Phyllis Renee Brown, v. Charles Chandler Brown, Sr. - Concurring
I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion. However, I write separately to express my concern with the language on page 10 of that opinion which states that, “[i]n order to be compelling enough to warrant the dramatic remedy of changed custody, the change of circumstances must be such that ‘continuation of the adjudicated custody will substantially harm the child.’” I acknowledge that this language appears in Wall v. Wall, 907 S.W.2d 829, 834 (Tenn. App. 1995), an opinion of the middle section of this court. However, I further note that Wall cited Contreras v. Ward, 831 S.W.2d 288 (Tenn. App. 1991). Contreras was a parental relocation case which stated the long recognized rule that “the best interest and welfare of the child must be the primary focus of attention.” Contreras, 831 S.W.2d at 290. The court also cited with approval from Sartoph v. Sartoph, 354 A.2d 467, 473 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1976), wherein the Maryland Court of Special Appeals stated that “[t]he custody of children should not be disturbed unless there is some strong reason affecting the welfare of the child. To justify a change in custody, the change in conditions must have occurred which affects the welfare of the child and not that of the parents.” |
Court of Appeals | ||
Frizzell Construction, Inc., v. Gatlinburg, LLC.
The facts of this case, as material to this appeal, are relatively simple. The parties entered into a contract for the construction of a hotel in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. The contract was a standard 2 |
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Kevin R. Wagner and Peggy A. Wagner, v. Tabor Construction, Inc. and John Tabor, D/B/A Tabor Construction Company
The facts of this case are relative (sic) simple. The plaintiffs contracted to purchase a house from the defendant. When the house was complete, excepting some "punch list items" the parties entered into a second contract. By the terms of the second contract, the defendant was to place $5,000.00 in escrow with the monies to be used toward the completion of the "punch list items. Part of the work was compleed on the "punch list" items. |
Court of Appeals | ||
Phyllis Renee Brown, v. Charles Chandler Brown, Sr.
Charles Chandler Brown, Sr., (Father), appeals the trial court's order denying his petition to modify the custody arrangement previously agreed to by the parties and set forth i their final divorce decree. For the reasons stated hereinafter, we affirm the trial court's judgment with certain modifications. |
Court of Appeals | ||
Gary Charles Hill, v. Insurance Company of North America
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. |
Court of Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee vs. James Christopher Tatrow
A jury in Cumberland County Criminal Court convicted the defendant, James Christopher Tatrow, of two counts of felony murder and two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping in the deaths of Roger Zammit and John Harry. The defendant was also convicted of two counts of premeditated and deliberate murder of the same victims. The trial court set aside those verdicts, however, as the thirteenth juror. See Tenn. R. Crim. P. 33 (f). In the sentencing phase, the jury declined to impose the death penalty or life without parole and sentenced the defendant to serve life sentences with the possibility of parole. At the conclusion of a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve two consecutive life sentences concurrently with sentences of 22 years for the kidnapping convictions. The defendant now challenges the validity of the convictions and the propriety of consecutive sentencing pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. |
Cumberland | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Policeman's Benefit Assoc. of Nashvillevs. Nautilus Insurance Co.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. Royce Lane
|
Dyer | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Michael Love
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Lescarbeau vs. Lescarbeau
|
Greene | Court of Appeals | |
Caruthers vs. Caruthers
|
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
03A01-9712-CH-00535
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Fowler vs. Bowie
|
Washington | Court of Appeals | |
Sanjines vs. Sanjines
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Moore vs. Moore
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Pleasant vs. Repass
|
Court of Appeals | ||
01A01-9711-PB-00656
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. Charles Madison Blackman, Jr.
|
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State v. Larry Morris
|
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Thomas Davenport
|
Cannon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Thomas Davenport
|
Cannon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Kennedy vs. Robson
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Thomas Calvin Maney v. Tennessee Board of Paroles
A prisoner at the Lake County Regional Correctional Facility filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the Circuit Court of Davidson County, claiming that the Board of Paroles had acted illegally in revoking his parole, and in refusing to recondiser the revocation. The circuit court granted summary judgment to the Board of Paroles. We affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Advo, Inc. and Insurance Company of North America v. Denise Phillips
|
Shelby | Workers Compensation Panel |