Please enter some keywords to search.
| In re: Estate of Carleton Elliott Walton, Deceased, Jeffrey O. Walton, Administrator v. Leslie Young
01S01-9612-PB-00252
This case presents for review with the decision of the Court of Appeals reversing the trial court's denial of a claim of paternity. For the reasons set forth, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case is remanded.
Authoring Judge: Justice Lyle Reid
Originating Judge:Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr. |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 09/02/97 | |
| State v. Worley
03C01-9608-CR-00322
|
Sullivan County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| Walter A. Dickman v. Meadows Homes, Inc.
01S01-9703-CC-00061
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. In this appeal, the employer, Meadows Homes, Inc., contends the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the claimant was a covered employee and in favor of a finding that he was an independent contractor. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the claimant was an independent contractor. On June 13, 1994, the claimant, Walter Dickman, and Meadows Homes, Inc., entered into the following: CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT I/We Walter Dickman do state that I/We are general contractors who are duly licensed to perform the services for which we are offering to Meadows Homes. Our services are being offered to the general public. As a contractor, I/We provide our own commercial automobile, workmen compensation and liability insurance,and hereby release Meadows Homes from any and all liabilities concerning our contract and any employees and their properties. As a contractor I/We agree to provide all necessary tools, equipment and transportation necessary to complete any services required. As a general contractor I/We affirm that we are responsible to report and pay any local, state or federal taxes which may be due on income from services rendered. The paper writing was dated and signed by the claimant and a representative of Meadows Homes, Inc. Thereafter, Dickman bid on and was awarded work at property owned by Meadows Homes in Jackson County. Then, beginning on June 27, 1994, the parties agreed that he would be compensated on an hourly rather than a per job basis. He would perform the work, then bill Meadows for his time. 2
Authoring Judge: William S. Russell, Retired Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. J. O. Bond, |
Workers Compensation Panel | 08/29/97 | ||
| 01A01-9611-CH-00530
01A01-9611-CH-00530
Originating Judge:Robert S. Brandt |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| IN RE: Ross
03A01-9703-CH-00099
|
Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | ||
| State vs. Colson
03C01-9612-CR-00465
Originating Judge:Leon C. Burns, Jr. |
Court of Criminal Appeals | 08/29/97 | ||
| 01A01-9702-CV-00069
01A01-9702-CV-00069
Originating Judge:Walter C. Kurtz |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| 01A01-9612-CH-00540
01A01-9612-CH-00540
Originating Judge:Robert E. Burch |
Humphreys County | Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| 01A01-9610-CV-00491
01A01-9610-CV-00491
Originating Judge:Don R. Ash |
Rutherford County | Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| 01A01-9702-CV-00069
01A01-9702-CV-00069
|
Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | ||
| Charles C. Jones v. Tridon, Inc., et al.
01S01-9703-CV-00057
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. In this appeal, the defendants-appellants contend (1) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding of an injury by accident, (2) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the claimant's injury was one arising out of the employment, (3) the trial court exceeded its authority under an agreed order, and (4) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's award of medical and temporary total disability benefits. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the award of medical and temporary total disability benefits should be reversed and the judgment otherwise affirmed. The claimant, Jones, was an employee of the employer, Tridon, on January 3, 1993, when he suffered a compensable back injury and was provided some medical benefits by the employer's insurer, Royal. He continued to work and, in January of 1994, requested additional benefits, claiming a new injury. He was given a list of approved physicians but chose, without further consulting the employer or its insurer, to see a chiropractor who was not on the list. The trial court found that a compensable injury occurred on January 21, 1994 and awarded the medical expenses for treatment by Dr. McCombs, 36 weeks of temporary total disability benefits and permanent partial disability benefits based on 15% to the body as a whole. No issue has been raised with respect to the extent of permanent partial disability. 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. section 5-6- 225(e)(2). This panel is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Robert Corlew, |
Rutherford County | Workers Compensation Panel | 08/29/97 | |
| Pack vs. State
03C01-9611-CR-00440
Originating Judge:Douglas A. Meyer |
Hamilton County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| Kay Perryman v. Cosmolab, Inc.
