Boiler Supply Company, Inc., v. Lunn Real Estate Investments
01A01-9605-CH-00246
This appeal involves a dispute over the interpretation of a provision allocating the responsibility for paying legal expenses in the event of a default or breach of two leases. The lessee filed suit against the lessor in the Chancery Court for Davidson County seeking a declaration that the leases had expired and requesting its attorney’s fees in accordance with the provisions of the lease agreements. The trial court granted the lessee’s motion for summary judgment and declared that the leases had expired but denied the lessee’s claim for legal expenses. The lessee has appealed. We have determined that the trial court correctly interpreted the lease agreements and, therefore, affirm the summary judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
W. Hudson Connery, Jr., et al., v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation, et al.
01A01-9709-CH-00529
Authoring Judge: Justice William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 07/01/98 | |
Razorback Marble Mfg. Co., Inc., v. D.D. Roberts Construction Company, Naran P. Patel, Kusum N. Patel, and Heritage Bank
01A01-9709-CH-00512
In this construction contract dispute, the Chancery Court of Montgomery County granted a judgment plus prejudgment interest to Razorback Marble Manufacturing Company, Inc. On appeal, Roberts Construction Company, Inc. and D. D. Roberts, Individually, raise issues pertaining to the Contractor’s Licensing statutes and the Notice of Non-Payments statute. Razorback insists that it was due a larger judgment and a greater award of prejudgment interest.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Chancellor Alex W. Darnell |
Montgomery County | Court of Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
Thomas Huggins v. Royal Insurance Company
01S01-9708-CH-00178
Authoring Judge: William S. Russell, Retired Judge
Originating Judge:William S. Russell |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/01/98 | |
W. Huson Connery, Jr., et al. vs. Columbia/HCA Helathcare Corporation, et al. - Concurring
01A01-9709-CH-00529
Twenty former employees of “HealthTrust,” a ____________ sued HealthTrust and its “successor in interest,” Columbia Health Care Corporation, to recover share of stock (or the value thereof) which they had purchased with earned bonuses and for the value of shares of stock due some of the plaintiffs due them upon discharge. Two of the plaintiffs nonsuited, leaving eighteen.
Authoring Judge: Judge Henry F. Todd
Originating Judge:Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 07/01/98 | |
State of Tennessee vs. Edward Shane Rust
01C01-9707-CC-00258
The appellant, Edward Shane Rust, was indicted by a Coffee County Grand Jury for the offenses of arson of personal property and reckless endangerment. Following a jury trial, the appellant was found guilty of arson of personal property, a class E felony, and received a two year sentence in the Department of Correction. The appellant was found not guilty of reckless endangerment. In this appeal as of right, the appellant contends:
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Judge John W. Rollins |
Coffee County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
State of Tennessee vs. Ronnie L. Ingram
02C01-9707-CR-00260
The defendant was indicted, charged, and convicted of burglary and sentenced as a career offender to twelve years imprisonment. In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for burglary since the State failed to prove intent to commit theft. Finding no merit in the defendant’s argument, we affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge John H. Peay
Originating Judge:Judge Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
W. Hudson Connery, Jr., et al. v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation, et al., - Concurring
01-A-01-9709-CH-00529
I concur in Judge Todd’s opinion affirming the grant of summary judgment to the defendants. I write separately simply to emphasize the following points: First, the bonus plan allowed the plaintiffs to purchase shares of the company at a price below the market price. When the plaintiffs left the company before the shares fully vested, they did not forfeit their investment; they simply lost the difference between what they had invested and the market value of the shares. The difference in the purchase price and the market value is what this controversy is about.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
|
Court of Appeals | 07/01/98 | ||
Martha M. Eden v. Employers Ins. of Wasau Mutual Co., et al .
