State of Tennessee vs. Roy D. Nelson, Jr.
The defendant, Roy D. Nelson, stands convicted of burglary, aggravated burglary, aggravated arson and possession of marijuana as a result of his efforts to blow up his ex-wife's home. Nelson received his convictions at the conclusion of a jury trial in the Washington County Criminal Court. A Range III offender, Nelson is presently serving an effective 62-year sentence in the Department of Correction for his crimes.1 In this direct appeal, Nelson claims he was improperly convicted of aggravated arson because he, rather than another person, suffered the serious bodily injury relied upon to elevate the offense from arson to aggravated arson. Having reviewed the appellate record, the arguments of the parties and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Washington | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Roy D. Nelson, Jr.
The defendant, Roy D. Nelson, stands convicted of burglary, aggravated burglary, aggravated arson and possession of marijuana as a result of his efforts to blow up his ex-wife's home. Nelson received his convictions at the conclusion of a jury trial in the Washington County Criminal Court. A Range III offender, Nelson is presently serving an effective 62-year sentence in the Department of Correction for his crimes. In this direct appeal, Nelson claims he was improperly convicted of aggravated arson because he, rather than another person, suffered the serious bodily injury relied upon to elevate the offense from arson to aggravated arson. Having reviewed the appellate record, the arguments of the parties and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Washington | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Peggy Wilson v. United Parcel Service, Inc. Ohio, et al
|
Wilson | Workers Compensation Panel | |
William H. Lance, Emma Lee Lance v. Larry H. Street, D/B/A Street Construction
|
Cheatham | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee, ex rel., Doug Sizemore, Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance for the State of Tennessee, v. United Physicians Insurance Risk Retention Group - Concurring
I concur with the court’s opinion. Insurance companies have the right to assume that the risk they undertake will not later be enlarged by the courts. See Schultz v. Tennessee Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 218 Tenn. 465, 474, 404 S.W.2d 480, 484 (1966). Accordingly, the courts are not at liberty to rewrite policies of insurance to provide coverage where no coverage was intended. See Spears v. Commercial Ins. Co., 866 S.W.2d 544, 548(Tenn. Ct. App. 1993). Dr. Johnson did not contract for prior acts coverage when he purchased his UPI insurance policy. Accordingly, UPI never provided coverage for claims such as Blendora Ann Echols. |
Court of Appeals | ||
Robert S. Lipman v. First National Bank of Boston, and Alexander H. McNeil, J. Virginia McNeil, R. & J. Knoxville - Concurring
The trial court granted the motion of defendant First National Bank of Boston (“First National”) for summary judgment, which the plaintiff (“Lipman”] appeals, insisting that there are genuine issues of material fact. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Glenda Wright Benning v. James Russell Benning
In this divorce case, Glenda Benning (wife) challenges the trial court's award of permanent alimony to James Benning (husband). After the file filed for divorce and the parties separated, the hisband moved into the same apartment with one Jaylene Deen. On appeal, the wife argues that the tril court erred in finding that the statutory presumption fond at T.C .A . § 36 - 5 - 10 1 ( a ) ( 3 ) had been rebutted by the evidence presented by the husband. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
James Prince, D/B/A/ Big Jim, Inc., v. Charles Campbell, Individually and D/B/A Limosines by K.C.
This appeal involves a motion to set aside a judgment. Defendant/cross-plaintiff,Charles Campbell (Campbell), appeals the judgment of the trial court awarding money damages to The day of trial, Prince filed a motion to amend the complaint to reduce the amount requested as damages from $97,000 to $77,000. There is no record as to the trial court’s action plaintiff/cross-defendant, James Prince (Prince). This case arose from a contract entered into between the parties in April 1995 in which Campbell agreed to transfer a limousine from his business to Prince in exchange for the opportunity to run Prince’s “World Famous Stagecoach Lounge.” Prince filed suit against Campbell for breach of contract and fraud in August 1995 alleging that Campbell failed to make lease payments on the property and refused to transfer the limousine agreed upon in the contract. Campbell’s answer denied the material allegations and asserted a counterclaim for conversion, fraud, and breach of contract. |
Marshall | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee, Department of Childrens Services v. Tamra Leann Viar and John Fitzgeral Gross, In the Matter of Katlyn Nicole Viar
We have reviewed the Petition to Rehear filed on behalf of the Attorney General and conclude that the Petition should be denied for the following reasons. |
Cannon | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee, Commissioner Doug Sizemore, Commerce and Insurance v. United Physicians Insurance, Risk Retention Group State ex rel Doug Sizemore vs. United Physicians Ins.
This is an appeal from a memorandum and order of the chancellor affirming and adopting the Special Master's report pursuant to Rule 53 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. The issue is whether the lower court erred in this action. Our review is de novo upon the record accompanied by a presumption of correctness as to the findings of fact by the chancellor. Tenn.R.App.P.13(d). |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Gary June Caughron v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Gary June Caughron, appeals as of right from the Sevier County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief as to the guilt phase of his trial. He was convicted in 1990 for the first degree murder of Ann Robertson Jones and received the death penalty. He was also convicted of first degree burglary and assault with the intent to commit rape for which he received consecutive ten-year sentences. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. State v. Caughron, 855 S.W.2d 526 (Tenn. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 979, 114 S. Ct. 475 (1993). |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Melissa (Buckley) Hatchell, v. Jerry Buckley
These parties were divorced in Arkansas on April 17, 1996. A Property Settlement Agreement was incorporated in the judgment which awarded custody of two children to Mother. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Larry Aubrey Henson v. Elizabeth Ellen Sorrell
The child of these parties, who were never married to each other, was born March 11, 1996. The paternity issue was determined in June, 1996 by the Juvenile Court, which also directed the payment of child support. The appellant questioned his liability for support because the child was conceived without his consent. He did not prevail. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Chris Hill Construction Company, v. State of Tennessee
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Rayford Martin vs. State of Tennessee
This is an appeal as of right from the trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief from convictions based upon guilty pleas. The Defendant entered guilty pleas, with sentencing left to the discretion of the trial judge, to two counts of aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated rape, and four counts of armed robbery. At the sentencing hearing conducted on April 3, 1989, he received a total effective sentence of 150 years. This Court affirmed his sentences on direct appeal.1 The Defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief in December of 1991; and following appointment of counsel, he filed a supplemental petition in June of 1997. The trial court conducted a hearing and denied the petition in July of 1997. The Defendant now appeals the trial court’s ruling. We affirm, but we grant D efendant relie f in the form of a delayed appeal. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Linda Chaney v. Robert Dickinson
Robert Lee Dickinson, Jr., appeals the ruling of the Juvenile Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee at Chattanooga, insisting that the Juvenile Court erred in its determination of Mr. Dickinson’s Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 60.02 motion for relief from child support payments based upon evidence that he is not the father of the child he has been supporting. The Juvenile Court ruled that Mr. Dickinson’s motion was barred by res judicata; therefore, Mr. Dickinson is still obligated to pay current and past due child support payments. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Antonio Sweatt v. Billy Compton, et al.
This is a medical malpractice case brought by an inmate at a state correctional facility. The |
Lake | Court of Appeals | |
Todd Frederick Brooks v. Linda Faye Carter
Defendant Todd Frederick Brooks (Father) appeals, and Plaintiff Linda Faye Carter (Mother) cross-appeals, the final divorce decree entered by the trial court which awarded the parties joint custody of their three minor children, designated the Father as the primary custodial parent, ordered the Father to pay child support to the Mother, and distributed the parties’ property. We affirm the trial court’s distribution of the marital property, with one modification, but we reverse the court’s custody decision and we remand for the court to recalculate the Father’s child support obligation pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines. |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Timmy Beavers
Following the denial of his mo tion to suppress evidence, the Defendant, Timmy Beavers, entered a best-interest plea to second degree murder, reserving the right to appeal the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress certain evidence. An agreed upon sentence of thirty (30) years was entered by the trial court. |
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Preston Carter - Concurring
In this capital case, the defendant, Preston Carter, pled guilty and was convicted on two counts of felony murder. A jury sentenced him to death on both counts, finding that the murders of Thomas and Tensia Jackson were especially heinous, atrocious, and cruel. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-2-203(i)(5). The jury imposed sentences of death based upon the presence of this sole aggravating circumstance. |
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
Edmund George Zagorski v. State of Tennessee
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING |
Robertson | Supreme Court | |
State of Tennessee v. Gerald Robert Stevens, Laurie Ann Williams, and James Darren Brothers Stevens, et al.
We granted this appeal to determine whether a conclusory allegation in an affidavit that information was provided by a “concerned citizen source” is sufficient to establish the presumptive reliability of the information for the issuance of a search warrant under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 7 of the Tennessee Constitution.1 There is a distinction in Tennessee law between “citizen informants” and “criminal informants” or those from the criminal milieu. Information provided by an unnamed ordinary citizen is presumed to be reliable, and the affidavit need not establish that the source is credible or that the information is reliable. State v. Melson, 638 S.W.2d 342, 354 (Tenn. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1137, 103 S. Ct. 770, 74 L. Ed. 2d 983 (1983). On the other hand, where information is provided by an anonymous criminal informant, the affidavit must establish (1) the basis of the informant’s knowledge, and (2) the reliability of the informant or the information. State v. Jacumin, 778 S.W.2d 430 (Tenn. 1989). |
Henry | Supreme Court | |
Curtis G. Mayes v. Margaret C. Culpepper, Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
This is an appeal from the denial of unemployment compensation benefits. Through the entire procedure, including an appeal to the Chancery Court for Knox County, the appellant has been denied unemployment compensation benefits because he had been guilty of misconduct arising out of the scope and course of him employment and T.C.A . § 50 -7-303( a ) ( 2 ) bars him from recovery of unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse the judgment of the Chancery Court and remand this case to the trial court for entry of an order awarding unemployment benefits as provided by law.
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Paula Lynn Barnett vs. Robert McAlister Barnett, III - Concurring
This is a post-divorce action to modify child support and alimony. The mother sought to increase child support, and the father sought to terminate periodic alimony payments. The trial court granted the mother’s request for an increase in child support, with a portion of the child support to be placed in an educational trust, and denied the father’s petition for modification of alimony. Both parties appealed. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and modify. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Margaret McCormick, v. Donald McCormick
This case concerns a dispute over the division of marital property, alimony, and attorney’s fees. Appellant, Donald F. McCormick (Husband), appeals from the Final Decree of Divorce that, inter alia, awarded Appellee, Margaret Ann McCormick (Wife), proceeds from a 1 Husband’s W-2 form from the Frigidaire Company reveals that his wages for 1996 were $94,063.26. 2 In 1996, Wife’s gross annual earnings were approximately $9,000.00. 2 401K account, rehabilitative alimony, and attorney’s fees. |
Sumner | Court of Appeals |