Please enter some keywords to search.
| Lawrence Westfall vs. Brentwood Svc. Grp, Inc.
E2000-01086-COA-R3-CV
Lawrence O. Westfall filed suit against his former employer, Brentwood Service Group, Inc., seeking payment of post-employment commissions allegedly due him. The defendant counterclaimed for breach of a non-competition/non-disclosure agreement. Following a bench trial, the court below awarded post-employment commissions to the plaintiff and dismissed the defendant's counterclaim, finding that the parties had not agreed to the non-competition/non-disclosure agreement. The employer now appeals, claiming that the plaintiff is not entitled to post-employment commissions and that the trial court erred in failing to enforce the parties' alleged non-competition/non-disclosure agreement. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Originating Judge:Jerri S. Bryant |
Bradley County | Court of Appeals | 11/17/00 | |
| State vs. Timothy Walton
W1998-00329-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Originating Judge:R. Lee Moore Jr. |
Dyer County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| Mitchell Bingham vs. Tammy Bingham
E1999-01768-COA-R3-CV
In this post-divorce case, Mitchell Blain Bingham filed a petition seeking the custody of his minor child. The trial court, instead, awarded the child's custody to the child's paternal grandparents, who, prior to the trial court's order awarding them custody, were not parties to the action and had not previously petitioned for custody. Both of the child's parents appeal the award of custody to the paternal grandparents. We vacate the trial court's judgment and remand for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Originating Judge:Samuel H. Payne |
Hamilton County | Court of Appeals | 11/16/00 | |
| State vs. Timothy Walton
W1998-00329-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Originating Judge:R. Lee Moore Jr. |
Dyer County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| Don Culbreath vs. First Tennessee Bank
W1998-00426-SC-R11-CV
Don L. Culbreath (Culbreath) filed suit against Community First Bank (Community First) seeking compensatory and punitive damages. Culbreath alleged that Community First fraudulently refused to pay Culbreath the proceeds of a new $150,000 loan that had been agreed upon by a bank officer and Culbreath and for which Culbreath had signed a demand note and deed of trust. Instead, the bank used the deed of trust to serve as additional collateral for Culbreath's existing indebtedness to the bank. Prior to trial, Community First merged with First Tennessee Bank, N.A. (First Tennessee), and First Tennessee was substituted for Community First as the defendant in the case. The trial court found in favor of Culbreath and awarded $209,156 in compensatory damages. After a bifurcated hearing on the issue of punitive damages, the court awarded Culbreath an additional $9,000,000 in punitive damages. First Tennessee argues on appeal that as a successor corporation it should not be liable for punitive damages arising from Community First's actions. We hold that First Tennessee is liable for the compensatory damages awarded by the trial court and that it is also liable for punitive damages arising out of Community First's pre-merger conduct. However, we remand this case to the trial court for reassessment of punitive damages based upon the factors outlined in Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Co., 833 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. 1992).
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Originating Judge:Floyd Peete, Jr. |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| In the Matter of All Assessments, Review of Ad Valorum
M1998-00243-SC-R11-CV
This Court granted the applications for permission to appeal submitted on behalf of the Tennessee Board of Equalization and certain public utility companies. The purpose of our grant was to consider whether the Court of Appeals erred in determining that the Board of Equalization had exceeded its authority in granting a reduction in the assessed value of certain centrally-assessed public utility tangible personal property for tax year 1998. We hold that the Board of Equalization does have the legal authority, as part of the equalization process, to reduce the appraised value (and the assessed value) of centrally-assessed public utility property. Such a reduction is an appropriate remedy where the reduction causes the appraised value of such centrally-assessed personal property within each local tax jurisdiction to bear the same ratio to fair market value as obtains for the personal property within such local jurisdiction that is appraised and assessed by local taxing authorities. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and this case is remanded to the Tennessee Board of Equalization for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
|
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| Willie Jean Johnson vs. James Johnson
W1999-01232-SC-R11-CV
The parties' marital dissolution agreement ("MDA") divided Mr. Johnson's "military retirement benefits" to provide one half of those benefits to Ms. Johnson. After the final decree was entered, Mr. Johnson unilaterally waived a portion of his military retired pay to receive the same amount in non-taxable disability benefits. The payment of Ms. Johnson's share of the military retired pay was reduced accordingly. Ms. Johnson requested a modification of the MDA to provide for alimony in an amount equal to the reduction. Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals denied the requested relief, relying on Gilliland v. Stanley, No. 3258, 1997 WL 180587 (Tenn. Ct. App. April 16, 1997). We interpret the petition to modify as a petition to enforce the divorce decree. We hold that when an MDA divides military retirement benefits, the non-military spouse obtains a vested interest in his or her portion of those benefits as of the date of the court's decree. Any act of the military spouse that unilaterally decreases the non-military spouse's vested interest is an impermissible modification of a division of marital property and a violation of the final decree of divorce incorporating the MDA. The case is remanded to the trial court for enforcement of the decree.