01S01-9710-CV-00210
Authoring Judge: William S. Russell, Retired Judge
Originating Judge:William S. Russell |
Trousdale County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/01/98 | |
W. Hudson Connery, Jr. et al., v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corporation, et al.
01A01-9709-CH-00529
Twenty former employees of “HealthTrust,” a ____________ sued HealthTrust and its “successor in interest,” Columbia Health Care Corporation, to recover share of stock (or the value thereof) which they had purchased with earned bonuses and for the value of shares of stock due some of the plaintiffs due them upon discharge. Two of the plaintiffs nonsuited, leaving eighteen.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Originating Judge:Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
Gretchen Hart, v. Ronald Rick Hart
01A01-9707-CV-00344
This is a post-divorce decree proceeding to adjust the amount of periodic alimony. The wife has appealed from the judgment of the Trial Court increasing the alimony from $1,000 per month to $1,350 per month.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Originating Judge:Judge Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 07/01/98 | |
Shelley Sackett v. Hal Roseman
M2002-00587-COA-R9-CV
This interlocutory appeal was brought to determine whether the trial court properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Joint Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Originating Judge:Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
State vs. Elroy Kahanek
01C01-9707-CC-00298
Originating Judge:Donald P. Harris |
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
State vs. Tanner
03C01-9703-CR-00101
|
Sullivan County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
State vs. Kestner
03C01-9611-CR-00390
|
Washington County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
State vs. Dominic Amari
01C01-9703-CR-00077
|
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
Henry Collier vs. Methodist Hosp., et al
02A01-9607-CV-00165
Originating Judge:Dick Jerman, Jr. |
Haywood County | Court of Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
Guadalupe Mendez vs. State
01C01-9703-CC-00076
Originating Judge:James E. Walton |
Montgomery County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
01C01-9702-CR-
01C01-9702-CR-
|
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
02A01-9707-CH-00157
02A01-9707-CH-00157
Originating Judge:W. Michael Maloan |
Obion County | Court of Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
Bradson Mercantile vs. Joseph Crabtree
02A01-9710-CV-00272
|
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 06/30/98 | |
Dianna Skelton v. Robert Shaw Controls
01S01-9710-CC-00229
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court awarded Dianna Skelton ["employee"] workers' compensation benefits based on one-hundred percent permanent, total disability. Robertshaw Controls Company ["employer"] appeals, challenging the extent of employee's disability, the admissibility of the opinion of a clinical psychologist as to permanency of employee's disability, and the failure of the trial court to apply the multiplier caps set forth in T.C.A. _ 5-6-241(a)(1). For the reasons herein stated, we modify the award to find 6 percent permanent vocational disability and, as modified, affirm the judgment of the trial court. I Mrs. Skelton had been employed as a factory laborer at Robertshaw for six years when, on September 4, 1992, she sustained a work-related injury to her lower back while lifting parts weighing about 3 pounds and placing them in an overhead bin. She timely reported the injury to Robertshaw and saw Dr. Bowden Smith, an approved physician, for treatment. Dr. Smith gave her epidural steroid blocks and heat treatments and took her off work for 2-1/2 weeks, then ordered lighter work in the Transition Room from September 22, 1992 until October 6, 1992, when she was released to return to full work. She continued to experience back pain, complained to Robertshaw, and then saw another approved physician, Dr. Larry Laughlin, who ordered X-rays and prescribed physical therapy. She continued to complain of pain. On November 2, 1992, she saw Dr. Robert Weiss, neurosurgeon, also an approved 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. J. O. Bond, |
Smith County | Workers Compensation Panel | 06/29/98 | |
James Ed Linkous, Jr. v. Federated Rural Electric
01S01-9709-CH-00191
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appellant, Reliance Insurance Company, insists (1) the chancellor erred in applying the successive or "last injurious injury" rule and (2) the award of permanent partial disability benefits is excessive. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. The employee or claimant, Linkous, is in his late thirties with a high school education, a few junior college courses, apprenticeship training as a journeyman lineman and twenty years' experience as a lineman. On September 13, 1993, he fell from a bucket truck and was injured. After conservative treatment and work hardening, he returned to work in April of 1994 with no permanent medical impairment or restrictions. He performed the same duties as before the accident, until July of 1994, when he suffered a second injury at work. The second injury was surgically treated and the claimant has again returned to his same duties, but with restrictions and a permanent impairment rating. The primary dispute before the trial court was whether disability and medical benefits should be the responsibility of the insurer at the time of the first or second injury, a factual dispute. The trial judge invoked the successive injury rule, long recognized in Tennessee, and sometimes referred to as the last injurious injury rule. Because both issues involve questions of fact, our review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3). Where the trial judge has seen and heard the witnesses, especially if issues of credibility and weight to be given oral testimony are involved, considerable deference must be accorded those circumstances on review. Humphrey v. David Witherspoon, Inc., 734 S.W.2d 315 (Tenn. 1987). As to the first issue, Reliance Insurance Company, the insurer in July of 1994 argues that it should not be subjected to liability because the July 1994 injury was merely an onset of increased pain resulting from the first injury, citing Cunningham v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 811 S.W.2d 888 (Tenn. 1991) as authority. In that case, the trial court found that plaintiff's condition was due to a general arthritic condition predating his employment at Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company and that, although his employment may have aggravated his preexisting condition by increasing his pain, there was no connecting industrial injury or accident that might be considered the triggering incident producing an acceleration of his condition. That finding was supported by expert medical evidence. The medical proof in the present case is quite different. The doctor who 2
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart, |
Marion County | Workers Compensation Panel | 06/29/98 | |
Sammy Moore v. A. O. Smith
02S01-9709-CH-00082
Authoring Judge: J. Steven Stafford, Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. George R. Ellis, |
Moore County | Workers Compensation Panel | 06/29/98 | |
Victor A. Wynn v. Perma-Fix and The Travelers Insurance Company
02S01-9711-CV-00099
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. 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 a workers' compensation case. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). The trial court found the plaintiff suffered from a heart attack and resulting disablement which arose out of and in the course and scope of his employment with the defendant. Further, the trial court found the plaintiff was totally and permanently disabled as a result of this work injury. The defendants appeal and present the following issue: "I. The issue for determination of this Court is whether or not the evidence in this cause preponderates against the findings of the trial court that Plaintiff sustained an injury arising out of and in the course and scope of his employment resulting in a permanent and total disability." The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. The evidence in this case was presented by the plaintiff, who testified in person, and three other witnesses who testified likewise. These other witnesses were the plaintiff's wife and Pat Townsend and Claude Hunt, both co-workers who testified that the plaintiff suffered pain in his chest on September 2, 1994 while at work. The plaintiff also presented the depositions of Dr. Bennett Rudorfer and Dr. Grady L. Saxton. The defendant's proof consisted of the deposition of Patricio A. Ilabaca and the testimony of Tammy Boggs, whose official capacity with the defendant is not shown. Boggs introduced a packet of medical records from the plaintiff's personnel 2
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. John R. Mccarroll, |
Shelby County | Workers Compensation Panel | 06/29/98 |