Ricky Shoulders v. TRW Commercial Steering Division
M2006-00300-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge J. S. (Steve) Daniel
Trial Court Judge: Judge James O. Bond

This workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel of the Tennessee Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court awarded the employee benefits based on 54.75 percent of the scheduled member loss of hearing in both ears. On appeal, the employer contends that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations and that the trial court erred when it failed to allow counsel to read portions of the plaintiff’s deposition. The employer also appeals the award being based on a scheduled member as opposed to the body as a whole and contends that the award is not supported by the preponderance of the evidence. Finally, the employer contends that the trial court erred in its determination of the compensation rate. After a careful review of the record, we find no error in the trial court’s determination that the claim met the statute of limitations. We do find that the trial court erred in its ruling on the use of deposition testimony but find that error harmless. We find that the trial court erred in its determination of disability attributable to a scheduled member and we have modified that award. Finally, we find no error in the trial court’s determination of the compensation rate. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part, modified in part and remanded.

Patrice Allen, et al. v. Methodist Healthcare Memphis Hospitals, et al.
W2006-01558-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge D'Army Bailey

This is a medical malpractice action in which the jury found in favor of Defendant hospital. Plaintiff
asserts Defendant’s expert was not qualified under Tennessee Code Annotated § 29-26-115(a)(1), and that the matter accordingly should be remanded for a new trial. We reverse the trial court’s order denying Plaintiff’s motion for new trial, vacate the judgment on jury verdict, and remand for a new trial.

State of Tennessee v. Maron Donta Brown
E2006-01038-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Steven Bebb

The appellant, Maron Donta Brown, pled guilty in the Bradley County Criminal Court to one count of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver and one count of speeding.1 The appellant received a total sentence of fifteen years as a Range II multiple offender. As part of the plea agreement, the appellant properly reserved a certified question of law, challenging the stop and subsequent search of his vehicle during which the cocaine was discovered. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Maron Donta Brown - Dissenting
E2006-01038-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Steven Bebb

I believe Appellant in this case gave a valid consent for Trooper Hoppe to conduct a general search of Appellant’s car. I am also in agreement that in doing so Appellant consented for Hoppe to “at least touch items, including locked or sealed packages, contained within the vehicle.” However, the majority notes and rightfully so that this consent did not extend to tearing open a sealed package within the car. The majority sanctions Hoppe’s having done so on the basis of his testimony that he was trained in drug interdiction and that upon feeling a closed, heavily-taped cardboard or pasteboard box he was able to immediately recognize the contents as a “brick” of cocaine. With this last crucial bit of information along with the other circumstances of the stop, the majority concludes Hoppe had probable cause to open the package and discover the cocaine within.

Frank H. McNiel v. Susan R. Cooper
M2005-01206-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Richard H. Dinkins

This appeal involves the authority of the Tennessee Board of Medical Examiners to review the medical records of a physician’s patients. After the Board requested access to his patients’  records in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-1-117 (2004), the physician filed a declaratory judgment action in the Chancery Court for Davidson County challenging the constitutionality of the statute. The physician asserted that the statutory procedure for gaining access to medical records amounted to an unreasonable search and seizure because it failed to provide him with pre-enforcement judicial review of the reasonableness of the Board’s request. He also claimed that the statute’s notice provisions violated due process. Both the physician and the Board filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court concluded that the physician received adequate notice of the purpose of the request for medical records. It also determined that Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-1-117(a)(3), the portion of the statute authorizing disciplinary sanctions against physicians who willfully fail to produce requested records, was unconstitutional and awarded the physician $20,916 in attorney’s fees. The Board perfected this appeal. We concur with the trial court’s conclusion that the physician received adequate notice of the reasons for the request for medical records. However, we have determined that physicians in Tennessee have no reasonable expectation that they can shield their patients’ records from the Board’s regulatory oversight and that the Board may discipline physicians who willfully refuse to comply with lawful requests for patient records that comply with Tenn. Code Ann. § 63-1-117.

Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc. v. Edwin Jason Aldrich, et al.
M2006-00115-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Thomas E. Gray

Trial court dismissed action by worker’s compensation lienholder against employee’s attorney seeking to hold employee’s Tennessee attorney liable for disbursement of proceeds from third party settlement made by another out-of-state attorney.  We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Jacob Allen Reynolds
E2005-02768-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant, Jacob Allen Reynolds, pled guilty to one count of vandalism (Class C felony) and, after a sentencing hearing, was ordered to serve four years of confinement in the Department of Correction as a Range I, standard offender. Additionally, he was ordered to pay restitution to the victims in the amount of $11,407.75. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him to four years of confinement. After careful review, we hold that no error exists and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Jeffery Yates v. State of Tennessee
W2006-00969-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The petitioner, Jeffery Yates, appeals the Hardeman County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief from his convictions for especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated kidnapping, and attempted aggravated robbery. He contends that his sentences are illegal and, therefore, that his judgments of conviction are void. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the petition for habeas corpus relief.

