Please enter some keywords to search.
| Clifton vs. Acosta-Delgado
M2000-00253-COA-R3-CV
This is a post-divorce child custody dispute. The mother filed a petition to regain custody of the parties' three children after she had entered into an agreed order in 1995 granting custody to the defendant father. After hearing testimony on, inter alia, the father driving while intoxicated with the children in the car with him, the trial court found a material change in circumstances, granted custody to the mother, and ordered the father to pay child support. The father appeals, arguing that there was not a material change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a change in custody, that the trial court inappropriately considered his child support arrearage prior to the 1995 agreed order, and that the trial court miscalculated his income, resulting in an unreasonably high child support award. We affirm, finding a material change in circumstances warranting a change in custody, and finding that the evidence does not preponderate against the award of child support.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| In re: Estate of Willette Bonita Carnahan
M1999-00494-COA-R3-CV
This appeal arises from a will contest in which the defendant has appealed from a jury verdict invalidating a will on the grounds of unsound mind and undue influence. The deceased executed two wills. The first will was executed in 1985 naming the plaintiff who was a friend, employee, and the son of the family who cared for her in her later years as the sole beneficiary. The second will was executed in 1993 naming the defendant, a man who share cropped tobacco on her farm and was paid to mow her lawn, as the sole beneficiary. The plaintiff alleged that at the time the latter will was executed, the testator was of unsound mind and had been unduly influenced by the defendant. At trial, the jury returned special findings that the deceased was not of sound and disposing mind on December 29, 1993, when the second will was executed and that she was unduly influenced by the defendant in making the last will and testament. On appeal, the defendant presents three issues: (1) whether there was material, substantial evidence to support the jury findings, (2) whether the trial judge erred in instructing the jury regarding a presumption of undue influence and the burden of proof on finding a confidential relationship, and (3) whether the trial court erred in assessing court costs against the defendant and not awarding him attorneys fees. We affirm the judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Originating Judge:Tom E. Gray |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Harold Bayuk
M2000-01654-CCA-R3-CD
The Appellant, Harold M. Bayuk, was convicted by a Hickman County Circuit Court jury of one count of driving under the influence of an intoxicant and one count of driving on a revoked license. Following his conviction for DUI, the Appellant waived his right to jury sentencing and agreed to submit the issue of enhanced punishment to the trial court. The trial court found the Appellant guilty of DUI, third offense, and sentenced him to eleven months twenty-nine days, with 150 days to be served in confinement. On appeal, the Appellant argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him to serve 150 days instead of the statutory minimum of 120 days. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court in part, vacate in part, and remand this case to the trial court for entry of an amended judgment of conviction.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Timothy L. Easter |
Hickman County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Vincent Sims
W1998-00634-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden
M2000-00988-CCA-R3-CD
The Appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, was convicted by a Robertson County jury of burglary, theft of property over $1,000, and criminal impersonation. He received concurrent sentences of twelve years for burglary, twelve years for theft of property, and six months for criminal impersonation. On appeal, the Appellant raises the following three issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred in not excusing two jurors for cause during voir dire; and (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the statement of the Appellant's confession into evidence. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Robert W. Wedemeyer |
Robertson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Scarborough
M2000-01359-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Timothy L. Easter |
Hickman County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| Mahan vs. Mahan
M1999-01366-COA-R3-CV
In this divorce case, the husband appeals the award of custody of the children to the wife, the admission of certain evidence at trial, and the redistribution of marital property on a post-judgment motion following his bankruptcy. We affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Originating Judge:Carol A. Catalano |
Montgomery County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Clyde Smith
M2002-2138-CCA-R3-CD
Originating Judge:John H. Gasaway, III |
Robertson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Curtis Emery Duke
M2000-00350-CCA-R3-CD
The appellant, Curtis Emery Duke, was convicted in the Marshall County Circuit Court of two counts of the sale of crack cocaine, one count of possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell, two counts of criminal impersonation, and one count of failure to appear. The trial court sentenced the appellant to a total effective sentence of thirty-nine years. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain the appellant's convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; and (3) whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:William Charles Lee |
Marshall County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennesse v. Michael Herndon
M2000-01080-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:John H. Gasaway, III |
Montgomery County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Timothy Tyrone Sanders
M2000-00603-CCA-R3-CD
The Appellant, Timothy Tyrone Sanders, was convicted by a Bedford County jury of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell. The Appellant was sentenced to seventeen years six months as a range II offender. On appeal, he raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; and (3) whether the trial court improperly sentenced the Appellant. After review, we conclude that the trial court erred in not instructing the jury on simple possession. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:William Charles Lee |
Bedford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| D&E Construction Co. vs. Robert J. Denley Co.
