Please enter some keywords to search.
| Stuart Lowenkron vs. Laura Lowenkron
E2001-00957-COA-R3-CV
The spousal support obligation of the appellant was suspended during his disability, but was ordered to resume when he returned to the practice of medicine. He disfavors the requirement that he must resume alimony payments when he returns to employment. Judgment affirmed.
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Originating Judge:Thomas R. Frierson, II |
Hamblen County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Susan Whiton vs. Alan Whiton
E2003-01279-COA-RM-CV
Upon appeal to the Supreme Court, it reversed our determination that the guidelines promulgated with regard to child support were unconstitutional and remanded the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of the recently-released opinion in Gallaher v. Elam, S.W.3d 2003 WL 2010731 (Tenn. May 2, 2003).f
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Ben W. Hooper, II |
Sevier County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Dept.of Children's Svcs vs. LaShondra Whaley
E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV
This appeal from the Juvenile Court of Bradley County questions whether the Trial Court erred in terminating the parental rights of Ms. Whaley. We reverse the judgment of the Trial Court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:C. Van Deacon |
Bradley County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Bd. of Commissioners of Roane County vs. Joe Parker
E2001-00146-COA-R3-CV
The Plaintiffs acquired a nine-acre tract of land zoned A-1, the General Agricultural District, which was the least restrictive zoning district in Roane County, and soon announced their intention to house a tiger thereon, a permissible use, which motivated the County to amend its Regional Zoning Ordinance by creating a new zoning district, A-2, with the permissible use declared to be the keeping thereon of exotic animals. Within three years the Plaintiffs had fifty or more exotic [Class I] animals on their nine-acre tract. They acquired three additional tracts which they requested be rezoned A-2 in order to expand their exotic animal sanctuary. Rezoning was refused and the Plaintiffs filed suit alleging the refusal was arbitrary and capricious; the County filed suit, seeking to enjoin the Plaintiffs from keeping more than one exotic animal
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Originating Judge:Frank V. Williams, III |
Roane County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| State v. John R. Farner, Jr.
E1999-00491-SC-R11-CD
The primary issue presented in this appeal is whether Tennessee law recognizes a co-perpetrator rule which bars the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide on the basis that the victims were co-participants in the drag race. After fully and carefully considering the record in this case in light of the relevant authorities, we conclude that no rule of Tennessee law bars the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide as a matter of law. We hold that causation in criminal cases generally is a question of fact for a properly instructed jury, that a victim's contributory negligence is not a complete defense but may be considered in determining whether or not the defendant's conduct was a proximate cause of death, and that a jury's determination of the causation issue will be reviewed on appeal under the familiar sufficiency of the evidence standard and not disturbed so long as the evidence is sufficient to support the jury's determination. Because the trial court in this case failed to provide the jury with an instruction on proximate causation, an essential element of the offense, and because the jury was erroneously provided an instruction as to criminal responsibility, a theory that the State now concedes is inapplicable, the defendant's convictions for criminally negligent homicide must be reversed.
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Originating Judge:R. Jerry Beck |
Sullivan County | Supreme Court | 12/11/01 | |
| Daniel B. Taylor v. Donal Campbell
M2001-00479-COA-R3-CV
This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Department of Correction regarding the prisoner's sentence credits. After his request for a declaratory order was denied, the prisoner filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County against the Commissioner of Correction and others seeking a declaration that the Department had miscalculated his sentence and had erroneously refused to classify him as a Range I especially mitigated offender. The trial court granted the Department's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition. We concur with the trial court's conclusion that the Department is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law and, accordingly, affirm the summary judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| City of Knoxville vs. The Clinch Locust Garage
E2001-00297-COA-R3-CV
The Trial Court established the respective interests of owners and lessees in sums received in an Eminent Domain Case. On appeal, we affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Originating Judge:Dale C. Workman |
Knox County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| David Prater v. Mayfield Dairy Farms, Inc.
