Please enter some keywords to search.
| Roger Thomas v. Gail Thomas
M2001-01226-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton |
Giles County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Regina Ann Thompson v. Vivra Renal Care, Inc.
W2000-03017-WC-R3-CV
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. Although the only issue at trial was the extent of the employee's permanent disability, the employer contends in this appeal the evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings as to causation and permanency. The panel has agreed to address the issues on appeal and, as discussed below, concluded the judgment should be affirmed. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (2) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and ROBERT L. CHILDERS, SP. J., joined. John D. Burleson and V. Latosha Mason, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Vivra Renal Care, Inc. Mary Dee Allen, Cookeville, Tennessee, and George L. Morrison, III, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellee, Regina Ann Thompson MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Regina Ann Thompson, is a licensed practical nurse. She began working for the employer, Vivra Renal Care around September 1995 in its dialysis clinic. She is also trained in the care of HIV positive and hepatitis patients. Approximately two years after beginning work for the employer, she was required to perform a treatment on an HIV positive, hepatitis infected patient. She followed the usual precautions of donning two pairs of gloves, two pairs of shoes, a coat and a cap, then began the treatment in a room secluded from other patients. After she removed the needle from the patient, the patient made an unexpected move and the claimant accidentally stuck herself in the thumb with the dirty needle. Although tests conducted soon after the accident reflected no evidence of infection, she received a notice from the Obion County Health Department that a letter from the Shelby County Health Department indicated that she was HIV positive. She later learned that the letter was intended for someone else with the same or similar name and that she was not infected. The tests had been conducted in Shelby County. She was given literature to read and advised of organizations available to her as her disease progressed. She became anxious about her condition and her family and other personal relationships suffered. Her attorney referred the claimant to Dr. Elias King Bond, a psychiatrist, who established both medical causation and permanency. The record contains no countervailing medical or lay proof. At the time of the trial the claimant was taking prescription antidepressant medication. She is now working for a different employer but becomes squeamish at the sight of blood and in the use of needles. The trial court awarded, inter alia, permanent partial disability benefits based on 15 percent to the body as a whole. Appellate 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. _ 5-6-225 (e)(2). This tribunal is not bound by the trial court's findings but instead conducts an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance lies. Galloway v. Memphis Drum Serv., 822 S.W.2d 584, 586 (Tenn. 1991). 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, because it is the trial court which had the opportunity to observe the witnesses' demeanor and to hear the in-court testimony. Long v. Tri-Con Ind., Ltd., 996 S.W.2d 173, 178 (Tenn. 1999). The appellate tribunal, however, is as well situated to gauge the weight, worth and significance of deposition testimony as the trial judge. Walker v. Saturn Corp., 986 S.W.2d 24, 27 (Tenn. 1998). The extent of an injured worker's vocational disability is a question of fact. Story v. Legion Ins. Co., 3 S.W.3d 45, 456 (Tenn. 1999). The employer argues that the mental injuries are compensable only if they can be traced to an identifiable, stressful, work-related event producing a sudden mental stimulus such as fright, shock or excessive unexpected anxiety, citing Batson v. Cigna Property and Cas. Co., 874 S.W.2d 566, 569 (Tenn. 1994). However, mental and nervous illnesses are also compensable when causally connected to a work-related accident. Gentry v. Dupont, 733 S.W.2d 71, 73 (Tenn. 1987). The employer argues that Dr. Bond's report does not establish permanency. From our independent examination of Dr. Bond's report, we disagree. For the above reasons and because the evidence fails to preponderate against the findings of the trial court, the judgment is affirmed. Costs are taxed to the appellant. -2-
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Originating Judge:William Michael Maloan, Chancellor |
Obion County | Workers Compensation Panel | 12/11/01 | |
| 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 | |
| Billy Lattimer v. Dept of Correction
M2000-03126-COA-R3-CV
A prisoner filed a lawsuit against the Department of Correction and some of its employees, claiming that the employees had confiscated and destroyed his photo albums, and that their actions amounted to an unconstitutional deprivation of his due process rights. The trial court dismissed the suit without prejudice, ruling that the prisoner had only stated a claim for ordinary negligence against the State, and thus that the only forum available to him was the Tennessee Claims Commission. We reverse in part and affirm in part.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Carol L. Mccoy |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Mary Henry vs. Obstertrics and Gynecology Consultants
E2001-01246-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Dale C. Workman |
Knox County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Susan Whiton vs. Alan Whiton
E2000-00467-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Ben W. Hooper, II |
Sevier County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Roger Thomas v. Gail Thomas
M2001-01226-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton |
Giles County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc. vs. Hugh Hyatt
E2001-00434-COA-R3-CV
In this consolidated appeal Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc., and Leon Williams, individually and d/b/a Old World Cabinets appeal orders denying their demands for arbitration. We reverse the order of the Chancery Court denying the demand for arbitration filed by Leon Williams General Contractor, Inc. and affirm the order of the Circuit Court denying the demand for arbitration filed by Leon Williams, individually and d/b/a Old World Cabinets.
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Sharon J. Bell |
Knox County | Court of Appeals | 12/11/01 | |
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 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 |