interest are identifiable after his death.

Supreme Court

State of Tennessee v. William Henry Barney
01S01-9802-CR-00033
Authoring Judge: Justice Aldolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

The defendant, William Henry Barney, was convicted of eleven counts of rape of a child and seven counts of aggravated sexual battery. He is currently serving a total effective sentence of eighty years. Upon the Court of Criminal Appeals’s affirmance of these judgments, the defendant filed an application for permission to appeal to this Court. We granted the application in order to determine whether the language of the indictment was  sufficient under State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn. 1997), and to determine whether the multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy. We conclude that the indictment is sufficient under Hill. In addition, we conclude that, under the facts and circumstances of this case, multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery are justified and do not violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy.

Davidson Supreme Court

Scottie Allen Yant v. Arrow Exterminators, Inc.
01A01-9801-CV-00004
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

The manager of an exterminating company brought criminal charges against the owner of a competing company for the alleged theft of a piece of equipment. The general sessions court determined that probable cause existed, but the grand jury declined to indict. The defendant in the criminal case subsequently filed suit for malicious prosecution. The trial court granted summary judgment to the civil defendant. We affirm.

Davidson Court of Appeals

Randall Craig Cobb, v. Sharon Ruben Cobb
01A01-9803-CV-00127
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Muriel Robinson

In this case Appellant challenges the action of the trial court in denying his application for relief under Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, holding him to be in criminal contempt of court and denying his application for modification of alimony.
 

Davidson Court of Appeals

Carl G. Berning v. State of Tennessee, Department of Corrections
01A01-9804-CH-00180
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

The Tennessee Civil Service Commission upheld the termination of a veteran supervisory employee for sexual harassment, conduct unbecoming a state employee, and failure to maintain a satisfactory and harmonious working relationship with fellow employees. The Chancery Court of Davidson County affirmed the Commission’s order. On appeal the employee asserts that he was denied progressive discipline prior to termination, and that he was denied due process of law. On the strength of the proof, he also claims that his conduct does not fit the definition of “conduct unbecoming” or support a conclusion that he failed to maintain a harmonious working relationship, and that his conduct was constitutionally protected. We affirm the trial court.

Davidson Court of Appeals

Robby McCurry v. Container Corp. of America, a Division of Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
03S01-9705-CH-00050
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam

The appellee, Robby McCurry, filed a second motion to rehear on December 28, 1998, petitioning this Court to reconsider our decision in the above styled case. The appellee filed this petition without first seeking permission from this Court as prescribed in Rule 39(f) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. Accordingly, the motion is not well taken.

Campbell Supreme Court

State of Tennessee v. Kristina Schindler
03S01-9804-CR-00040
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

We granted this appeal to address whether a trial court can consider prior grants of diversion or previously expunged offenses in determining a defendant's suitability for diversion. In the case now before us, the trial court denied the defendant's request for judicial diversion because the defendant had previously been placed on diversion on two different occasions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision to deny the defendant's application for judicial diversion. Upon review, we hold that evidence of prior diversions may be considered in determining whether a defendant is a suitable candidate for diversion.

Knox Supreme Court

Paula Lynn Barnett vs. Robert McAlister Barnett, III - Concurring
03A01-9709-CH-00414
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge L. Marie Williams

This is a post-divorce action to modify child support and alimony. The mother sought to increase child support, and the father sought to terminate periodic alimony payments. The trial court granted the mother’s request for an increase in child support, with a portion of the child support to be placed in an educational trust, and denied the father’s petition for modification of alimony. Both parties appealed. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and modify.

Hamilton Court of Appeals

Curtis G. Mayes v. Margaret C. Culpepper, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
03A01-9801-CH-00032
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Frederick D. McDonald

This is an appeal from the denial of unemployment compensation benefits. Through the entire procedure, including an appeal to the Chancery Court for Knox County, the appellant has been denied unemployment compensation benefits because he had been guilty of misconduct arising out of the scope and course of him employment and  T.C.A . § 50 -7-303( a ) ( 2 ) bars him from recovery of unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse the judgment of the Chancery Court and remand this case to the trial court for entry of an order awarding unemployment benefits as provided by law.

 

Knox Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Preston Carter - Concurring
02S01-9705-CR-00045
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

In this capital case, the defendant, Preston Carter, pled guilty and was  convicted on two counts of felony murder. A jury sentenced him to death on both counts, finding that the murders of Thomas and Tensia Jackson were especially heinous, atrocious, and cruel. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-2-203(i)(5).  The jury imposed sentences of death based upon the presence of this sole aggravating circumstance.