State of Tennessee v. Travis Young
W2005-02593-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

The Defendant, Travis Young, was convicted of two counts of aggravated robbery, three counts of aggravated assault, two counts of reckless aggravated assault, and one count of intentionally evading arrest. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective sixteen-year sentence. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it: (1) classified him as a Range II offender; (2) enhanced the Defendant’s sentences; and (3) imposed consecutive sentences. We affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified, and we remand the case for entry of judgments consistent with this opinion.

Intermodal Cartage Co, Inc. v Timothy Cherry, et al.
M2005-01635-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. Mccoy

This case concerns an employment agreement entered into by employees of a company. The employment agreement contained provisions against solicitation and competition. Four employees who signed the agreement later left the company and went to work for one of its main competitors. The company leveled numerous allegations against the four employees and their new employer, including breach of the employment agreement, breach of duty of loyalty, unlawful inducement of breach of contract, and tortious interference with contractual relations and business relations. The trial court granted summary judgments in favor of the four employees and their new employer. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

E.J. Bernard, et al. v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County
M2006-00165-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. Mccoy

Two former police officers sought several tangible benefits of retirement guaranteed by Metro ordinances and police department policies. The officers requested such benefits and were denied, the Deputy Chief of Police citing a lack of good standing, as required by the ordinances, as the reason. The officers filed a declaratory judgment action. Metro filed a motion to dismiss asserting that a common law writ of certiorari should have been filed instead. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss. We reverse and remand.

Antwan Anglin v. Sgt Leroy Turner, Warden, et al
E2006-01764-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Judge Russell E. Simmons, Jr.

Prisoner filed Petition for a writ of certiorari. The Trial Court refused to issue the writ. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Maurice Leonard and Kenneth Shondale Mason
M2006-00136-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Russell

In this consolidated appeal, the Appellants, Maurice Leonard and Kenneth Shondale Mason, appeal their convictions by a Bedford County jury. Following a joint trial, Leonard and Mason were convicted of aggravated burglary, attempted robbery, assault, and false imprisonment. As a result of these convictions, Leonard received an effective sentence of four years, as a Range I offender, and Mason received an effective sentence of sixteen years as a Range II offender. On appeal, Leonard and Mason each raise two issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions; and (2) whether the sentences imposed by the trial court are excessive. Following review, we affirm the judgments of conviction and resulting sentences.

State of Tennessee, Ex Rel., LaJaunta McNeil Dauda v. Corry Jamal Harris
W2006-01314-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Special Judge Harold W. Horne

This is a Title IV-D child support case. The Appellant State of Tennessee ex rel. LaJuanta McNeil Dauda was granted an order legitimizing the minor child and setting Appellee/Father’s child support obligation going forward. Appellee/Father filed a petition to set aside paternity, which was denied. Appellee/Father’s child support arrears were determined and, thereafter, the child’s mother sought to have Appellee/Father’s support obligation suspended and any arrears forgiven. The trial court granted the motion and the State appeals. We reverse and remand.

Michael Henderson v. State of Tennessee
W2006-01798-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The Petitioner, Michael Henderson, appeals the lower court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner has failed to comply with the procedural requirements for seeking habeas corpus relief and has failed to allege any ground that would render the judgment of conviction void. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal.

William H. Stitts v. State of Tennessee
W2006-00176-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

Aggrieved of his robbery convictions, the petitioner, William H. Stitts, sought post-conviction relief, which was denied by the Circuit Court of Madison County after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, the petitioner presses his claim that appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to ensure that a trial exhibit, a videotape of one of the robberies, was included in the appellate record on direct appeal. We affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.

State of Tennessee v. Eric Maxie
W2006-00604-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

Indicted for rape of a child, the defendant, Eric Maxie, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of aggravated sexual battery. He appeals and challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Because the record supports the jury’s verdict, we affirm the conviction.

Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange, et al. v. William R. Hill, et al.
M2005-02461-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

Employer and its insurer filed suit against employee for fraud in the procurement of workers' compensation benefits. Employee and his wife filed a counter-complaint alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress. retaliatory discharge and loss of consortium. The trial court dismissed the counter-complaint for failure to state a claim. Employee sought to amend the counter-complaint to add procurement of breach of employment contract and a tortious interference claim against the insurer. The trial court also denied these claims. Employee and his wife appeal. We reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand.

