King v. State
03C01-9601-CR-00024

Atwell v. Colonial
03S01-9609-CV-00090
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Harold W Imberly,
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. Plaintiff, S. Scott Atwell, has appealed from the trial court's action in modifying a portion of a judgment which provided for a structured settlement of a workers' compensation claim. Originally the parties to this action entered a judgment on September 17, 1993, finding plaintiff to be totally (1%) disabled and providing the award would be payable as follows: a. Lump sum payment of $55,235. upon the entry of judgment. b. Payment of $588. every two weeks for a one year period. c. Lump sum payment of $14,34. on August 3, 1994. d. Lump sum payment of $14,34. on February 28, 1995. e. Lump sum payment of $15,37. on February 28, 1996. Upon learning plaintiff was engaged in certain work activities, the defendant, Colonial Freight Systems, Inc., filed a motion on March 8, 1995, to modify the last two annual payments upon the ground the evidence indicated the employee was not totally disabled. This motion was filed pursuant to the provisions of T. C. A. _ 5-6- 231 and Rule 6, T. R. Civ. P. After conducting a hearing, the trial court found there had been a "change of circumstances" and entered an order relieving the employer of the responsibility of paying the last two annual payments. The order did not state whether relief was granted pursuant to the statute or Rule 6 or both. This ruling was based upon evidence the employee had been working at a construction site in South Carolina over a certain period of time. Evidence of this nature was produced at the hearing by a private investigator who had observed the employee and a video made at the construction site. On appeal the employee argues the payments which the court abated were classified as lump sum payments and were not subject to modification under the statutory language and further that the evidence did not justify relief under Rule 6. 2

Marvin & Ellyse McCarley vs. West Food Quality Service
02S01-9610-CV-00085

Marvin & Ellyse McCarley vs. West Food Quality Service
02S01-9610-CV-00085

Thomas E. Montooth vs. State
01C01-9604-CC-00126
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.

Henry B. Waggoner vs. David Mills Warden
01C01-9604-CC-00142
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

State vs. Lutcher O. Miles & Amber Dawn Miles
01C01-9604-CC-00169

State vs. Terry Wayne Farrar
01C01-9605-CC-00198

Taft Douglas vs. State
01C01-9605-CR-00182

State vs. John P. Pelfrey
01C01-9606-CR-00251
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond

Douglas Trammell vs. State
01C01-9602-CC-00083
Trial Court Judge: James E. Walton

State vs. Randall Lunsford
01C01-9603-CC-00098

Jimmy Lee Heard vs. State
01C01-9704-CR-00120

State vs. Gray
M1998-00256-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Gale B. Robinson
The sole remaining question in this appeal is whether in October of 1998 the General Sessions Court of Davidson County had jurisdiction over a contempt warrant issued for violating the Davidson County Circuit Court's order of protection. We affirm the General Sessions Court's exercise of jurisdiction.

State vs, Albert Lewis
02C01-9512-CR-00394
Trial Court Judge: Bernie Weinman

State vs. John Earnest
02C01-9604-CR-00114
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

State vs. Ricky Tucker
02C01-9606-CR-00196
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley

State vs. Milton Spears, Jr.
02C01-9606-CR-00197

In re: Estate of Ora Sloan Blankenship, Deceased, Katherine Sloan Braden and Steve Sloan, v. Billie Ann Gann
01A01-9607-CV-00290
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge William Harbison

This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(a) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee.1 In this case, the decedent, Ora Sloan Blankenship (“Blankenship”), 84 years old, died on June 24, 1994. Subsequently, a petition was filed to probate Blankenship’s alleged holographic will. The purported holographic will named one of Blankenship’s sisters, Kathryn Braden (“Braden”) and Blankenship’s nephew, Steve Sloan (“Sloan”) as co-representatives of the estate.

Tom Milligan and wife Louise Millgan v. Curtis George and wife Wilma George
01A01-9609-CH-00406
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert E. Corlew, III

This interlocutory appeal involves a boundary line dispute between neighbors who live along Wilmouth Creek in Cannon County. Following inconclusive litigation between two of their neighbors, the owners of one of the tracts filed a boundary line action in the Chancery Court for Cannon County against the owners of one of the adjoining tracts that had been involved in the earlier litigation. The defending landowners moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the decision in the earlier litigation was res judicata as to the plaintiff landowners’ claims. The trial court denied the motion but grante permission to seek an interlocutory appeal. We granted the application for permission to appeal and now affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss because the parties in this case and the former case are not the same.

