William Sims vs. Eddie Stewart, et al
02A01-9706-CV-00123
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX

In State v. Sam John Passarella, No. 81-260-Iii (Tenn. Crim. App., At Nashville, October
01C01-9801-CR-00049

State vs. Jacques Sherron
02C01-9512-CC-00364
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

State vs. Thomas Lowery
02C01-9608-CC-00248

State vs. Randy Fiveash
02C01-9611-CR-00429

State vs. William Hopper
02C01-9612-CC-00485
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn

03A01-9707-CV-00292
03A01-9707-CV-00292

State vs. Cynthia Mancell
02C01-9612-CC-00473
Trial Court Judge: Joe G. Riley. Jr.

Willie Henderson vs. State
01C01-9607-CR-00304

Carlton Mayo vs. State
01C01-9703-CC-00074

State vs. Jason Broadnax
01C01-9702-CC-00044
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer

John Johnson vs. State
01C01-9611-CR-00470
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.

State vs. Holly Earls
01C01-9612-CC-00506
Trial Court Judge: Gerald L. Ewell, Sr.

Griffin (Meyer) vs. Griffin
01A01-9704-CV-00190
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Smiley, et. al. vs. Walker
01A01-9704-JV-00164
Trial Court Judge: William C. Koch

Smiley, et. al. vs. Walker
01A01-9704-JV-00164
Trial Court Judge: Andrew J. Shookhoff

Knight vs. City of Gallatin
01A01-9705-CV-00213
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

Dowling, aka: Berle
01A01-9706-PB-00268
Trial Court Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.

Wilson vs. Mcwherter
01A01-9706-CV-00266
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Brothers

Dowling, aka: Berle
01A01-9706-PB-00268

State vs.Donald Middlebrooks
01C01-9606-CR-00230

Pam Fenner v. D.B.C. Enterprises, et al
02S01-9703-CV-00023
Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, 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. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants for lack of jurisdiction and dismissed the cause with prejudice at the plaintiff's cost. We affirm the judgment of the trial court on the grounds that Tennessee does not have jurisdiction over this case under the provisions of TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5- 6-115, which governs extraterritorial jurisdiction of the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Law. The plaintiff contacted the defendant D.B.C. Enterprises' headquarters in Grand Rapids, Michigan by telephone in late August 1993 from Camden, Tennessee after she learned of the possibility of employment. She stated in her deposition that at the time she made the initial inquiry, the only contact that she and her husband had with Tennessee was their ongoing attempt to purchase real property. Plaintiff first spoke by telephone to the hiring agent for D.B.C., Pete Carroll, who told her that she would have to travel to Grand Rapids to finalize employment with the company. She was not hired during the course of this initial phone call. By the plaintiff's own admission, her employment was contingent upon passing a physical examination and completing entrance paperwork at the defendant's Grand Rapids headquarters. She was actually hired in Grand Rapids, Michigan on September 1, 1993, after taking a physical examination, completing an interview and finalizing the formal paperwork. The affidavit of Victor Mainwaring, D.B.C. Enterprises Safety Director, states that no contract for hire was ever entered between D.B.C. and the plaintiff in Tennessee and that the plaintiff's employment was not principally localized in Tennessee. His affidavit further states that [D.B.C.] Enterprises does not run, operate, or own a terminal in Tennessee and that driver trip data sheets completed by the plaintiff and her husband indicate that at no time did the plaintiff deliver, pick up, load or unload anything in the State of Tennessee. Plaintiff alleges that on October 22, 1993, she was injured in Gallup, New Mexico while enroute from California carrying cargo for the defendant. Under Tennessee law, a court may assume jurisdiction of a workers' compensation action

Eddie Freeman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
02S01-9612-CV-00106
Authoring Judge: Hewitt P. Tomlin, Jr., Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Robert A. Lanier, 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 of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer, Kimberly-Clark, appeals and contends that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings (1) in ordering the extension of temporary total disability benefits through July 1996, and (2) in ordering the defendant to pay the medical expenses and deposition costs resulting from Plaintiff's treatment by and the deposition of Dr. Berry. The panel concludes that the judgment should be modified in part and reversed in part. Edward Freeman ("Plaintiff") was employed by Kimberly-Clark ("Defendant") for some eight years as a maintenance insulator. While lifting a load of cardboard boxes during work hours he suffered an injury to his neck. His treating physician determined that Plaintiff had ruptured two discs in his neck which required surgery. Following surgery, due to undetermined causes, fusion plugs that had been inserted into Plaintiff's neck during the first surgery slipped out of place, causing him to have to undergo two additional surgeries to correct the problem. In order to prevent future slippage of the fusion plugs, Plaintiff was fitted with a halo traction device following his third surgery for immobilization of his head and neck. This device was secured by steel pins screwed through the scalp and into the outer surface of the skull. Following the third surgery in August of 1992, one of Plaintiff's treating physicians, Dr. Lindermuth, released Plaintiff into the care of the other treating physician, Dr. Meredith, who after treating Plaintiff for slightly over a year determined that he had reached maximum medical improvement as of September 7, 1993. During this same period of time Plaintiff was referred by his counsel to Dr. McAfee for pain management and evaluation. On October 15, 1993 Dr. McAfee produced a plan for Plaintiff to gradually taper off his therapy and medication over the course of approximately one month. Dr. McAfee testified that in his opinion Plaintiff had achieved maximum medical improvement at that time. He encouraged Plaintiff "to think positive toward going back to work by the end of December of 1993." Since 1989, Plaintiff had been under the care of Dr. Harris, a licensed psychiatrist. From that time through May of 1992, Dr. Harris treated Plaintiff for

Doris Hensley v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co.
02S01-9705-CH-00044
Authoring Judge: Cornelia A. Clark, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Dewey C. Whitenton,