APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

This is a domestic relations dispute involving money only. The trial court held that a certificate of deposit and one investment account were the separate property of Husband and declined to award Wife alimony or the total amount of her attorney fees. She appeals and presents these issues for review.

This appeal involves the validity of certain transactions entered into by the holder of a power of attorney. The trial court set aside the transactions finding that the attorney in fact had failed to rebut the presumption of undue influence which arose in light of these self-benefitting transactions. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

This is a divorce case. In the original divorce, years ago, the wife was awarded shares of stock from the husband’s p ension fund. Subs equently, the pension fund was distributed to the husband, with no monies going to the wife. In this action, the trial court awarded the wife a judgment for the value o f the stock at the time of the trial co urt’s order. The husband appeals. We affirm.

A Rutherford County grand jury indicted defendant for aggravated rape, two counts of aggravated sexual battery, and rape of a child for incidents involving his young female cousin. A negotiated plea agreement allowed defendant to plead to one count of rape, a Class B felony, and one count of incest, a Class C felony. The agreed upon sentences were eight years for rape and three years for incest to be served consecutively as a Range I, standard offender. The sole issue on appeal is the trial court’s denial of alternative sentencing. However, plain error dictates that the convictions be VACATED and the case REMANDED for further proceedings. The defendant pled guilty to incest which is neither a lesser included nor a lesser grade of child rape; nor do the acts of the defendant constitute the crime of incest.

Megan Harmon (“Megan” or “Appellant”), minor child born during the marriage of Plaintiff/Appellee, Todd Harmon (“Mr. Harmon” or “Appellee”) and Defendant Janet Harmon (“Mrs. Harmon”), by and through her Guardian Ad Litem (G.A.L.), appeals the decision of the trial court which found that Appellee was not the biological father of Appellant, and incorporated into the decree of divorce the marital dissolution agreement in which the parties agreed Appellee would have no further obligation to the child.

The parental relationship between Tamra Viar and her daughter, Katelyn, was terminated by the Juvenile Court, the propriety of which she presents for review. Our 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.

The defendant, Tony Randall Arnold, appeals as of right his conviction by a Benton County jury of simple assault, a Class B misdemeanor. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-101(a)(3). The trial court sentenced the defendant to six (6) months in jail to be served at 75%. The sole issue for appeal is whether the trial court properly sentenced the defendant.

Defendant Thomas R. Throneberry appeals the trial court’s judgment in the amount of $6,000 entered in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee Allen E. Hasty after a jury trial. For the reasons hereinafter stated, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

This action is based on a series of contracts executed in the sale of an industrial dust control and laundry business. The Chancery Court of Davidson County dismissed the claims of the sellers, held that one of the sellers had breached one of the agreements but that the buyer had failed to prove its damages, and awarded the buyer attorneys’ fees. We reverse the dismissal of the sellers’ action and modify the award of attorneys’ fees.

Respondent Laurie Watson Pawlakos (the Wife) appeals the trial court’s order requiring her to return certain funds to the estate of her deceased husband, John T. Pawlakos (the Decedent). For the reasons hereinafter stated, we affirm in part and reverse in part the trial court’s judgment.

Benton County appeals the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to H & W Environmental Services, Inc. (H&W) and Waste Management, Inc. of Tennessee (Waste Management) and denying summary judgment to Benton County. For the reasons stated hereafter, we affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment.

Plaintiff, Jeri St. John (“St. John” or “Appellant”) appeals the trial court’s judgment 2 in favor of Defendant, Beer Permit Board (“Beer Board” or “Appellee”) denying St. John a beer permit for her business “Jeri’s” n/k/a “The Foxy Lady.”

The Petitioner, Carolyn Strickland, appeals the order of the Jackson County Criminal Court dismissing her petition for post-conviction relief. In her sole issue on appeal, Petitioner argues she was incompetent to stand trial due to the medication she was taking during the trial and was, therefore , denied her right to due process and a fair trial. Petitioner was convicted of first degree murder and received a sentence of life imprisonment in the Jackson County Criminal Court. The conviction was affirmed on appeal. State v. Carolyn Strickland, No. 01C01-9212-CR-00390, Jackson County (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, March 23, 1995), perm. to appeal denied, (Tenn. 1995). Following the denial of her permission to appeal, she filed a petition for post-conviction relief. In post-conviction proceedings, the pe titioner bears the burden of proving the allegations raised in the petition by clear and convincing evidence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-210(f). Moreover, the trial court’s findings of fact are conclusive on appeal unless the evidence preponderates against the judgment. Tidwell v. State, 922 S.W.2d 497, 500 (Tenn. 1996); Campbell v. State, 904 S.W.2d 594, 596 (Tenn. 1995); Cooper v. State, 849 S.W.2d 744, 746 (Tenn. 1993). As the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the trial court, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition.