State vs. Jessie Bishop
02C01-9609-CR-00301
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

State vs. Whitmore
03C01-9404-CR-00141
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

State vs. Joseph Alley
02C01-9405-CC-00100
Trial Court Judge: David G. Hayes

State vs. Charles Smith
02C01-9708-CC-00311

The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.
01A01-9612-CH-00571
Trial Court Judge: Tom E. Gray

The City of White House vs. Whitley, et. al.
01A01-9612-CH-00571

State vs. David L. Hathaway
01C01-9703-CR-00094

Hunter vs. Anderson
01A01-9701-CV-00024
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

Ruff vs. Traughber
01A01-9702-CH-00074
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

Tomlinson vs. Traughber
01A01-9703-CH-00143
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Flowers vs. Metro Baptist Schools
01A01-9705-CH-00219
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

State vs. Edison
03C01-9605-CC-00199
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II

Harrill vs. State
03C01-9605-CC-00185
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

State vs. Lane
03C01-9607-CC-00259
Trial Court Judge: R. Steven Bebb

Gates, Duncan & Vancamp Co., et al vs. Richard Levantino
02A01-9605-CH-00095

Marles Flowers vs. Memphis Housing Authority
02A01-9610-CV-00240
Trial Court Judge: Wyeth Chandler

State vs. Joseph Rhinerson
02C01-9608-CC-00265
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn

State vs. Ealey
03C01-9609-CR-00333

David Hickman v. Continental Baking Company
W1999-00520-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Don R. Ash, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr., Chancellor
The trial court did not issue a final order in this case. We therefore remand with instructions for further proceedings and a final judgment.

Susan Turner v. Jeffrey Purvis
M2002-00023-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Michael R. Jones
Mother appeals from a trial court modification of the custody and visitation arrangement which had been in place since the divorce in 1997. The previous arrangement gave Mother primary residential custody, and Father was to have liberal visitation as agreed upon by the parties. After declining to adopt the parenting plan submitted by either Mother or Father, the trial court devised a plan establishing a specific residential schedule. Mother argues that there was not a material change of circumstances that warranted the trial court's decision. Because we determine that a material change in circumstances occurred and because the modification of the custody arrangement was in the best interests of the children, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

03C01-9605-CC-00194
03C01-9605-CC-00194

03C01-9610-CR-00358
03C01-9610-CR-00358

03C01-9612-CR-00459
03C01-9612-CR-00459

03C01-9609-CC-00345
03C01-9609-CC-00345

03C01-9607-CR-00274
03C01-9607-CR-00274