Gary R. Slone v. Woodcraft Manufacturing, Inc.,
E2005-01575-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Roger E. Thayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben K. Wexler

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 Plaintiff 100 percent permanent disability. On appeal,
Defendants contend the trial court erred in (1) finding Plaintiff’s stroke was work-related, (2) in
awarding Plaintiff 100 percent disability, and (3) in allowing medical expenses for treatment at the
VA Hospital. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Brenda Woods v. State of Tennessee
W2005-02119-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: J.S. (Steve) Daniel, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Nancy C. Miller-Herron, Claims Commissioner
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 9-8-43(a)(1) and Tennessee Code Annotated section 5-6-225(e)(1) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. On appeal, the employee contends that the trial court erred in awarding permanent partial disability workers' compensation benefits at a rate of 2% to the body as a whole and contends that the evidence preponderates in favor of a much higher award of benefit. After carefully reviewing the record, we affirm the commissioner's award. Tenn. Code Ann. __ 9-8-43(a)(1) 5-6-225(e)(3) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Claims Commission Affirmed J.S. (Steve) Daniel, Sr. J., in which Janice M. Holder, J., and Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J., joined. Michell G. Tollison, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Brenda Woods. Michael B. Schwegler, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. OPINION I. Facts and Procedural History Ms. Brenda Woods is an unmarried person who is the mother of three children and was forty-eight years of age when this case was tried before the Claims Commission of the State of Tennessee. She has two daughters and one son. Unfortunately one of her daughters has lupus, and her son has cystic fibrosis. Ms. Woods has and is rearing these children as a single parent. The two children with the physical disabilities lived with her at the time of the trial. Ms. Woods is a high school graduate and has taken college courses at the University of Memphis, Jackson State Community College, and the Tennessee Tech Center in Jackson, Tennessee, but has not graduated from college. She previously worked as a legal secretary for almost ten years. She then had her own consulting firm before working for Harold Ford, Sr. as a health screening coordinator. She went to work for the State in 1999 when she began her work at the West Tennessee State Penitentiary as a Counselor I. She quickly rose in classification to Counselor III and was working in such a position at the time of the work-related accident which is the subject of this lawsuit although she was facing disciplinary action. She has not returned to work for the State subsequent to the accident which is the subject of this litigation. However, she did run for political office in 25 but was unsuccessful in her bid to be elected mayor of the city of Bolivar, Tennessee. Brenda Woods was injured in the course and scope of her employment on September 9, 22, when a chair she was sitting in broke, causing her to fall to the floor and strike her left arm on her desk. The fall caused injuries to her left wrist, back and neck. The back and neck injuries ultimately resolved. Ms. Woods filed a complaint for workers' compensation benefits with the Tennessee Claims Commission for the State of Tennessee, Western Division on August 27, 23, seeking compensation for the left wrist. She later sought and obtained permission from the commission to amend her complaint to seek psychological damages for this work-related incident. Proper notice of her injury was given, and at the time of the injury she was directed first to the prison infirmity then was sent home on the day of the accident. She was seen by Dr. David ErikYakin who treated her left wrist injury. Dr. Yakin initially treated the wrist injury as a contusion, but as time passed and Ms. Woods continued to have pain and swelling, concern developed that she might have a more significant injury. It was ultimately determined by Dr. Yakin that Ms. Woods had a ligament tear in her wrist that was corrected by surgery in December 22, when a left wrist arthroscopy was performed with debridement of the triangular fibrocartilage comple (TFCC) and debridement of a partial scapholunate ligament tear. Ms. Woods continued to experience pain and complained swelling in his wrist, and she was unable to return to work or to perform housekeeping duties. Therefore, Dr. Yakin sought a second opinion from Dr. Weiker. Dr. Weikert recommended further physical therapy but no additional surgery. Dr. Yakin opined that Ms. Woods suffered an 8% impairment of the left upper extremity based on the swelling of her joint, the mild instability of the scapholunate ligament, and her problem in the TFCC region itself. He imposed work restrictions of lifting no more than five pounds and no repetitive activities with her left upper extremity. During a visit in December 22, Ms. Woods made statements that were considered an expression of suicidal ideations by members of Dr. Yakins' staff who referred her to Pathway Psychiatric Unit in Jackson, Tennessee, for psychological care. She was then seen in January 23 by Dr. Elias King Bond who specializes in psychiatry and who treated Ms. Woods sporadically over an extended period of time for depression. After seeing Ms. Woods in January, Dr. Bond next saw her in April 23 for depression and in October 23 for depression and sleep disorder, and he saw her some eleven months later in September of 24 for depression. Dr. Bond primarily treated Ms. Woods with various medications. Our review of the record reveals that on many occasions, Ms. Woods missed her appointments. Dr. Bond was of the opinion that Ms. Woods had depression related to continued pain and inability to use her left wrist. Ms. Woods is left-hand dominant. Dr. Bond made no diagnosis of Ms. Woods' psychological problems but concluded that she had sustained a permanent impairment of moderate intensity for depression. He estimated the impairment at about "15% to the body as a whole" and listed the areas that she was impaired in as "self-care, personal hygiene, travel, communication and sleep."