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Originating Judge:Robert L. Childers |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| Memphis Housing Authority vs. Tara Thompson
W1998-00108-SC-R11-CV
The appellee, Memphis Housing Authority brought this unlawful detainer action seeking to evict the appellant, tenant Tara Thompson, after drugs were discovered on the father of her child while he was inside her apartment. The trial court granted summary judgment to the appellee, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that the lease agreement imposes strict liability upon the appellant for the drug-related criminal activity of her "guests and other persons under her control." We granted permission to appeal to consider the appropriate standard that applies when a public housing authority seeks to evict a tenant for drug-related criminal activity. This is an issue of first impression in Tennessee. After due consideration, we hold that the lease agreement imposes strict liability for drug-related criminal activity engaged in by the tenant or any household member but permits eviction for the drug related criminal activity of "guests and other persons under [the tenant's] control"only if the tenant knew or should have known of the drug-related criminal activity and failed to take reasonable steps to halt or prevent the illegal activity. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court for reconsideration of the appellee's motion for summary judgment under the legal standard announced herein.
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Originating Judge:Robert A. Lanier |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| 00243-SC-R11-CV
00243-SC-R11-CV
|
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| State vs. Derrick Sayles
W1998-00425-SC-R11-CD
Shelby County -Derrick Sayles was convicted of second degree murder. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction and remanded the cause for a new trial on the ground that the trial court had erred in refusing to allow Sayles's counsel to probe the circumstances surrounding the bond reduction and the charge reduction accorded to the State's principal witness immediately after his testimony. The State appealed. We hold that the trial court erred when it refused to allow Sayles's counsel to probe the circumstances surrounding benefits granted to the witness after his testimony; Sayles's right to confrontation was therefore violated. We cannot hold that this violation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. This cause is therefore remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing to allow Sayles's counsel to probe the circumstances resulting in the bond reduction and the charge reduction, both of which were granted after the witness had testified. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part and this cause is remanded to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing.
Authoring Judge: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Arthur T. Bennett |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/16/00 | |
| State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden
M2000-00988-CCA-R3-CD
The Appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, was convicted by a Robertson County jury of burglary, theft of property over $1,000, and criminal impersonation. He received concurrent sentences of twelve years for burglary, twelve years for theft of property, and six months for criminal impersonation. On appeal, the Appellant raises the following three issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred in not excusing two jurors for cause during voir dire; and (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the statement of the Appellant's confession into evidence. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Robert W. Wedemeyer |
Robertson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Scarborough
M2000-01359-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Timothy L. Easter |
Hickman County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| Mahan vs. Mahan
M1999-01366-COA-R3-CV
In this divorce case, the husband appeals the award of custody of the children to the wife, the admission of certain evidence at trial, and the redistribution of marital property on a post-judgment motion following his bankruptcy. We affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Carol A. Catalano |
Montgomery County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Curtis Emery Duke
M2000-00350-CCA-R3-CD
The appellant, Curtis Emery Duke, was convicted in the Marshall County Circuit Court of two counts of the sale of crack cocaine, one count of possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell, two counts of criminal impersonation, and one count of failure to appear. The trial court sentenced the appellant to a total effective sentence of thirty-nine years. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain the appellant's convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; and (3) whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:William Charles Lee |
Marshall County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Clyde Smith
M2002-2138-CCA-R3-CD
Originating Judge:John H. Gasaway, III |
Robertson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennesse v. Michael Herndon
M2000-01080-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:John H. Gasaway, III |
Montgomery County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Timothy Tyrone Sanders
M2000-00603-CCA-R3-CD
The Appellant, Timothy Tyrone Sanders, was convicted by a Bedford County jury of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell. The Appellant was sentenced to seventeen years six months as a range II offender. On appeal, he raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; and (3) whether the trial court improperly sentenced the Appellant. After review, we conclude that the trial court erred in not instructing the jury on simple possession. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:William Charles Lee |
Bedford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| D&E Construction Co. vs. Robert J. Denley Co.