E2000-03030-WC-R3-CV
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6- 225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found the plaintiff 9 percent vocationally disabled. We affirm the judgment of the trial court but find the preponderance of the evidence indicates the plaintiff is entitled to a award of permanent total disability. We modify the judgment accordingly. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed as Modified JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., in which E. RILEY ANDERSON, J. and ROGER E. THAYER, SP. J., joined. Bert Bates, Cleveland, Tennessee for the appellant, David Prater. Kent T. Jones, Chattanooga, Tennessee for the appellee, Mayfield Dairy Farms, Inc. MEMORANDUM OPINION Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial court in workers' compensation cases. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). The plaintiff, age forty at the time of trial, is married with two minor children. He has a high school education and graduated from a two-year vocational program in auto mechanics. His work history consists of work in a service station, in a machine shop, as a local delivery truck driver and in a factory. The plaintiff began working for the defendant sometime in October of 1995. While employed with the defendant, the plaintiff also worked as a part-time police officer for the City of Niota and as a reserve officer for the McMinn County Sheriff's Department. On December 1, 1998, the plaintiff was nearing the end of his shift and was performing trash detail duties when he injured his back. The plaintiff was lifting 2 to 5 pounds of cardboard boxes at a time and placing them in a baler. He bent over to lift some boxes into the baler, experienced "excruciating pain" and blacked out. He was taken to the hospital by ambulance and kept overnight for treatment. An MRI revealed a ruptured disc, which was subsequently treated with surgery. After surgery, the plaintiff continued to experience disabling pain in his back and leg. Despite extensive treatment for his work-related injury, the plaintiff has not been able to return to work. A post-surgical MRI revealed inoperable scarring at the surgical site. A Functional Capacity Evaluation was performed on February 23, 1999; it showed the plaintiff capable of performing sedentary work. A later Functional Capacity Evaluation performed by the same examiner showed the plaintiff incapable of even sedentary work as defined by the United States Department of Labor. The trial court found the plaintiff suffered a work-related injury resulting in a medical impairment of 25 percent to the body as a whole and further found the plaintiff sustained a 9 percent permanent partial disability. We affirm the judgment of the trial court but find the preponderance of the evidence indicates the plaintiff is entitled to a award of permanent total disability. We modify the judgment accordingly. Medical Evidence Dr. Robert E. Finelli first saw the plaintiff on December 7, 1998, on referral from the physician who treated the plaintiff's work-related injury at the hospital. Dr. Finelli reviewed the plaintiff's MRI, which showed a very large extruded disc at the L-5, S-1 level on the left side. Dr. Finelli also noted the plaintiff had weakness and a positive straight leg raise. Surgery was recommended, and Dr. Finelli advised the plaintiff about the risk of pain syndrome as a post-surgical complication whenever weakness is present pre-operatively. On December 21, 1998, Dr. Finelli performed a laminectomy and removed a large free fragment of disc material that was compressing the nerve root on the plaintiff's left side. When the plaintiff's condition failed to improve after surgery, Dr. Finelli referred the plaintiff to a pain management specialist. Dr. Finelli referred the plaintiff for the February 23, 1999, Functional Capacity Evaluation, which showed the plaintiff capable of sedentary work; he then assigned the plaintiff a 12 percent whole body impairment rating. Dr. Finelli stated in his deposition testimony that he traditionally adopts the findings of the Functional Capacity Evaluation. Dr. Finelli last saw the plaintiff in March of 1999. He was no longer treating the plaintiff when the second Functional Capacity Evaluation, which showed the plaintiff incapable of even sedentary work, was performed. Dr. Finelli was made -2-
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Originating Judge:Jerri S. Bryant, Chancellor |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | 12/11/01 | |
| Stan Mosley vs. Carrie Mosley
E2001-01006-COA-R3-CV
In this divorce case, the husband appealed the classification and division of the parties' marital property and the basis for awarding child support. We affirm the Trial Court's Judgment, as modified.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Originating Judge:Jean A. Stanley |
Washington County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Jared M. Barnes
E2001-00325-CCA-R3-CD
The defendant, Jared M. Barnes, was convicted upon his guilty plea for vehicular homicide by recklessness, a Class C felony. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I, standard offender to five years, with ten months, day for day, to be served in the county jail and the remainder of the sentence to be served on probation. In addition, the trial court suspended the defendant's driving privileges for five years and ordered that he complete five hundred hours of community service. The defendant appeals his sentence, contending that the trial court erred in denying him judicial diversion or full probation. We affirm the trial court's denial of judicial diversion and full probation, but hold that the order that the defendant serve his ten-month incarceration day for day does not preclude use of applicable conduct credits.
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge:Judge Richard R. Vance |
Sevier County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Vandal Doss v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Ins. Co.