Kelly Lee Bowers v. G. Beeler Auto Delivery, Inc.
E2005-02006-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Sharon G. Lee
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor John F. Weaver

This workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation
Appeals Panel 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. The Chancellor determined that the
plaintiff was permanently and totally disabled as a result of his work-related injury. The defendant
appeals, arguing that the evidence preponderates against the trial court’s determination of disability. After careful review of the record and applicable authorities, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Clifford Wayne Morris
E2005-01957-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

The Petitioner, Clifford Wayne Morris, pled guilty to attempted dissemination of a cordless telephone transmission, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days with a thirty day period of incarceration to be served prior to release on probation. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it sentenced him. After thoroughly reviewing the record and the applicable authorities, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Jimmie Lee Hart
W2005-02938-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Lee Moore Jr.

The defendant, Jimmie Lee Hart, was convicted of possession of one-half gram or more of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver, a Class B felony, and was sentenced to thirty years imprisonment as a career offender. He appeals his conviction, contending (1) that the convicting evidence was insufficient and (2) that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the meaning of the use of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee Department of Children's Services v. Patricia Danielle Stinson, et al.
W2006-00749-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Danny Smith

This is a termination of parental rights case involving two minor children. The mother of both children and the father of one of the children appeal separately from the Order of the Juvenile Court of Hardin County terminating their respective parental rights. Both Appellants assert that the grounds for termination of their parental rights are not met by clear and convincing evidence in the record, and that termination of their parental rights is not in the best interest of the minor children. Because we find clear and convincing evidence in the record to support the trial court's findings, we affirm.

In Re: Estate of Spencer Brown - Dissenting
M2005-00864-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace

With great reluctance, I must part ways with the court regarding the dismissal of this will contest. Based on the facts of this case, I have concluded that the trial court erred by dismissing the will contest without first disposing of Don Brown’s motion to implead additional parties and Alton Brown’s petition to intervene.

In the Estate of: Spencer Brown
M2005-00864-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace

Four years after the contest of his uncle’s will was filed, Alton Brown filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 24 Motion to Intervene in the contest of his uncle’s will. The motion, however, was not accompanied by a proposed pleading setting forth the claim for which intervention was sought as required by Rule 24.03. Subsequent to the filing of the motion, an order of dismissal of the will contest was entered.  Thereafter, the movant filed his proposed pleading following which the trial court denied the Motion to Intervene based upon a finding the movant had slept on his rights. Finding no error, we affirm.

James Craven v. Corrections Corporation of America and American Home Assurance Company
W2005-01537-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge J. S. (Steve) Daniel
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Dewey Whitenton

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 defendant, Corrections Corporation of America, has appealed the trial
court’s award of 60% whole body impairment to the plaintiff, Mr. Craven. Corrections Corporation
of America contends that the trial court erred in finding that Mr. Craven sustained a compensable
psychological workers’ compensation injury, in permitting Dr. Randall Moskovitz and Dr. David
Strauser to testify as experts, and in finding that Mr. Craven gave proper notice of the work-related
injury. Corrections Corporation of America also contends that the award of temporary total  disability benefits was in error and that the award of 60% permanent partial impairment to the body as a whole was excessive. After carefully considering the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. We remand the case for a determination of the personal representation of Mr. Craven and a determination as to the effect of his death on the award.

Brett Allen Patterson v. State of Tennessee
M2004-01271-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Michael R. Jones

Both the petitioner and his co-defendant were convicted by a jury of two counts of first degree murder, one count of aggravated rape and one count of first degree burglary. The petitioner was unsuccessful in his direct appeal to this Court. He subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the post-conviction court denied. The petitioner was also unsuccessful in his appeal of that judgment. The petitioner filed a motion to amend his post-conviction petition to request DNA testing of evidence. The second post-conviction court denied that motion. The petitioner appeals this decision. We affirm the decision of the second post-conviction court.