W1998-00445-SC-R11-CV
The contractor submitted to arbitration a contractual payment dispute with the project owner arising from a contract to build a subdivision in Collierville. The arbitrators found in favor of the contractor and included an award of attorney's fees. The trial court determined that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority in awarding attorney's fees and vacated the arbitration award. The Court of Appeals reversed, reinstating the entire award. We hold that when the arbitrators awarded attorney's fees, they exceeded their authority by awarding upon a matter not within the scope of the contract's arbitration provision. Therefore, we reverse in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals and vacate the award of attorney's fees.
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Originating Judge:Walter L. Evans |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| Archie Lee Roberts vs. State
M1999-02462-CCA-R3-PC
The petitioner, Archie Lee Roberts, was found guilty by a jury in the DeKalb County Criminal Court of one count of first degree murder, for which he received a life sentence, and one count of attempted first degree murder, for which he received a sentence of twenty years incarceration. On direct appeal, we affirmed the petitioner's convictions. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, which petition was denied by the post-conviction court. On appeal, the petitioner raises the following issue for our review: whether the post-conviction court erred in denying his claim for relief. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:Leon C. Burns, Jr. |
DeKalb County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| State of Tennessee v. James P. Stout
M1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. James P. Stout
W1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| State vs. Antonio Kendrick
W1997-00157-SC-R11-CD
We granted this appeal to determine whether the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense of aggravated rape upon which it sought to convict the defendant constituted plain error and required a new trial. The main purpose of the election requirement is to preserve a defendant's right to a unanimous jury verdict under the Tennessee Constitution. A majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the defendant's conviction for one count of aggravated rape without examining the election issue. After reviewing the record and controlling authority, we conclude that the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense upon which it sought to convict the defendant failed to preserve the defendant's rights under the Tennessee Constitution and constituted plain error. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Originating Judge:Arthur T. Bennett |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/15/00 | |
| Heatherly vs. Merrimack Mutual Fire Ins. Co.
M1998-00906-COA-R10-CV
This extraordinary appeal involves a dispute between two homeowners whose house was damaged by fire and the two insurance adjusting companies hired by the homeowners' insurance carrier to investigate their claim. Believing that their claim had been fraudulently processed, the homeowners filed suit in the Circuit Court for Sumner County against their insurance carrier and the two adjusting companies. The three defendants moved to dismiss the complaint as to the adjusting companies. After the trial court denied the motions and declined to grant an interlocutory appeal, the two adjusting companies petitioned for a Tenn. R. App. P. 10 extraordinary appeal. We granted the application and now reverse the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss because the homeowners have conceded that they have no breach of contract claim against the adjusting companies and because we have concluded that the homeowners' claims are barred by the statute of limitations.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Originating Judge:Thomas Goodall |
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 11/15/00 | |
| Jimmy L. Lane v. Schering-Plough Corporation,
E2000-00829-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. The State Second Injury Fund has appealed the trial court's ruling that it was not entitled to a credit or setoff for payment of temporary total disability benefits against that portion of the permanent disability award which it is responsible to pay. Judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Authoring Judge: Thayer, Sp. J.
