Estate of Paul David Rowe Et Al. v. Wellmont Health Systems Et Al.
E2024-00431-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Katherine Leigh Priester

Paul David Rowe was not informed of a radiology report, which revealed two masses in his kidneys indicative of renal cancer, for five years. Mr. Rowe passed away after suit was filed, but his wife, Sharon K. Rowe, both individually and as the administrator ad litem of his estate, (“Plaintiffs”) maintained a health care liability action against the allegedly negligent parties, Wellmont Health System d/b/a Wellmont Bristol Regional Medical Center (“Wellmont”), Carl W. Harris, Jr., D.O. (“Dr. Harris”), and Northeast Tennessee Emergency Physicians (“NETEP”) (collectively, “Defendants”) in the Circuit Court for Sullivan County (“the Trial Court”). Defendants filed two separate motions for summary judgment, arguing that the three-year statute of repose barred Plaintiffs’ action. Plaintiffs raised the defense of fraudulent concealment. The Trial Court granted the motions for summary judgment finding that Defendants had no actual knowledge until 2015 that Mr. Rowe had or might have had cancer in 2010, and therefore, had nothing to fraudulently conceal. Plaintiffs appealed. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Bobby Daniel Pettie
M2024-00558-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge Forest A. Durard, Jr.

A Bedford County jury found the Defendant, Bobby Daniel Pettie, guilty of possession of a firearm with the intent to go armed during the commission of a dangerous felony, among other offenses. The court then imposed a six-year sentence for this conviction after implicitly finding that the Defendant had a qualifying prior felony conviction. Thereafter, the Defendant sought to have his sentence declared illegal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1, arguing that the jury did not find that he had a qualifying prior felony conviction. The trial court denied the motion, finding that the Defendant waived the jury’s determination of the issue. The Defendant appealed to this court. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court.

In Re Traden R., et al.
M2023-00942-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Matthew Joel Wallace

In this parental termination case, the mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children. The trial court found that grounds for termination had been proven and that termination of her parental rights was in the children’s best interests. She appealed, raising several issues. We find that one ground for termination, abandonment for failure to support, was properly pled and proven by clear and convincing evidence; however, we reverse the ruling that the ground of abandonment by failure to visit had been proven. We also vacate the other grounds purportedly found by the trial court because they were not properly pled. We affirm the trial court’s determination that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests. Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

Nedra R. Hastings v. Larry M. Hastings, Jr., et al.
W2024-01433-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary L. Wagner

The notice of appeal in this case was not timely filed. Therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

State of Tennessee v. William Wylie
M2023-00870-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Tom Greenholtz
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Russell Parkes

A Maury County jury convicted the Defendant, William Wylie, of second degree murder, among other offenses. The trial court imposed a sentence of twenty years. On appeal, the State asks this court to dismiss the appeal because the Defendant’s notice of appeal was untimely. Upon our review, we agree that the Defendant’s notice of appeal was untimely and that the interest of justice does not require us to waive the timely filing requirement. We respectfully dismiss the appeal.

Joseph E. Graham v. State of Tennessee
M2024-00108-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert H. Montgomery, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge William R. Goodman, III

The Petitioner, Joseph E. Graham, appeals from the Montgomery County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his convictions for two counts of first degree felony murder, seven counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, five counts of attempted aggravated robbery, and one count of especially aggravated burglary and his effective sentence of life imprisonment plus twenty years. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred by (1) denying relief on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim and (2) denying his motion for a continuance of the post-conviction hearing. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Dora Rathbone Brown Et Al. v. James H. Fitchorn Et Al.
E2024-00477-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge John McClarty
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor James H. Ripley

Pro se appellant appeals from an order to partition real property. Due to the deficiencies in the appellant’s brief, including the lack of any specific issues for appellate review, we dismiss the appeal. We also conclude the appeal is frivolous and remand for an assessment of damages.

Mickey Verchell Shanklin v. State of Tennessee
W2024-00328-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Matthew J. Wilson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

Petitioner, Mickey Verchell Shanklin, appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief in which he challenged his convictions for the sale of heroin, the delivery of heroin, the sale of fentanyl, and the delivery of fentanyl and his effective sentence of thirty years of imprisonment as a Range III, persistent offender. On appeal, Petitioner asserts that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to submit the controlled substance for independent testing. Because Petitioner filed an untimely notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

Ajalon Elliott, et al. v. Harold Junior Monger, et al.
W2023-01783-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny Armstrong
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary L. Wagner

This appeal arises from an automobile accident. Appellants, one of the drivers and her husband, filed a complaint for negligence against appellees, the other driver and his employer. Appellees filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging that immediately preceding the collision, the appellee-driver experienced a heart attack that left him physically incapacitated and unable to control his vehicle. In granting the motion for summary judgment and dismissing the case, the trial court found that the sudden physical incapacitation doctrine provided appellees with a defense to appellants’ negligence claim. Discerning no error, we affirm.