Louis Tyrone Robinson v. Ricky Bell, Warden
M2006-00869-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

This matter is before the Court upon the State’s motion to affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court by memorandum opinion pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.  The Petitioner has appealed the habeas corpus court’s order dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Upon a review of the record in this case, we are persuaded that the habeas corpus court was correct in dismissing the habeas corpus petition and that this case meets the criteria for affirmance
pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.  Accordingly, the State’s motion is granted and the judgment of the habeas corpus court is affirmed.

William James Jekot v. Pennie Christine Jekot
M2006-00316-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Sharon G. Lee
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III

Theressa Joanne Booker v. Ricardo Baytonia Booker, Jr.
M2005-01455-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Laurence M. McMillan

This is a divorce case. The trial court granted Theressa Joanne Booker (“Wife”) a divorce from Ricardo Baytonia Booker, Jr. (“Husband”), divided the parties’ property, and decreed an award of alimony in solido and alimony in futuro. Husband appeals, asserting that the division of marital
property was not equitable.  He also challenges the propriety of each of the alimony awards.  We modify the trial court’s award of alimony in futuro so as to make it an award of rehabilitative alimony.  As modified, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Mack T. Transou
W2005-02208-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

This matter is before the Court upon the motion of appointed counsel seeking permission to withdraw from further representation of the Appellant in the above-captioned appeal pursuant to Rule 22, Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. Counsel claims that there are no meritorious issues available for appellate review. Counsel has complied with the procedural requirements of Rule 22, Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner, Mack T. Transou, has filed a responsive brief pursuant to Rule 22(E), Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. After careful review of the motion, the accompanying Anders brief, and the appellate record, we agree with counsel’s assertion that the appeal has no merit and is, accordingly, frivolous within the meaning of Rule 22, Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.

State of Tennessee, ex rel. Lakenya L. Johnson v. Otha L. Mayfield, Jr.
W2005-02709-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Special Judge George E. Blancett

Appellant challenges trial court’s order setting aside the consent order acknowledging paternity and ordering no child support after July 1, 2005, based on the results of DNA tests which conclusively prove that Appellee is not the father of the child.  We affirm and remand.

Shinny Leverette v. State of Tennessee
W2006-00235-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge J. C. McLin
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Mark Ward

The Petitioner, Shinny Leverette, appeals the lower court’s denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis 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. Upon review of the record and the accompanying pleadings, this Court concludes that the trial court properly dismissed the petition for writ of error coram nobis. Accordingly, the State’s motion is granted and the trial court’s dismissal is affirmed.

Andre L. Dotson v. City of Memphis
W2005-01602-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams

This is an appeal from the dismissal of an inmate’s civil action for failure to pay costs in prior lawsuits. The plaintiff inmate, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint in the trial court against the defendant municipality alleging violations of the government tort liability act, proceeding as a pauper. The City filed a motion to dismiss the case based on Tennessee Code Annotated §41-21-812, because the plaintiff had failed to pay costs in previous lawsuits filed by him. Realizing that his lawsuit was subject to dismissal under the statute, the plaintiff then paid the initial filing fee
and cash bond for the instant lawsuit, but did not pay the costs for the prior lawsuits. The plaintiff subsequently filed a response to the City’s motion to dismiss, claiming that, although he initially was prohibited from filing the lawsuit, because he subsequently paid his filing fees for the instant lawsuit, Section 41-21-812 was not applicable. The trial court dismissed the case pursuant to the statute.  The plaintiff now appeals. We affirm.

C. Phillip McDow v. Sara Ciaramitaro McDow
W2005-02353-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kay S. Robilio

This is a divorce case in which grounds were stipulated.  Husband appeals the trial court’s award of alimony in futuro to Wife.  He asserts, in the alternative, that if this Court affirms the award of alimony the matter must be remanded for reconsideration of the division of property. We vacate the award of alimony in futuro and remand.

Hal Gerber v. Robert R. Holcomb, Salans, Holcomb Management, Inc., Holcomb Investments, L.P. and Vanderbilt University
W2005-02794-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Walter L. Evans

This is a garnishment action. The plaintiff lawyer filed a lawsuit against the defendant to collect on a promissory note. This lawsuit was settled by a consent decree requiring the defendant to make installment payments. The defendant became delinquent in the agreed payments. The plaintiff then issued a garnishment request to the defendant’s employer, based on the consent decree. In response, the defendant filed a motion in the trial court to stay the garnishment and establish installment payments. After a hearing, the trial court entered an order as to the monthly amount to which the plaintiff was entitled in garnished wages. This amount was less than the maximum statutory amount permitted for garnishment. The plaintiff now appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by not awarding the maximum statutory amount. We affirm, finding no abuse of discretion.

