St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company and Lineal Group, Inc. v. Cecil Carrick
01S01-9509-CV-00146
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 trial court awarded Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff 85% permanent partial disability to the left lower extremity. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant below appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that the employee's testimonywas credible; that the employee failed to prove that he sustained a permanent injury which arose out of and in the course of his employment; that the employee failed to give proper notice of his injury; that the evidence does not support an award of 85% to the lower extremity; and that the medical treatment awarded by the trialcourt was unauthorized and should not have been allowed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff worked at Samsonite for 3 years. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff's other work experience includes growing tobacco and peppers, raising cattle, and performing various odd jobs. Defendant/Counter- Plaintiff has a high school education and some training in electronics. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff's duties at Samsonite included counting and transferring chairs from one line to another. This involved shifting his weight from one leg to the other. It also involved spending long periods of time on his feet while working on a concrete floor. Because Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff suffered several strokes since the time of the injury and was unable to remember many of the specific facts surrounding his injury so as to be unavailable, the trial court relied on Defendant/Counter- Plaintiff's deposition testimony. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff was 55 years old on the date that he gave his deposition testimony. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff testified that he suffered from pain in his left knee. For four or five months prior tothe injury complained of, Defendant/Counter- Plaintiff's leg would swell from hip down to ankle. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff told his foreman about the problems with his legs
Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Robert E. Corlew |
Rutherford County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/10/96 | |
02A01-9509-CH-00202
02A01-9509-CH-00202
Originating Judge:C. Neal Small |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/10/96 | |
02A01-9510-CV-00231
02A01-9510-CV-00231
Originating Judge:D'Army Bailey |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/10/96 | |
02C01-9501-CR-00029
02C01-9501-CR-00029
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/10/96 | |
Joseph Jarreau v. Vanliner Insurance Company
01S01-9512-CH-00228
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. This appeal presents the questions whether and under what circumstances, if any, an injured worker may give up his right to future medical expenses. The panel concludes the trial court's judgment, approving a settlement in which the right to future medical expenses was voluntarily surrendered for consideration, should be affirmed. The employee or claimant, Jarreau, commenced this civil action by filing a complaint for workers' compensation benefits, averring that he had suffered an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by Ozark Motor Lines, Inc. The complaint further averred, in relevant part, that his injury had been diagnosed as a tear of the left medial meniscus, that he had reached maximum medical recovery and would retain a permanent impairment but that there was a genuine dispute as to the extent of his permanent disability. He sought to recover medical and permanent partial disability benefits. Vanliner Insurance Company served its answer admitting it was the insurer for Ozark, but denying that the claimant had suffered a compensable injury or that he was permanently disabled. On September 8, 1994, before the case could be tried, the claimant and his attorney and the attorney for Vanliner appeared before Judge Capers seeking approval of a negotiated settlement. By the settlement terms, the claimant was to receive $25,459.2, representing a permanent partial disability of forty percent to the left leg, and an additional $9,54.8 in consideration of the claimant's relinquishment of any claim for future medical benefits, for a total of $35,.. Additionally, the claimant had already received $15,481.3 in medical benefits and $12,481.3 in temporary total disability benefits. We find in the record no transcript of the settlement hearing, but Judge Capers found that Dr. Robert V. Russell had opined the claimant had reached maximum medical improvement and would retain a permanent anatomical impairment of ten percent to the leg. The judge further found the settlement to be in the best interest of the claimant, "in light of the controversy and dispute between the parties." The agreement was approved as a full, final and complete settlement of Mr. Jarreau's claim against the employer and its insurer. Almost eight months later, on April 28, 1995, the claimant applied to the court, per Tenn. R. Civ. P. 6.2, for an order setting aside the settlement 2
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Originating Judge:Hon. Bobby Capers, |
Wilson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/10/96 | |
Kenneth W. Leach v. Driver Power Leasing & Humboldt Express
01S01-9601-CV-00021