Shelby Supreme Court

Edmund George Zagorski v. State of Tennessee
01S01-9711-CC-00240
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING
Appellant Edmund George Zagorski has filed a petition to rehear this cause
pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 39 contending that our opinion conflicts with and/or
overlooks principles of law regarding trial counsel’s duties to investigate mitigation
evidence and fully advise a defendant regarding a potential mitigation defense. We
have reviewed all of the arguments raised in the petition, and we find them to be
without merit.

Robertson Supreme Court

State of Tennessee v. Gerald Robert Stevens, Laurie Ann Williams, and James Darren Brothers Stevens, et al.
02S01-9712-CC-00112
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn

We granted this appeal to determine whether a conclusory allegation in an affidavit that information was provided by a “concerned citizen source” is sufficient to establish the presumptive reliability of the information for the issuance of a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 7 of the Tennessee Constitution.1 There is a distinction in Tennessee law between “citizen informants” and “criminal informants” or those from the criminal milieu. Information provided by an unnamed ordinary citizen is presumed to be reliable, and the affidavit need not establish that the source is credible or that the information is reliable. State v. Melson, 638 S.W.2d 342, 354 (Tenn. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1137, 103 S. Ct. 770, 74 L. Ed. 2d 983 (1983). On the other hand, where information is provided by an anonymous criminal informant, the affidavit must establish (1) the basis of the informant’s knowledge, and (2) the reliability of the informant or the information. State v. Jacumin, 778 S.W.2d 430 (Tenn. 1989).
 

Henry Supreme Court

State vs. Donald Stephens
01C01-9711-CC-00551
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Ricky Woodard
01C01-9802-CC-00056
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Michael Clark
01C01-9802-CC-00087

Montgomery Court of Criminal Appeals

Robert James Watkins v. Inman Construction Corp.
02S01-9710-CH-00098
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Neal Small, 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. The plaintiff, Robert James Watkins, injured his right ankle on February 2, 1995 in the course of his employment for Inman Construction Company. He was temporarily working in Oxford, Mississippi, but was employed to work in Memphis, Tennessee. After hearing the evidence, the trial judge found that the plaintiff sustained a permanent partial disability of thirty-five percent to the right leg. The court also found that the plaintiff had been paid temporary total disability benefits for the period prior to October 1, 1995. The trial judge also found that the plaintiff worked sporadically on a part-time basis for the defendant from October 3, 1995 until December 29, 1995 and that plaintiff was entitled to temporary partial disability benefits through that period. The court also found that the plaintiff suffered temporary total disability from the date of the injury until November 7, 1996, excluding the periodfor temporary partial disability, and that the plaintiff was entitled to recover additional temporary total compensation for the period from October 1, 1995 until November 7, 1996 except for the aforesaid period for which an award was made for temporary partial disability benefits. The court also directed the defendant to pay the medical expense incurred for treatment of plaintiff by Dr. T. E. Rizk in the sum of $85.. On this appeal, the defendant presents two issues: (1) Whether the trial court's award of temporary total disability benefits following the date of maximum medical improvement was error. (2) Whether the trial court erred in ordering the employer to pay for the medical treatment of Dr. T. E. Rizk. The defendant does not attack the portion of the judgment awarding compensation for 35 percent permanent partial disability to the leg. It is conceded that the plaintiff injured the Achilles tendon of his right ankle while working on a construction site for defendant on February 2, 1995. He was treated conservatively by Dr. Wayne Lamar until May 16, 1995 when Dr. Lamar performed surgery 2

Shelby Workers Compensation Panel

Olympia Child vs. City Maryville
03A01-9804-CV-00136

Court of Appeals

Simmons vs. Simmons
03A01-9805-CV-00158

Bradley Court of Appeals

Macklin vs. Macklin
03A01-9807-CV-00232

Knox Court of Appeals

Slate vs. Hooper
03A01-9809-CH-00299
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II

Sevier Court of Appeals

State vs. Lamb
03C01-9708-CC-00346

Hamblen Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Huskey
03C01-9811-CR-00410
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Baumgartner

Knox Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Tiffany Betts
02C01-9709-CC-00337

Madison Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Christopher Eacholes
02C01-9803-CR-00065

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals