State vs. Frederick Sledge
W2001-02402-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
The defendant was convicted of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery and was originally sentenced to death and twenty years, respectively. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. On appeal, this court affirmed both convictions but reversed the death sentence and remanded it for resentencing. On remand, the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment after a new sentencing hearing. The life sentence was ordered to be served consecutively to the original twenty-year sentence for especially aggravated robbery. The only issue raised on this appeal is whether, on remand, the trial court erred by not reconsidering the issue of consecutive sentencing when resentencing the defendant for the murder conviction. We affirm the sentence as imposed on remand by the trial court.

State vs. Frederick Sledge
W2001-02402-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
The defendant was convicted of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery and was originally sentenced to death and twenty years, respectively. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. On appeal, this court affirmed both convictions but reversed the death sentence and remanded it for resentencing. On remand, the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment after a new sentencing hearing. The life sentence was ordered to be served consecutively to the original twenty-year sentence for especially aggravated robbery. The only issue raised on this appeal is whether, on remand, the trial court erred by not reconsidering the issue of consecutive sentencing when resentencing the defendant for the murder conviction. We affirm the sentence as imposed on remand by the trial court.

Traci Sorrells vs. Donald Lee Sorrells
E1999-01658-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: C. Van Deacon

State of Tennessee v. Robert Lee Smartt
M2005-00176-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins

01A01-9510-CV-00454
01A01-9510-CV-00454
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz

Tamco Supply, et al vs. Tom Pollard, et al
W1999-01725-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Lee Moore

Kline vs. Kline
03A01-9706-CV-00240

02A01-9411-CV-00265
02A01-9411-CV-00265
Trial Court Judge: Wyeth Chandler

Diana Morris v. State
M1999-02714-COA-RM-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
This appeal involves a dispute between the State of Tennessee and a former employee of the Department of Correction arising out of a work-related injury. After the Department discharged her for failing to return to work, the employee filed a retaliatory discharge claim with the Tennessee Claims Commission asserting that she had actually been fired because she had filed a workers' compensation claim. The Tennessee Court of Appeals determined that the Commission lacked subject matter jurisdiction over retaliatory discharge claims and vacated the Commission's $300,000 award to the employee. While the employee's appeal was pending before the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Tennessee General Assembly retroactively broadened the Commission's jurisdiction to include retaliatory discharge claims. The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed this court's decision and remanded the case to this court for further consideration. We have determined that the Tennessee General Assembly may enact retroactive laws waiving the State's sovereign immunity with regard to past events, and we accede to the Tennessee Supreme Court's decision in this case that the General Assembly validated the results of this proceeding. We also have concluded that the Commission had authority to award front pay damages. Accordingly, we affirm the Commission's award.

Cecil Ayers vs. Minda Ayers
W1999-01261-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby

Tony Blan D v. State of Tennessee
W2002-01784-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

Tony Bland v. State of Tennessee
W2002-01784-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

Lorri Bailey (Capps) vs. David Capps
M1999-02300-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Clara W. Byrd
This child custody case has already been the subject of one appeal before this Court. The father was awarded sole custody of the parties' only child, with the mother receiving liberal visitation rights. The mother petitioned for a change of custody. The trial court found that there was no material change in circumstances sufficient to warrant an award of sole custody to the mother. However, the original custody order was modified to provide that the parties had joint custody, with the father being the "primary residential custodian." The trial court also ordered that the mother was no longer required to pay child support and that the mother owed no arrearage in child support. The father appeals. We affirm in part and reverse in part, affirming the order of joint custody and the order that the mother is not required to pay child support, but we reverse on the issue of the mother's child support arrearage.

Arthur Ray Lepley
01C01-9903-CR-00084

Joe Utley vs. State of Tennessee
01C01-9709-CR-00428
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge L. T. Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

The appellant, Joe L. Utley, appeals as of right from a judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court denying his petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner alleges that trial and appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance in several areas. After a through review of the record, we REMAND to the trial court with instructions to enter a findings of fact and conclusions of law.

In Re: Estate of Warren Glenn Brown, Candice Mathis, v. Joe Brown
01A01-9809-PB-00471
Authoring Judge: Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Andrew Jackson

In this case, the decedent’s grand niece, Candice Mathis, the petitioner, appeals the trial court’s finding that she failed to establish, by clear and convincing evidence the lost or destroyed will of her grand uncle, Warren Brown. The trial court ordered that the administration of the estate proceed as an intestate estate. For the following reasons, we reverse.

Mina Woods and Robert Woods v. World Truck Transfer, Inc. and Edward J. Seigham
M1997-00068-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

This appeal involves a personal injury action that was dismissed because the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Davidson County refused to accept and file a summons that had not been prepared on an original form provided by the clerk. By the time the plaintiff provided another summons acceptable to the clerk, the time for filing the complaint and the summons had elapsed. Accordingly, on motion of one of the defendants, the Circuit Court for Davidson County dismissed the personal injury claim because it was time-barred. We have determined that the clerk’s office exceeded its authority when it declined to accept and file the summons and, therefore, that the trial court erred by dismissing the complaint. Accordingly, we vacate the order dismissing the personal injury claims and remand the case for further proceedings.

Daniel B. Taylor v. Donal Campbell, et al.
M1998-00913-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Department of Correction regarding the prisoner's request for access to the Department's rules governing prisoner sentence credits. The Department responded by informing the prisoner that its policies governing prisoner sentence reduction credits could be found in the prison law library. Thereafter, the prisoner filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County complaining that he had been wrongfully denied access to public records. The Commissioner of Correction moved to dismiss the complaint. Alternatively, the Commissioner sought a summary judgment and supported his motion with affidavits asserting that the prisoner had already received all the information he sought. Based on these affidavits, the trial court granted the Commissioner's summary judgment motion and dismissed the prisoner's complaint. We have determined that the Commissioner has not demonstrated that he is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law and, therefore, reverse the summary dismissal of the prisoner's complaint.

John Doe v. Jane Doe
M2003-01142-SC-S25-BP
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker

The petitioner, an attorney identified as John Doe, filed a petition for contempt alleging violations by the respondent, an attorney identified as Jane Doe, of the confidentiality requirement of Rule 9, section 25 of the Rules of the Tennessee Supreme Court. The Court directed the parties to address as a threshold matter the constitutionality of Rule 9, section 25. After considering the arguments of the parties, the Attorney General and amicus curiae, and analyzing the applicable law, we hold that section 25 of Rule 9 violates free speech protections of Article I, section 19 of the Tennessee Constitution and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. We further conclude that sanctions for criminal contempt are not appropriate under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, the petition for contempt is denied.

Cybill Shepherd v. Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc.
W1999-00508-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Walter L. Evans

The plaintiff brought suit against a manufacturer of windows and doors for allegedly supplying defective products which allowed substantial leaks into her dwelling and caused rotting because of excessive moisture. Following a nonjury trial, the trial court denied the plaintiff's claim pursuant to the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act but awarded judgment to the plaintiff on her claim that the defendant supplied defective doors and windows. Based upon our review, we affirm the trial court's denial of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act claim. Finding that the plaintiff did not provide notice to the defendant of its allegedly defective product within the applicable statute of limitations, we reverse the award of damages to the plaintiff and dismiss her complaint.

Dorothy Owens, as Conservator of Mary Francis King, et al. v. National Health Corporation, et al.
M2005-01272-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III

James Gant v. Kenneth Broadway, County Executive and Chmn of the Decatur County Commission, et al.
02A01-9701-CH-00007
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor J. Walton West

Petitioner, James Edward Gant, appeals the judgment of the chancery court denying his application for a beer permit.

Alton F. Dixon v. Nike, Inc.
02A01-9702-CH-00049
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Neal Small

Plaintiff, Alton F. Dixon, appeals the order of the trial court granting summary judgment to defendant, Nike, Inc. Nike is a manufacturer of sporting goods, footwear, and apparel, and Dixon was an at-will employee of Nike. Nike encourages its employees to actively participate in improving their work environment and in implementing ideas for new products on the market 2 through a program called “I Got It.” The program invites Nike’s employees to submit ideas that “eliminate waste, improve the way we work, increase productivity, prevent accidents, save time, money, or energy.” Employees can also submit ideas for new products or inventions. In a weekly bulletin for employees, Nike stated, “If what you are suggesting is an idea for a new product or invention, to protect you and NIKE, a letter of understanding will be sent for your signature stating, in essence, that NIKE will not use your product idea until a written contract is negotiated and signed.”

State of Tennessee v. John R. Farner, Jr.
E1999-00491-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

The State of Tennessee has filed a petition to rehear asking this Court to reconsider certain
portions of the opinion. Contrary to the assertions of the petition the opinion does not require the giving of a special “proximate cause” instruction in every homicide case. The opinion requires the giving of a general causation instruction whenever the homicide offense does not itself explicitly or implicitly include a causation instruction. As the State recognizes, some of the homicide offenses include elements that implicitly instruct the jury that a causation finding is necessary. Also without merit is the State’s assertion that the suggested pattern jury instruction set out in footnote 16 conflicts with existing law and relieves the State of its burden of proof. The State’s petition confuses criminal negligence and causation. Both elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish criminally negligent homicide. Moreover, we emphasize that the language in footnote 16 is merely a suggestion which may be accepted, revised, or rejected by the Pattern Jury Instruction Committee. Accordingly, the State’s petition to rehear is DENIED. Costs of this petition are taxed to the State of Tennessee, for which execution may issue if necessary.
 

M2001-01866-CCA-R3-DD
M2001-01866-CCA-R3-DD