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Originating Judge:Hon. Randolph A. Veazey, |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/10/96 | |
02A01-9505-CH-00102
02A01-9505-CH-00102
|
Fayette County | Court of Appeals | 10/10/96 | |
Grace Thru Faith, v. Tony L. Caldwell, and Tony L. Caldwell and Joann P. Caldwell Trust, v. Edward Irwin and Rebecca Irwin
02A01-9502-CH-00026
This is a case involving a trustee’s improper accounting procedures and misuse of funds regarding a trust set up to receive Social Security Insurance payments. At issue is whether Tennessee state courts have subject matter jurisdiction to hear a dispute between a beneficiary and his representative payee over alleged misuse of Social Security benefits. The trial court found it had jurisdiction. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Originating Judge:Chancellor William Michael Maloan |
Weakley County | Court of Appeals | 10/09/96 | |
Howard A. Woods, v. Mutual of Omaha and CNA Insurance Company, and Eastwood Hospital
02A01-9510-CV-00218
Woods filed suit against various defendants; however, the judgment before us enters summary judgment in favor of Omaha only and was rendered final by the trial court in accordance with Rule 54.02 T.R.C.P. Thus, Omaha is the only Appellee for purposes of this appeal. This case concerns the validity of a “Compromise Settlement Release” executed by the appellant, Howard A. Woods (Woods), in favor of the appellee, Mutual of Omaha (Omaha). Woods challenges its validity on the ground of mental incapacity. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Omaha Woods has appealed. For reasons hereinafter expressed, we affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Originating Judge:Judge Robert A. Lanier |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/09/96 | |
Melanie Miller, Ashley Miller Luna, & Gregory Luna v. Gary D. Niblack, M.D., Laboratory Investments Inc., et.al. - Concurring
02A01-9505-CV-00101
This is an action for negligence in the conducting of a paternity test. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the appellees, Gary D. Niblack, M.D., Laboratory Investments, Inc. and Ren Laboratories, Inc. d/b/a Ren Histocompatibility Laboratory, a joint venture, and John Doe. The appellants, Melanie Miller, individually and as next friend for Ashley Miller Luna, a minor, and next friend of Gregory Luna, deceased, have appealed presenting the single issue of whether the trial court erred in doing so. For reasons hereinafter set forth, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Farmer
Originating Judge:Judge William O'Hearn |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/09/96 | |
Zella Balentine, v. Simon White, In Re: Paternity of Ashley Arron Balentine, a Minor
02A01-9508-JV-00190
Zella Balentine (“plaintiff”) filed a petition in the Juvenile Court of Hardin County seeking to have that court declare Simon White (“defendant”) to be the natural father of the parties’ minor child, Ashley Balentine. The Hardin County General Sessions Court, in its role as Juvenile Court, found defendant to be the father of the child and awarded plaintiff retroactive child support dating back to November 1, 1992. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion by not awarding retroactive child support back to the date of the child’s birth. For the reasons stated, we find that the trial court did abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we reverse as to this issue and remand this cause to that court for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge Hewitt P. Tomlin
Originating Judge:Judge Max Seaton |
Hardin County | Court of Appeals | 10/09/96 | |
Ethel Faye George v. Clyde Wayne Alexanderand Phillip R. Jones, M.D.
01S01-9505-CV-00084
In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff, Ethel Faye George, appeals from the Court of Appeals’ affirmance of a judgment based on a jury verdict in favor of the defendants, Clyde Wayne Alexander, M.D. and Phillip R. Jones, M.D. This case presents the following issue for our determination: whether a defendant in a negligence case must, pursuant to Rule 8.03 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, plead comparative fault as an affirmative defense if the defendant wishes to introduce evidence that a person other than itself caused the plaintiff’s injury. We conclude that the defendant is required to affirmatively plead comparative fault in such a situation; and because that was not done in this case, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank W. Drowota, III
Originating Judge:Judge Marietta M. Shipley |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 10/07/96 | |
Ethel Faye George v. Clyde Wayne Alexander, M.D. and Phillip R. Jones, M.D. - Concurring
01S01-9505-CV-00084
I agree with the result reached by the majoirity however, resolution of the important principles of comparative fault and rules of pleading and evidence presented in this case requires, in my view, a more precise articulation and analysis of the pleadings, the facts, and the legal issues. As an example, the statement of the issue decided in themajority's introductory paragraph - if the defendant wishes to introduce evidence that a person other than itself caused the plaintiff's injury - encompasses various situations controlled by different rules and cannot be decided as stated. Since the ruls of substantive law. pleading and evidence are correlated, I can best state my views in an integrated opinion rather than in a commentary on the majority's opinion.
