Tennessee Supreme Court To Hear Oral Arguments for January In Knoxville

January 5, 2018

The Tennessee Supreme Court will hear four cases on January 10, 2018, in Knoxville.  The details of the cases are as follows:  

Rhonda Willeford, et al. v. Timothy P. Klepper, MD, et al. v. State of Tennessee The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff’s application for permission to appeal in this healthcare liability action following the Court of Appeals’ denial of Plaintiff’s interlocutory appeal.  The sole issue in this case concerns the constitutionality of Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-26-121(f).  Section 29-26-121(f) outlines a defendant’s ability to petition the court for a qualified protective order granting defendants access to health information outside the presence of a plaintiff or a plaintiff’s counsel.  Plaintiff claims that section 29-26-121(f) violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine of Article II, sections 1 and 2 of the Tennessee Constitution because it intrudes on the judiciary’s authority over the practice and procedure within the courts of this state.

State of Tennessee v. David Scott HallThe Court has granted review in this direct appeal of defendant David Scott Hall’s conviction of attempted especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor.   The defendant has raised multiple issues for the Court’s consideration, including whether the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to convict the defendant of attempted aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor and whether the trial court properly admitted certain evidence under the Tennessee Rules of Evidence.  

Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee v. Charles Edward DanielThe Board of Professional Responsibility is appealing the decision of the trial court, which in turn affirmed the decision of a hearing panel imposing a three-year suspension from the practice of law of Mr. Daniel, all of which was to be served on probation.  On appeal, the Board argues that disbarment was the appropriate sanction in this matter because the hearing panel failed to apply the appropriate aggravating circumstances. 

Board of Professional Responsibility v. Michael Gibbs Sheppard- This is the second attorney discipline case on the Knoxville docket.  The Board of Professional Responsibility’s appeal is from the trial court’s modification of a hearing panel’s proposed suspension.  The Board again is challenging a sanction of suspension, arguing that disbarment was appropriate in this case.  The Board also challenges the trial court’s modification of the sanction imposed by the hearing panel.  Likewise, Mr. Sheppard on appeal disputes the trial court’s modification of the hearing panel’s sanction. 

Media members planning to attend oral arguments should review Supreme Court Rule 30 and file any required request.