In Re Santana M., et al.
W2024-00740-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny Armstrong
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jason L. Hudson

This is a termination of parental rights case. Father appeals the termination of his parental rights on the grounds of: (1) abandonment by failure to provide a suitable home; (2) substantial noncompliance with the permanency plan; (3) persistence of conditions; (4) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody or financial responsibility; and (5) abandonment by an incarcerated parent. We affirm.

Hunters Point Quarry LLC v. Metropolitan Government of Hartsville and Trousdale County, Tennessee et al.
M2023-00883-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Jeffrey Usman
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Charles K. Smith

A county regional planning commission denied the petitioner’s application to place a quarry in an agricultural zone. The zoning laws included certain requirements for quarrying. None of the zones, however, permitted quarrying, and all the zones prohibited any unpermitted uses. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari. The trial court granted summary judgment to the county respondents, concluding that the planning commission did not act illegally, capriciously, fraudulently, or without material evidence. Because the zoning laws for the agricultural zone did not permit quarrying and explicitly prohibited unpermitted uses, we affirm the grant of summary judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Brentnol Calvin James
M2024-00193-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steve R. Dozier

A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant, Brentnol Calvin James, of first degree premeditated murder, and the trial court imposed a life sentence. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that the evidence of premeditation was insufficient to support his conviction, and that the trial court erred by failing to provide a jury instruction on self-defense. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Howard Levy v. James Franks et al.
M2022-00231-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Frank G. Clement
Trial Court Judge: Judge Deanna B. Johnson

This appeal concerns claims for nuisance, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and enforcement of a local zoning ordinance. The plaintiff, Howard Levy, alleged that his neighbor, James Franks, engaged in an intentional and malicious course of conduct that included paving over a corner of Levy’s property, building a wooden fence along Levy’s property line, and routing construction vehicles over the parties’ shared driveway. Levy also alleged that the fence violated the Zoning Ordinance of Franklin, Tennessee, and that Franks was operating a construction company on his property in violation of the same. The trial court dismissed Levy’s fence-zoning claim at the summary judgment stage because he had not produced evidence that he was “specially damaged” as required by Tennessee Code Annotated § 13-7-208(a)(2). At the close of Levy’s proof during the bench trial, the court dismissed the remaining claims pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 41.02. The court also enjoined Levy from interfering with the installation of underground power lines under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 65.04(2). This appeal followed. We conclude the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter the injunction, which was unrelated to any of the underlying claims, but we affirm the trial court’s judgment in all other respects.

State of Tennessee v. Joey Dewayne Callahan
M2023-01238-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert L. Holloway, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge M. Wyatt Burk

Joey Dewayne Callahan (“Defendant”) appeals from his Marshall County Circuit Court convictions for possession with intent to sell or deliver more than 0.5 grams of methamphetamine, possession of a prohibited weapon, possession with the intent to use drug paraphernalia, resisting arrest, and reckless driving, for which he received a total effective sentence of fifteen years’ incarceration. Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to establish his intent to sell the methamphetamine. Following a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Brittany Sharayah Lehmann v. Jerry Scott Wilson
M2023-01529-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Travis Macon Lampley

This appeal concerns custody and child support determinations regarding a minor child. Because the trial court failed to identify and employ the applicable legal standard, we vacate the judgment as to the limitation of Father’s parenting time, the imposition of supervised parenting time, and the suspension of Father’s parental rights. Additionally, we vacate the award of attorney’s fees to Mother because the trial court failed to determine their reasonableness. The judgment is otherwise affirmed as to the remaining issues and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Monoleto D. Green v. State of Tennessee
M2024-00783-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steve R. Dozier

The Petitioner, Monoleto D. Green, acting pro se, appeals from the order of the Davidson County Criminal Court summarily dismissing his second petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus. Pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Jamarea Dashon Alderson
M2023-01286-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge David L. Allen

After being indicted on multiple charges in two separate cases, Jamarea Dashon Alderson, Defendant, entered an open guilty plea to the offenses of aggravated assault, two counts of simple possession of marijuana, possession of oxycodone, possession of hydrocodone, and evading arrest.  The trial court denied alternative sentencing and sentenced Defendant to serve an effective sentence of five years, eleven months, and twenty-nine days, ordering partial consecutive sentencing.  Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in denying alternative sentencing and ordering consecutive sentencing.  Defendant also challenges the trial court’s admission of testimony about pending charges during the sentencing hearing.  Because the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. 