Robert W. Bible, D/B/A Chalet Village Chalets v. Ted Mullikin, et al.
E2005-2064-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

Robert W. Bible d/b/a Chalet Village Chalets (“Plaintiff”) sued Ted Mullikin and Ted Mullikin d/b/a Mountain Rentals of Gatlinburg (“Defendant”) alleging, in part, that Defendant was in breach of a contract for the sale by Plaintiff to Defendant of Plaintiff’s chalet rental business. The case was triedwithout a jury, and the Trial Court granted Plaintiff a judgment against Defendant for $21,931.35. Defendant appeals to this Court. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Kascey Marquis Campbell
W2005-02810-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

A Shelby County jury convicted the Defendant, Kascey Marquis Campbell, of first degree premeditated murder, two counts felony murder, robbery, and aggravated burglary. On appeal, he contends that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions and that he acted under duress. Finding no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

David Prewitt v. Semmes-Murphey Clinic, P.C., et al.
W2006-00556-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams

The plaintiff was rendered a quadriplegic after a car accident, and he received care at The Regional Medical Center at Memphis. The hospital staff included University of Tennessee School of Medicine residents, private physicians who were dual employees of a private corporation and the University of Tennessee as part of its residency training program, and nurses employed by another private corporation. The dual employee physicians treated patients independently in their capacity as employees of the private corporation and supervised resident physicians in their capacity as
employees of the University of Tennessee. A University of Tennessee resident physician intended to perform a lumbar puncture procedure on the plaintiff, and he left a written request for a nurse for a lumbar puncture kit for said procedure. The nurse provided this kit, but did not include an antiseptic. The day of the procedure, the resident physician lowered the plaintiff’s bed rail and placed the plaintiff on his side in anticipation of performing the lumbar puncture, but when he noticed that an antiseptic was missing from the kit, he briefly left the plaintiff unattended to obtain the antiseptic. When the resident physician returned to the room, the plaintiff had fallen off the bed onto the floor. The plaintiff ruptured his spleen from the fall, requiring major surgery which resulted in subsequent complications. The plaintiff filed suit in both the Tennessee Claims Commission and the circuit court against the resident, the University, the hospital, the nurse, and the present corporate defendants, alleging claims of medical malpractice and negligent supervision. The liability of the resident and the University was stipulated by the parties in the Claims Commission, and these parties were dismissed from the circuit court proceeding on the basis of immunity. The present defendant corporations remained in the circuit court action. After discovery, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment in the circuit court. The defendant physicians’ corporation moved for summary judgment based upon immunity and the plaintiff’s lack of expert testimony, and the defendant nurse’s corporation moved for summary judgment based upon the plaintiff’s lack of expert testimony.  The trial court granted both defendants’ motions for summary judgment and certified the judgments as final. The plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal to this Court.  We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher W. Norwood
M2006-00145-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge R.E. Lee Davies

The defendant, Christopher W. Norwood, was convicted by a Williamson County jury of conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery, a Class C felony, and evading arrest, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court imposed a sentence of 2.7 years as a mitigated offender to be served on probation after the service of sixty days incarceration for the conspiracy offense and a concurrent sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days for the evading arrest offense. The defendant argues on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in denying him judicial diversion. Upon a full review of the record, arguments of counsel and applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Henry Estes v. Bridgestone Americas Holdings, Inc.
M2006-00834-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge Donald P. Harris
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert E. Corlew, III

This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court our findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the Employer, Bridgestone Americas Holding, Inc. (Bridgestone) asserts that the trial court erred in awarding to the Employee, Henry Estes, seven and one-half percent permanent partial disability to the right arm based upon inconsistent alternative findings of the trial court related to apportioning Mr. Estes’ injury to his hand. Mr. Estes alleges the injury should have been apportioned to his hand rather than the arm. We conclude the trial court correctly found Mr. Estes’ carpal tunnel injury should be apportioned to the arm and, based upon our review of the record, fix his impairment at five percent of the right upper extremity. Based upon this finding, we agree with the trial court that Mr. Estes will sustain a seven and one-half percent permanent partial disability to the right arm. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Betty S. Fleisher v. Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Company and M-Tek Company, Inc
M2005-01005-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Jeffrey S. Bivins
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Gerald L. Ewell, Sr.

This workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated § 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found that the employee suffered a 5% medical impairment to the body as a whole and determined that the employee was entitled to a permanent partial disability award of 10% to the body as a whole. The employee contests the adequacy of this award and the failure of the trial court to award the employee additional amounts as a penalty against the employer for the employer’s delay in paying temporary total disability benefits. We affirm the trial court in all respects.

Christine Pesce v. Aerostructures/Vought Aircraft Industries, et al.
M2006-00012-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge Donald P. Harris
Trial Court Judge: Circuit Judge Thomas W. Brothers

In this case, the employee, Christine Pesce, suffered an acute injury to her left knee during the course of her employment with Aerostructures/Vought Aircraft Industries (Vought) resulting in the dislodging of a large osteochondral fragment in the knee. This fragment was surgically removed and her treating physician found she had sustained a loss of joint space in the patellofemoral joint. Because the injury is not covered by the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, the physicians who testified both for Ms. Pesce and Vought based their determinations on injuries that were covered by the Guides and thought by the testifying physician to be similar. The trial court found Ms. Pesce to have sustained a fifteen percent impairment to her left leg resulting in a fifty percent disability to that extremity. Vought has appealed challenging the amount of the award and the admissibility of the testimony of Ms. Pesce's treating and evaluating physicians based upon an alleged lack of their reliability. We find that the evidence does not preponderate against the disability award and that the trial court properly admitted the testimony of Ms. Pesce's expert witnesses. Accordingly, we affirm.