Please enter some keywords to search.
| State vs. Vincent Hadley
02C01-9710-CR-00414
|
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/23/98 | |
| State vs. Darron Clayton
02C01-9304-CR-00071
Originating Judge:L. Terry Lafferty |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/23/98 | |
| State vs.Carl London
01C01-9710-CR-00458
Originating Judge:J. Randall Wyatt, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/23/98 | |
| Robert Wall vs. City of Paris, TN
02A01-9707-CV-00166
Originating Judge:C. Creed Mcginley |
Henry County | Court of Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| State vs. C. W. McCaleb
01C01-9707-CC-00251
|
Hickman County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| State vs. Roy Leach
01C01-9705-CC-00189
Originating Judge:William M. Barker |
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| James Gatlin vs. Deanna Gatlin
02A01-9710-CH-00267
Originating Judge:George R. Ellis |
Gibson County | Court of Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| State vs. Bobby Love
02C01-9809-CR-00261
|
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| Worther Williams vs. Robert Steward
02A01-9712-CV-00311
Originating Judge:James E. Swearengen |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| Jeanie Dianne (White) Hannah vs. Gary Hannah & Carl Hannah
01A01-9712-CV-00694
Originating Judge:Thomas Goodall |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| James E. McGaugh, Jr. vs. Charles & Joyce Galbreath
01A01-9706-CH-00256
Originating Judge:Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| 01C01-9703-CR-00078
01C01-9703-CR-00078
Originating Judge:Jane W. Wheatcraft |
Sumner County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/22/98 | |
| State vs. Michael Benson
02C01-9708-CC-00333
Originating Judge:C. Creed Mcginley |
Hardin County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/21/98 | |
| State vs. Melvin Boyd
02C01-9708-CC-00301
|
Lake County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/21/98 | |
| State vs. Bryan Bastel
02C01-9708-CR-00312
Originating Judge:Arthur T. Bennett |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/21/98 | |
| William J. Chase, Jr. vs. City of Memphis
02S01-9703-CV-00019
|
Supreme Court | 07/21/98 | ||
| Richard May v. Liberty Mutual Insurance & Southern Manufacturing
01S01-9709-GS-00193
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. Richard May filed this complaint alleging permanent partial disability after a mold dropped on his left hand at work, causing a crush injury. The trial court found he had sustained 45% permanent partial disability to the left arm and awarded temporary total, permanent partial, mileage and medical benefits, as well as discretionary costs. Southern Manufacturing Group ["Southern"] appeals and presents for our review the issues of (1) whether the preponderance of the evidence supports a lesser amount of permanent partial disability, and (2) whether the weekly benefit rate should be $24.76 rather than $226.52. On May 6, 1996, Mr. May was injured while working for Southern when his hand was crushed between two halves of a large metal mold weighing approximately 15 pounds. He notified his employer immediately and went to see Dr. Gregory Wiley, whom he selected from the employer's list of approved physicians. After a brief period of conservative treatment, Dr. Wiley referred Mr. May to Dr. Ramotsumi Makhene, a board-eligible plastic surgeon who also practices reconstructive surgery with a subspecialty in hand surgery. Dr. Makhene saw Mr. May on July 31, 1996 and noted swelling of his left hand and a nodule on the back of his hand above the knuckle, along with limited range of motion. He diagnosed tendinitis and prescribed a splint, anti- inflammatory medication, and occupational therapy. 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Barry Medley |
Warren County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/20/98 | |
| State vs. Y'vette vs. Vaden
01C01-9708-CC-00366
|
Rutherford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/20/98 | |
| Danny E. Ray v. The Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company
01S01-9710-CH-00223
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. I The plaintiff seeks an enlargement of a prior award for workers' compensation benefits, as allegedly provided by T.C.A. _ 5-6-241(a)(2). The defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted. Appeal from a summary judgment order in a workers' compensation case is not controlled by the de novo standard of review, but is governed by Rule 56, Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. Downen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 811 S.W.2d 523 (Tenn. 1991). Further, no presumption of correctness attaches to decisions granting summary judgment because they involve only questions of law; thus on appeal the reviewing court must make a fresh determination concerning whether the requirements of Rule 56 have been met. Gonzales v. Alman Constr. Co., 857 S.W.2d 42 (Tenn. 1993). II The petitioner suffered a sprained shoulder on November 11, 1994, during the course of his employment by Kantus Corporation. He sustained a seven percent permanent partial impairment as a result of the accident and returned to work after recuperation. His claim for benefits for partial permanent whole body disability was settled on the basis of 17.5 percent, or seventy weeks, arrived at by multiplying his anatomical impairment by 2.5, as directed by T.C.A. _ 5-6-241(a)(1). The settlement was approved on June 3, 1995, upon the joint petition of Kantus Corporation and its insurer, The Yasuda Fire 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Lee Russell |
Marshall County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/20/98 | |
| Richard Lee Bennett v. Bridgestone, U.S.A., Inc.