Mitchell D. Horst, et al. v. Gary Gaar
W2023-00442-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Valerie L. Smith

The Plaintiffs filed suit against the former father-in-law of one of the Plaintiffs, complaining that, following alleged statements the former father-in-law made to a third party, the third party moved money that had been invested with the former son-in-law. The former father-in-law sought to dismiss the claims that were asserted against him, both pursuant to a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12 motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and pursuant to a petition under the Tennessee Public Participation Act. After initially dismissing the Plaintiffs’ complaint for failure to state a claim and denying a motion to alter or amend, the trial court held a separate hearing regarding dismissal under the Tennessee Public Participation Act. Ultimately, the trial court ruled that dismissal under the Tennessee Public Participation Act was appropriate and concluded that the former father-in-law was entitled to costs and attorney’s fees in connection with this litigation, both in relation to the Tennessee Public Participation Act petition and the Rule 12 dismissal. For the specific reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal under Rule 12, vacate its dismissal—and award of costs and attorney’s fees—under the Tennessee Public Participation Act, and affirm the award of costs and attorney’s fees that stemmed from the trial court’s Rule 12 dismissal.

In Re Daniel W. Et Al.
E2023-00923-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge John McClarty
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Michael Sharp

This action involves the termination of a mother’s parental rights to her minor children. Following a bench trial, the court found that clear and convincing evidence existed to establish the following statutory grounds of termination: (1) the persistence of conditions which led to removal; (2) substantial noncompliance with the permanency plans; and (3) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody of the children. The court also found that termination was in the best interest of the children. We affirm the trial court’s termination decision.

In Re Brian Z. Et Al.
E2024-00398-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Judge William C. Jones

Father appeals the termination of his parental rights, arguing that termination was not in his child’s best interests. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. David Alexander Hayes
E2023-01800-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Hector Sanchez

The Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction
of resisting arrest. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-602(a) (“It is an offense for a person to
intentionally prevent or obstruct anyone known to the person to be a law enforcement
officer, or anyone acting in a law enforcement officer’s presence and at the officer’s
direction, from effecting a stop, frisk, halt, arrest or search of any person, including the
defendant, by using force against the law enforcement officer or another.”). The gravamen
of the Defendant’s challenge is not the sufficiency of the evidence offered to establish his
use of “force.” Instead, the Defendant asks us to focus on when the “force” occurred or
the Defendant’s pre- and post-arrest conduct. Because the State did not offer any evidence
of the Defendant’s use of force before his arrest, the Defendant argues, and I agree, that the
evidence supporting the resisting arrest conviction is insufficient as a matter of law.

In Re Tayla R.
M2024-00248-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Chief Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Judge Caroline E. Knight

This appeal concerns the termination of parental rights. Tamara R. (“Mother”) is the mother of minor child Tayla R. (“the Child”). Jesse R. (“Legal Father”) is the Child’s legal father, having married Mother on the day that the Child was born. The Child was removed into state custody based on Mother’s drug use while pregnant and environmental concerns in the home. The Tennessee Department of Children’s Services (“DCS”), and the Child’s foster parents Autumn M. (“Foster Mother”) and Drannon M. (“Foster Father”) (“Foster Parents,” collectively), filed a petition in the Chancery Court for Putnam County (“the Chancery Court”) seeking to terminate Mother’s and Legal Father’s parental rights to the Child. The Chancery Court terminated Mother’s and Legal Father’s parental rights on several grounds. Aside from a few token visits with the Child, Mother and Legal Father essentially did nothing on their case, declining to cooperate with DCS or even allow DCS inside their residence, an RV camper. Neither Mother nor Legal Father paid any child support whatsoever for the Child. We affirm.

Julie Michelle Garret (Mix) v. Keith Douglas Garrett
M2023-01672-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Andy D. Bennett
Trial Court Judge: Judge Clara W. Byrd

A husband appeals the trial court’s final judgment of divorce with respect to two issues.  Because the husband failed to comply with the applicable briefing rules, we have concluded that he waived his first issue.  We find no support for the husband’s second issue.  Having determined that the husband’s appeal is frivolous, we affirm the trial court’s decision and remand to the trial court for the assessment of damages.

In Re Rome W.
E2024-00621-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge Andy D. Bennett
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy G. Elrod

The juvenile court terminated a mother’s parental rights to two of her children. The mother appealed and challenges the court’s determination that clear and convincing evidence established grounds for termination and that termination of her rights was in the children’s best interests. We find no error and affirm.

In Re Jolene S.
E2024-01708-COA-T10B-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Carma Dennis McGee
Trial Court Judge: Judge Andrew B. Morgan

In this accelerated interlocutory appeal, the appellant’s oral motion for recusal made during trial was denied. She then filed a written motion for recusal that apparently has yet to be resolved by the trial court. Because no order denying the motion has been entered, we dismiss the appeal.