M2000-01971-COA-R3-CV
This is an appeal from the Judgment of the Chancellor for Sumner County, Tennessee, dismissing Vondal Doss's Complaint against Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, alleging breach of contract for failure to make payment for medical expenses pursuant to the medical payment coverage contained in two insurance policies and the Defendant's Counter-Complaint for subrogation. Doss had suffered a personal injury as a result of an auto accident which occurred on April 8, 1993 involving a third-party tort-feasor. Plaintiff/Appellant filed a Motion to Appeal on August 2, 2000. The Judgment of the Chancellor is affirmed on all counts. Doss's claim for additional post-settlement medical payments is denied as a result of the execution of the Release and Order of Compromise and Settlement which extinguished Tennessee Farmers' subrogation rights. Tennessee Farmers' claim for reimbursement is denied. Costs of this Appeal are assessed to the Appellant.
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Originating Judge:E. Gray |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Thomas Stubblefield vs. Monique Stubblefield
E2001-01433-COA-R3-CV
Husband appeals the Trial Court's allocation of the parties' marital estate in this divorce action. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Originating Judge:William R. Brewer |
Blount County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Janet Harper, et al. v. Keith Churn, et al.
M2000-02353-COA-R3-CV
This is a personal injury case arising from a vehicular collision. The plaintiffs, the Harpers, and the defendants, Mr. Churn and Mr. Beard, along with several others, were traveling together in a rented vehicle at the time of the collision. Mr. Churn was the driver of the vehicle; Mr. Beard was the pastor of the parties' church. At trial, the Harpers asserted that Mr. Churn was negligent in his operation of the vehicle. Additionally, the Harpers claimed that Mr. Beard was vicariously liable for their injuries, or in the alternative, that Mr. Beard was liable under the theory of negligent entrustment. The trial court granted Mr. Beard's motion for a directed verdict, and the jury found in favor of Mr. Churn. The Harpers appeal both decisions. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Originating Judge:Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| John Jaco v. Department of Health Bureau of Medicaid
01-A-01-9507-CH-00285
This appeal involved judicial review of an administrative decision regarding the denial of petitioner’s application for benefits for care at a nursing home facility. The chancellor granted the motion to dismiss of the Department of Health, Bureau of Medicaid (?respondents” or by name) on the ground that the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction due to the failure of petitioner1 to cause a summons to be properly issued and served on the Department within the sixty (60) day time limit specified in T.C.A. § 4-5-322(b)(1). The sole issue presented for review by this court is whether the chancellor erred in dismissing petitioner’s suit for judicial review for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We find no error and affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Hewitt P. Tomlin
Originating Judge:Chancellor Robert S. Brandt |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| William Patrick Varley, Jr., v. Pamela Dawn Varley
01A01-9511-CV-00498
This is a divorce action wherein the appellant, Pamela Dawn Varley (Wife), appeals from the final decree which awarded a divorce and sole custody of the parties’ three minor children to Appellee, William Patrick Varley, Jr. (Husband). The children are Bridget Marie, born December 14, 1988, William Patrick Varley, III, born January 23, 1991 and Sadie Ellen Varley, whose date of birth is June 30, 1992. The decree also fails to award Wife alimony.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Originating Judge:Judge Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Cheryl Ann Cupples, v. Luther Wayne Cupples
02A01-9408-CH-00193
This divorce action involves dissolution of the 25 year marriage between Appellant, Cheryl Ann Cupples ("Wife"), and Appellee, Luther Wayne Cupples ("Husband"). Wife filed for divorce in September 1992, citing irreconcilable differences and inappropriate marital conduct. Husband counterclaimed for divorce alleging inappropriate marital conduct. Both parties sought custody of their minor son, Jonathan, age 10 at the time of trial.1 On appeal, Wife cites as error the trial court's award of an absolute divorce and custody of the child to Husband, its failure to award her alimony and its division of the marital estate. For reasons hereinafter expressed, we affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Originating Judge:Chancellor Joe C. Morris |
Chester County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| American Child Care, Inc. v. Dept. of Human Services, et al.