01S01-9710-CH-00236
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 issue in this case is whether the trial judge properly dismissed the complaint owing to the failure of the plaintiff to prove by a preponderance of all the evidence that his disability was job-related. 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 finding, 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). I The complaint alleged that the plaintiff experienced a `work-related event' in November 1994 which worsened a `progressively deteriorating back disease.' He is 44 years old and has worked at Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. continuously from 1985 through April 2, 1996. The onset of back problems was traced to 1988, with no history of a specific injury at any time. On November 5, 1994, he was working in the curing department at Bridgestone when he suddenly could not lift any more tires. At his request, his supervisor helped him complete his work that shift, and he took a vacation day the following day. No particular event or incident caused his inability to work, although two days earlier he had presented himself at the Health Unit at Bridgestone, where he gave a history of back pain for three years and that the pain originally began on "4/11/88." Four days later he again visited the Health Unit for ongoing back pain. Plaintiff first saw Dr. Gregory Lanford on November 14, 1994, to whom he gave a history of three years of back pain with no precipitating trauma. He 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. James Weatherford, |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/20/98 | |
| Kenneth M. Ward v. Tangent Industries
01S01-9710-CH-00235
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 issues are whether the leg injury suffered by the plaintiff was properly apportioned to the body as a whole and whether the Court correctly ordered the award to be paid in a lump sum. A non-issue is whether the trial judge properly awarded interest on the judgment.1 The plaintiff is a 41-year-old single man whose testimony that he finished eighth grade was so suspect as to move the Chancellor to observe "I don't mean to disrespect you Mr. Ward, [but] you probably don't have an eighth grade education," and who is by virtue of that fact and other limitations capable only of basic manual and menial labor. On December 8, 1993 during the course of his job, a heavy bundle of steel fell from a forklift and crushed his left leg and foot. He was initially treated by Dr. Charles Emerson of Murfreesboro, and later by Dr. Joe Luna of Maryville, which was made necessary because he moved to the home of his sister in Blount County. Dr. Luna referred the plaintiff to Dr. Turner, under whose care he remains. To comply with an order to prosecute, the plaintiff was evaluated by an independent medical examiner, Dr. Steven C. Weissfield, on July 28, 1997, who graphically described the crushing injury. Reduced to the necessary, the leg bones were multi-fractured, refused to heal, pieces of them were removed subsequently, screws and pins were inserted; the lower portion of his leg filled with fluid which the experts could not alleviate. Four or more 1Much of the oral argum ent was given over to the propriety of the Court's action in awarding statutory interest on the "full amount," which the Court did not do. The issue of interest was neither raised nor addressed by the trial Court. The subject appeared, for the first time, in the brief of the appellee. 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Don R. Ash |
Rutherford County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/20/98 | |
| State vs. Rebecca Curevich
01C01-9707-CR-00276
|
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/20/98 | |
| Sandra Gail Holmes V Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
01S01-9710-CH-00237
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 plaintiff sought workers' compensation benefits for plantar fasciitis, which she alleged was caused by standing on a concrete floor at work for twelve hours shifts. The defendant argued that plantar fasciitis is not caused by standing for long periods and therefore plaintiff's job did not cause her condition. The trial court, in a comprehensive and well-reasoned opinion, found the preponderance of the evidence proved the condition to be work-related and awarded benefits, which the defendant appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Sandra Gail Holmes ["Employee"] began working for Bridgestone ["Employer"] in 1987. Her job as a tire builder consisted of twelve hour shifts during which she stood on a concrete floor on a 1/4" rubber mat while building tires. She was not permitted to sit unless she was on break. In 1994 she began complaining of her feet, and on August 22, 1994, requested medical treatment at work owing to burning pain shooting through her heel and arc of her left foot, up through the calf muscle, and lesser symptoms in her right foot. The employer's on-site physician, Dr. Flynn, sent her to Dr. Mark Christofersen, an orthopedic surgeon, whom employee testified she saw once, for ten or 15 minutes, on September 1, 1994. Dr. Christofersen examined employee and found excellent joint motion and no swelling but with tenderness to palpation at the origin of the plantar fascia and arch on the left and to a lesser extent on the right. She had been on a 2
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Robert E. Corlew, III |
Rutherford County | Workers Compensation Panel | 07/20/98 | |
| Knight vs. Lancaster
01A01-9711-CH-00643
Originating Judge:L. F. Stewart |
Marion County | Court of Appeals | 07/17/98 | |
| State vs. Ralph Cooper
02C01-9709-CR-00339
Originating Judge:W. Fred Axley |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 07/17/98 |