W1998-00445-SC-R11-CV
The contractor submitted to arbitration a contractual payment dispute with the project owner arising from a contract to build a subdivision in Collierville. The arbitrators found in favor of the contractor and included an award of attorney's fees. The trial court determined that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority in awarding attorney's fees and vacated the arbitration award. The Court of Appeals reversed, reinstating the entire award. We hold that when the arbitrators awarded attorney's fees, they exceeded their authority by awarding upon a matter not within the scope of the contract's arbitration provision. Therefore, we reverse in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals and vacate the award of attorney's fees.
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Originating Judge:Walter L. Evans |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| Archie Lee Roberts vs. State
M1999-02462-CCA-R3-PC
The petitioner, Archie Lee Roberts, was found guilty by a jury in the DeKalb County Criminal Court of one count of first degree murder, for which he received a life sentence, and one count of attempted first degree murder, for which he received a sentence of twenty years incarceration. On direct appeal, we affirmed the petitioner's convictions. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, which petition was denied by the post-conviction court. On appeal, the petitioner raises the following issue for our review: whether the post-conviction court erred in denying his claim for relief. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:Leon C. Burns, Jr. |
DeKalb County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout
M1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. James P. Stout
W1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Antonio Kendrick
W1997-00157-SC-R11-CD
We granted this appeal to determine whether the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense of aggravated rape upon which it sought to convict the defendant constituted plain error and required a new trial. The main purpose of the election requirement is to preserve a defendant's right to a unanimous jury verdict under the Tennessee Constitution. A majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the defendant's conviction for one count of aggravated rape without examining the election issue. After reviewing the record and controlling authority, we conclude that the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense upon which it sought to convict the defendant failed to preserve the defendant's rights under the Tennessee Constitution and constituted plain error. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Originating Judge:Arthur T. Bennett |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| Heatherly vs. Merrimack Mutual Fire Ins. Co.
M1998-00906-COA-R10-CV
This extraordinary appeal involves a dispute between two homeowners whose house was damaged by fire and the two insurance adjusting companies hired by the homeowners' insurance carrier to investigate their claim. Believing that their claim had been fraudulently processed, the homeowners filed suit in the Circuit Court for Sumner County against their insurance carrier and the two adjusting companies. The three defendants moved to dismiss the complaint as to the adjusting companies. After the trial court denied the motions and declined to grant an interlocutory appeal, the two adjusting companies petitioned for a Tenn. R. App. P. 10 extraordinary appeal. We granted the application and now reverse the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss because the homeowners have conceded that they have no breach of contract claim against the adjusting companies and because we have concluded that the homeowners' claims are barred by the statute of limitations.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Thomas Goodall |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Vincent Sims
W1998-00634-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| Clifton vs. Acosta-Delgado
M2000-00253-COA-R3-CV
This is a post-divorce child custody dispute. The mother filed a petition to regain custody of the parties' three children after she had entered into an agreed order in 1995 granting custody to the defendant father. After hearing testimony on, inter alia, the father driving while intoxicated with the children in the car with him, the trial court found a material change in circumstances, granted custody to the mother, and ordered the father to pay child support. The father appeals, arguing that there was not a material change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a change in custody, that the trial court inappropriately considered his child support arrearage prior to the 1995 agreed order, and that the trial court miscalculated his income, resulting in an unreasonably high child support award. We affirm, finding a material change in circumstances warranting a change in custody, and finding that the evidence does not preponderate against the award of child support.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 |