Vanessa Ann Webster v. Brad Anthony Webster
W2005-01288-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor W. Michael Maloan

This is a parental relocation case. The parties were divorced and, under their MDA, the mother was designated the primary residential parent for the parties’ two children. Within a month after the divorce decree was entered, the mother wrote the father a letter saying that she was moving to Canada with the children. The father filed an objection to the relocation in the trial court. The mother filed a response and a petition to relocate with the children to Canada, stating that she intended to marry a citizen of Canada who was currently serving in the Canadian armed services.  After a hearing, the trial court denied the mother’s petition, finding that the relocation did not have a reasonable purpose and that the relocation was not in the children’s best interest. The mother now appeals. We reverse, holding that the evidence  preponderates against the trial court’s finding of no reasonable purpose under the parental relocation statute.

State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services v. Christina Marie Keelyn and Edward Malachowski
W2006-00663-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor D. J. Alissandratos

This is an appeal from an unusual order in a termination of parental rights case.  The child involved in this action was placed into state custody soon after the child’s birth, because both the mother and the child tested positive for cocaine.  The child was placed in the custody of a foster mother who was a single parent.  The state filed a petition to terminate the parental rights of the biological parents of the child. After a trial, the trial court terminated the parents’ parental rights. Additionally, the trial court sua sponte ordered the state to find a suitable dual-parent home in which to place the child and ordered the state to consult with private adoption agencies to accomplish this task.  The state now appeals the portion of the trial court’s order requiring it to place the child in a dual-parent home.  There is no appeal from the termination of parental rights. We reverse the trial court’s order regarding placement of the child, concluding that the trial court was without jurisdiction to adjudicate placement of the child after the parents’ rights were terminated and the state was given complete guardianship over the child.

State of Tennessee v. Ashley Martin
W2005-01814-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The defendant, Ashley Martin, was convicted of two counts of aggravated robbery: aggravated robbery by violence and aggravated robbery by fear. The trial court merged the convictions and sentenced the defendant to thirty years as a Range III, career offender. This appeal follows the denial of his motion for a new trial in which he alleged that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and (2) the trial court erred in ruling his nine prior convictions for aggravated robbery were admissible for purposes of impeachment if he chose to testify. After careful review, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Thurman Randolph
W2006-00261-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

The appellant, Thurman Randolph, was arrested in February of 2005 for rape. After a preliminary hearing in the Madison County Municipal Court the charge was dismissed. Subsequently, the State presented the matter to the Madison CountyGrand Jury, which returned an indictment on two counts of rape. The appellant was later re-indicted by the Madison County Grand Jury on two counts of rape and two counts of statutory rape. Upon learning that part of the audiotape of the preliminary hearing was not available due to a technical glitch in the recording, the appellant filed a motion seeking dismissal of the indictment and a remand of the matter to the Jackson Municipal Court for a new preliminary hearing pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(a). The trial court denied the motion and the appellant sought an interlocutory appeal. In this interlocutory appeal, the appellant asserts that the trial court improperly denied the motion to dismiss the indictment and remand the matter to the Jackson Municipal Court. Because the trial court properly denied the motion to dismiss the indictment, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Iain Hiscock v. Sue E. Hiscock
M2005-01489-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Buddy D. Perry

Husband appeals the type and amount of alimony awarded to Wife after the termination of a twenty-seven year marriage. The decision of the trial court is affirmed as modified.

State of Tennessee v. Jacques Sherron
W2005-00903-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Clayburn L. Peeples

The appellant, Jacques Sherron, was convicted by a jury of criminal responsibility for introducing a controlled substance into a penal institution, conspiracy to introduce a controlled substance into a penal facility, possession of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver and possession of marijuana with the intent to sell or deliver. The appellant received an effective sentence of ten years on March 18, 2005. The appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on April 6, 2005. On July 1, 2005, trial counsel for the appellant filed a motion for new trial alleging that the evidence was insufficient, that the verdict was based on circumstantial evidence and that the appellant’s sentence was excessive.  The appellant subsequently filed a motion in this Court requesting dismissal of his appeal without prejudice due to the fact that the trial court had not yet ruled on the motion for new trial. This Court denied the motion. The appellant filed an amended pro se motion for new trial. The trial court held a hearing on the motion for new trial on September 14, 2005, at which time the appellant filed a third amended motion for new trial. The trial court denied relief, and the appellant filed a second notice of appeal on September 14, 2005. On appeal, the following issues are presented for our review: (1) whether the conspiracy charge should have been dismissed for failure to state a crime; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; and (3) whether the trial court committed plain error in failing to give an accomplice instruction to the jury. For the following reasons, we reverse and dismiss the conspiracy conviction, and affirm the conviction for introducing a controlled substance into a penal facility.