M2000-01790-COA-R3-CV
This appeal arises from the trial court's denial of appellant American Child Care, Inc.'s, request for attorney's fees resulting from an administrative action in which appellant's license was suspended and later reinstated. The trial court later granted appellee summary judgment on all issues, including attorney's fees. We reverse the trial court's decision denying the appellant's application and remand to the trial court to set a reasonable fee for the appellant.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| State ex rel. Margaret Holtsinger vs. Jack Elrod
E2001-00257-COA-R3-CV
These parties were divorced in May 1996. Custody of their children was awarded to Wife. The oldest child, Catherine, DOB July 14, 1981, was mentally and physically afflicted. Support was awarded as the Guidelines direct. Father filed a petition to modify the judgment by eliminating the support requirement for Catherine, who reached her majority. The Chancellor held that the duty of support of the afflicted child was a continuing one. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Originating Judge:William E. Lantrip |
Anderson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Guy Wilson, et al. v. Thompson Const. Co., et al.
M2000-03200-COA-R3-CV
This is a suit by Guy Wilson and his wife Rhessa, owners of a building in Gallatin, Tennessee, against their general contractor in the construction of an addition to the building and against their electrical subcontractor. The complaint charges negligence in the use of a defective fiberglass ladder that broke as Guy Wilson was climbing on it to inspect the work. The trial court held that the general contractor, Thompson Construction Company, had breached no duty of care to Plaintiffs and that the electrical contractor, Gary R. Boyd, was an independent contractor for whose alleged negligence Thompson Construction Company was not vicariously liable. On such basis, the trial court granted summary judgment to Thompson Construction Company on all issues and, pursuant to Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 54.02, entered final judgment on all issues in favor of Thompson Construction Company. Plaintiffs appeal, and we affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Originating Judge:C. L. Rogers |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Charles Hardy, et al. v. Robert Miller, et al.
M1998-00940-COA-R3-CV
This appeal involves a dispute among members of a joint venture regarding their rights under suretyship agreements each member signed to guarantee a loan to the joint venture. After the joint venture defaulted, the bank looked to the members of the joint venture for payment of the debt. After three members of the joint venture paid the bank more than their prorated share of the debt, they filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County against a former member, seeking contribution for the amount they had paid in excess of their prorated share. The former member counterclaimed, seeking to recover the payments he had made to the bank on the joint venture's debt. Following a bench trial, the trial court concluded that the members were co-sureties, awarded the three members a $150,145.10 judgment against the former member, and denied the former member's counterclaim. The former member appealed, arguing that his former co-venturers lost their right to contribution when they expelled him from the joint venture and that he is entitled to be reimbursed for the payments he made to the bank on the joint venture's debt. We have determined that each member of the joint venture agreed to be severally liable to the bank for the joint venture's debt and, therefore, that the members were not entitled to contribution from the former member. We have also concluded that the trial court correctly dismissed the former member's counterclaim.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Carol L. Mccoy |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Boyd's Creek Enterprisesl vs. Sevier County
E2001-01975-COA-R3-CV
These beer permit cases were consolidated for trial, with a common issue: whether the proposed sale location was located within 2000 feet of a "public gathering place," and if so, whether the restriction was waived, owing to a discriminatory practice.
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Originating Judge:Telford E. Forgerty, Jr. |
Sevier County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| 2001-00729-COA-R3-CV
2001-00729-COA-R3-CV
Originating Judge:W. Dale Young |
Blount County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| In re: Estate of M.L. Wakefield, Deceased
M1998-00921-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Frank G. Clement, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| John Warfield, et ux vs. Carlos Lowe, et al
E2001-01042-COA-R3-CV
Plaintiff sought to establish insurance coverage for his injuries under his employer's policy. The Trial Judge declared no coverage. On appeal, we affirm.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Originating Judge:James B. Scott, Jr. |
Anderson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 | |
| Jo Anne Hofmeister v. John Hofmeister
M2000-00363-COA-R3-CV
A series of post-divorce petitions resulted in a hearing on July 22, 1999 in which no witnesses were called nor any sworn testimony offered. Based on the petitions, the answers, and the statements of counsel, the court modified the final decree of divorce with respect to the husband's obligations to pay the wife's medical insurance premiums, medical expenses, and life insurance premiums. The court also denied the wife's petition for post-judgment interest on a payment to the wife that had been ordered in the final decree. The wife appeals on the grounds that (1) there were no pleadings or proof justifying the amendments and (2) the court erred in not granting her petitions. We affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Marietta M. Shipley |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/10/01 |