01S01-9703-CH-00069
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court inaccordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employer contends the evidence preponderates against the trial court's award of permanent partial disability benefits and temporary total disability benefits. The employee concedes the award of temporary total disability benefits is excessive, but contends the trial court used an incorrect compensation rate. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the award of permanent partial disability benefits should be affirmed and the award of temporary total disability benefits modified. The case is remanded for additional proof as to the correct compensation rate. The employee or claimant, Perryman, is forty years old with a high school education. She has worked for the employer for twenty years. In 1994, she injured her elbow at work. As part of her treatment, she was required to take medication which contained blue and yellow dyes, which were also used in the employer's manufacturing process. She had an allergic reaction to the dyes after taking the medication. As a consequence, she is no longer able to work for the employer. She returned to gainful employment on October 31, 1994, thirteen weeks after the beginning of her inability to work because of the injury and treatment. The proof of permanency consisted of the following from the testimony of Dr. Samuel Rowe Marney, Jr., a board certified specialist in Allergy and Immunology: Q. Dr. Marney, Ms. Perryman now has these allergies. Do you have an opinion based upon a reasonable degree of medical certainty as to whether she will have those in the future? A. Based on the usual course of allergies, she's almost certain to carry these allergies the rest of her life. The trial judge awarded permanent partial disability benefits based on forty percent to the body as a whole and temporary total disability benefits for sixty-five weeks. The compensation rate was fixed at $216.22. 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 2
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Lee Russell, |
Perry County | Workers Compensation Panel | 08/29/97 | |
| 01A01-9610-JV-00469
01A01-9610-JV-00469
Originating Judge:Andrew J. Shookhoff |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 08/29/97 | |
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Sullivan County | Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | |
| Fortson vs. Fortson
03A01-9611-CV-00363
|
McMinn County | Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | |
| Camille Gaines v. American Airlines, Inc.
01S01-9701-CV-00015
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. In this appeal, the employer contends (1) the trial court erred in calculating the claimant's average weekly wage, (2) the trial court erred in awarding permanent partial disability benefits in excess of two and one-half times her medical impairment rating and (3) the trial court erred in awarding benefits for hypertension. The employee contends (4) the trial court erred in allowing the employer credit for certain temporary total disability benefits and (5) the appeal is frivolous. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be modified as to the claimant's average weekly wage, but otherwise affirmed. The employee or claimant, Gaines, worked as a flight attendant for American Eagle, the employer. On September 13, 1993, she injured her back and neck when, as she was performing her duties on a flight from Nashville to Asheville, North Carolina, the aircraft encountered extreme turbulence. She was thrown about in the cabin, causing the injuries. After receiving medical care and a period of recuperation she returned to work but later quit because her residual disability rendered her unable to perform her work without disabling pain. After a trial on the merits, the trial court found the employee's average weekly wage to be $292.76 and awarded permanent partial disability benefits based on forty percent (4%) to the body as a whole and temporary total disability benefits for twenty-six (26) weeks. The trial court allowed the employer a credit in the sum of$3,361.8 for overpaid temporary total disability benefits. 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. section 5-6- 225(e)(2). Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo without any presumption of correctness. Wingert v. Government of Sumner County, 98 S.W.2d 921 (Tenn. 1995). 2
Authoring Judge: William S. Russell, Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Thomas W. Brothers, |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 08/28/97 | |
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | ||
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | ||
| Sanders vs. Springs
03A01-9701-JV-00036
|
Anderson County | Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | |
| Dockery vs. State
03A01-9704-CV-00135
|
Anderson County | Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | |
| Hon. Frank v. Williams, Iii,
01S01-9609-CV-00174
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. This case was heard on March 15, 1996. The plaintiff alleged that he sustained work injuries on October 29, 1986 (pulmonary injury), January 21, 1986 (carpal tunnel syndrome), and January 6, 1986 (back injury). The trial court found the plaintiff's injuries were compensable and awarded the plaintiff permanent total disability plus medical costs. Prior to July 1, 1985, the level of review on appeal was whether there was any material evidence to support the findings of a trial court. Hilton v. Food Lion, Inc., 738 S.W.2d 626, 627 (Tenn. 1987). After July 1, 1985, the level of review is de novo upon the record with a presumption of the correctness of the trial court's findings of fact unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Alley v. Consolidated Coal Co., 699 S.W.2d 147, 147-48 (Tenn. 1985). All of the injuries upon which the trial court awarded compensation occurred after July 1, 1985. The standard of review, therefore, is under the preponderance rule set out in the 1985 amendment to the Workers' Compensation Law as elucidated in Alley, supra. The standard of review created by the amendment requires us to conduct an independent examination of the record on appeal to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge John K. Byers
Originating Judge:JIM T. HAMILTON, JUDGE |
Maury County | Workers Compensation Panel | 08/28/97 | |
| State vs. Vaughn Mixon
02C01-9507-CC-00204
|
Chester County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 08/28/97 | |
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Court of Appeals | 08/28/97 | ||
| State vs. Larry Carr
02C01-9605-CR-00137
Originating Judge:Arthur T. Bennett |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 08/28/97 |