Originating Judge:Jerri S. Bryant, Chancellor |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | 11/14/00 | |
| James Becton v. Grisham Corporation
W1999-00183-SC-WCM-CV
This is an appeal by James E. Becton of a decision by the trial court that Becton did not show by a preponderance of the evidence that he had sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the scope of his employment with Grisham Corporation. He presents three (3) issues for review: 1) whether the Chancellor erred in excluding from consideration the testimony of the claimant's treating physician.; 2) whether the opinion of the treating physician is entitled to greater weight than that of a consultant; and 3) whether the evidence of vocational disability preponderates in favor of an award of permanent partial disability and medical payments in this case.
Authoring Judge: George R. Ellis, Sp. J.
Originating Judge:Floyd Peete, Jr., Chancellor |
Shelby County | Workers Compensation Panel | 11/14/00 | |
| State vs. Randal L. Cheek
M2000-00203-CCA-R3-CD
This appeal presents review of a certified question of law following the Appellant's guilty pleas to possession of marijuana with intent to sell and possession of drug paraphernalia. Pursuant to his negotiated plea agreement, the court imposed an effective sentence of one and one-half years, suspended after five days confinement followed by two years probation. Also, as part of the plea agreement, the Appellant explicitly reserved, with the consent of the trial court and the State, a certified question of law challenging the court's denial of the Appellant's motion to suppress. On appeal, the State contends that (1) the certified question of law is not contained in the final judgments nor is it incorporated by reference and (2) the question is not clearly stated so as to identify the scope and limits of the legal issue. After review, we find that the question of law presented fails to identify with sufficient clarity the scope and boundaries of the issue reserved. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed and this case is remanded to the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Timothy L. Easter |
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/00 | |
| State vs. William Clouse
M2000-00436-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:J. Richard Mcgregor |
Van Buren County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/00 | |
| Suzanne Burlew vs. Brad Burlew
M1998-01177-SC-R11-CV
The issue in this divorce case concerns the type and amount of alimony that should be awarded to the Wife. The trial court awarded her $220,000 of alimony in solido to be paid out in decreasing amounts over eight years, and declined to award her rehabilitative alimony. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's in solido award but remanded the case to the trial court to award rehabilitative alimony of at least $1,000 per month for a reasonable period of time. Before this Court, the Husband/appellee argues that rehabilitative alimony is unnecessary and that the alimony in solido award is excessive. The Wife/appellant counters that the in solido award was not excessive; indeed, she argues that she should have been awarded alimony in futuro. We hold that the trial court properly awarded alimony in solido rather than alimony in futuro. We also hold that the trial court did not err in denying the Wife's request for rehabilitative alimony. Thus, we affirm in part and reverse in part the decision of the Court of Appeals.
Originating Judge:Floyd Peete, Jr. |
Shelby County | Supreme Court | 11/14/00 | |
| State vs. William Clouse
M2000-00436-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:J. Richard Mcgregor |
Van Buren County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/00 | |
| Jonathan Duffy v. Tecumseh Products Co.
W1999-00766-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. The defendant, Tecumseh Products Company (Tecumseh), appeals the judgment of the Circuit Court of Henry County which ordered Tecumseh to pay medical expenses to the plaintiff, Jonathan Duffy (Duffy). For the reasons stated in this opinion, we find the trial court erred and reverse the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: W. Michael William Michael Maloan, Special Judge
Originating Judge:C. Creed Mcginley, Judge |
Henry County | Workers Compensation Panel | 11/14/00 | |
| William Floyd vs. State
M2000-00318-CCA-R3-CD
William Floyd appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. In 1998, Floyd pled guilty to two counts of rape and, under the terms of his plea agreement, was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. In his petition for post-conviction relief, Floyd contends that his guilty pleas are involuntary because on the date his pleas were entered he was under the influence of prescribed psychotropic drugs. The petition was dismissed by the post-conviction court and this appeal follows. Finding that the evidence in the record does not support Floyd's claim, we affirm the lower court's dismissal.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:J. S. Daniel |
Cannon County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/00 |