Shirley Jean McCracken and Alan McCracken, et. al., v. Brentwood United Methodist Church
01A01-9511-CV-00531
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cornelia A. Clark

This appeal involves a woman who broke both ankles in a fall at church. The woman and her husband filed suit in the Circuit Court for Williamson County against the church and others. The trial court granted the church’s motion for summary judgment based on the statute of limitations and the joint enterprise rule.The woman and her husband perfected this appeal after obtaining post-judgment relief from an inappropriate interlocutory appeal. We have determined that the trial court properly granted the post-judgment relief but erred in summarily dismissing the complaint.

Carolyn Franklin and Edward J. Franklin v. Rebecca A. Kimberly, et. al. - Concurring
01A01-9701-CV-00009
Authoring Judge: Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge William B. Cain

This is an appeal from an interlocutory ruling which the Trial Judge rendered final as provided by TRCP Rule 54.02. The controversy on appeal is between St. Paul Insurance Company, a/k/a Economy Fire and Casualty Company, (hereafter St. Paul), and Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance  Company (hereafter Tennessee Farmers). The plaintiffs have filed a brief in support of their interest in the disposition of the appeal.

Susanna Gillespie, A/K/A Susanna Grezegorcyk, A/K/A Susanna Kantack A/K/A Susanna Gregg, v. Stephen D. Graham and Lori G. Graham
01A01-9702-CH-00083
Authoring Judge: Judge Samuel L. Lewis
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Henry Denmark Bell

This is an appeal from the decision of the Williamson County Chancery Court. Plaintiff/appellant, Susanna Gregg, claims the chancery court erred when it denied her claim to attorney’s fees, and defendant/appellee, Steven D. Graham, claims the chancery court erred when it failed to dismiss the claim as outside the statute of limitations. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows: Defendant and his ex-wife, Lori G. Graham, entered into an agreement with Plaintiff and her husband, Donald Kanatack, for the lease/purchase of a piece of real estate. Defendant executed a note and a deed of trust in favor of Plaintiff and her husband on 15 March 1986. In exchange for the note, Plaintiff and her husband gave Defendant and Ms. Graham $10,477.17, which they used to pay real estate commissions and to set up an escrow account for repairs. The note listed the date of maturity as “on or at closing,” and the lease/purchase agreement listed the date of closing as 17 February 1988. Both the note and the deed contained provisions allowing Plaintiff to recover attorney’s fees if Plaintiff had to file suit to recover under each agreement. At the time of execution, however, the parties modified the note by drawing an “X” over five consecutive paragraphs. One of these paragraphs included the provision allowing the note holder to recover costs and expenses under certain circumstances.1 The parties failed to pay the note on 17 February 1988. The parties extended the original lease/purchase agreement for an additional year by executing an addendum on 27 May 1988. The new closing date passed without incident and both parties continued as they had in the contract for two additional years. A fire occurred on the property in 1990 while Plaintiff still occupied it.  After the insurance company paid the settlement to Defendant, he evicted Plaintiff from the property.

Mid-State Trust, IV v. Randall W. Swift
01A01-9703-CV-00145
Authoring Judge: Judge Samuel L. Lewis
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leonard W. Martin

This is an appeal by defendant/appellant, Randall W. Swift, from the decision of the Cheatham County Circuit Court dismissing his appeal from the general sessions court. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows

Pig Improvement Co. Inc., v. Curt Reaver & Richard Alan Tracey, Jr. - Concurring
01-A-01-9610-CV-00478
Authoring Judge: Judge Samuel L. Lewis
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Brothers

This is an appeal by plaintiff/appellant, Pig Improvement Co., Inc., from a decision of the Sixth Circuit Court for Davidson County dismissing Pig Improvements’s complaint against defendants/appellees, Curt Reaver and Richard Alan Tracey, Jr. The facts out of which this matter arose are as follows.