Authoring Judge: Justice Lyle Reid
Originating Judge:Judge Marietta M. Shipley |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 10/07/96 | |
Sherry Wimley v. Linda Rudolph, Commissioner of Tennessee Department of Human Services - Concurring
01S01-9507-CH-00108
The issue in this case is whether plaintiff can combine an original action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 with a petition for judicial review under the Uniform Administration Procedures Act when the sole relief requested under the Section 1983 claim is an award of attorney fees. We affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision allowing plaintiff an award of attorney fees.
Authoring Judge: Justice Penny J. White
Originating Judge:Chancellor C. Allen High |
Davidson County | Supreme Court | 10/07/96 | |
Walter P. Vogel v. Wells Fargo Guard Svcs. & Dina Tobin, Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, Tennessee Department of Labor Second Injury Fund, State of Tennessee and Charles Burson, Atty General, State of Tennessee
03S01-9601-CV-00005
In this workers' compensation case, we are asked to review the trial court’s determination that Tennessee Code Annotated Section 50-6- 207(4)(A)(i) is unconstitutional and that plaintiff is entitled to life-time workers’ compensation benefits. Having considered the positions of the parties, the plain language and the legislative intent of the statute, and relevant authority in other jurisdictions, we reverse.
Authoring Judge: Justice Penny J. White
Originating Judge:Judge John A. Turnbull |
Knox County | Supreme Court | 10/07/96 | |
Mitchell Brian Ramsey v. James G. Beavers
03S01-9509-CV-00104
In this case we are faced with the issue of the continued viability of the zone of danger test as a limitation on liability when plaintiff is neither physically injured nor in an area where physical injury is possible. We conclude that in cases such as this, in which plaintiff sensorily observes the injury and resulting death of his mother, recovery should be allowed under circumstances in which the incident which produces the emotional injuries and the emotional injuries are reasonably foreseeable.
Authoring Judge: Justice Penny J. White
Originating Judge:Judge Samuel H. Payne |
Hamilton County | Supreme Court | 10/07/96 | |
Jimmy E. Smith, v. Connie Sue Argo Smith - Concurring/Dissenting
01A01-9602-GS-00074
I concur with the majority’s conclusion that the criteria for determining the
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
|
Warren County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
United National Real Estate, Inc., v. C.F. Thompson and Columbia Auto Parts, Inc.
01A01-9604-CH-00173
This is a suit by a judgment creditor to set aside a fraudulent transfer of assets and to subject said assets to the satisfaction of the judgment.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Originating Judge:Judge Jim T. Hamilton |
Maury County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Richard D. Phillips, v. Interstate Hotels Corporation #L07 and Interstate Hotels Corporation on #L07, D/B/A Chattanooga Marriott and Kicks Lounge
03A01-9512-CH-00441
In this case, the Plaintiff, Richard D. Phillips, sues Interstate Hotels Corporation and Instate Hotels Corporation #L07, D/B/A Chattanooga Marriott and Kicks Lounge, seeking damages by reason of the Defendant's violating his civil rights under the provisions of T.C.A. 4-21-301( 2) .
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Chancellor Howard N. Peoples |
Hamilton County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Ella Mae Brown v. Marvin Douglas Brown - Concurring
01-A-01-9510-CV-00480
The wife of a prisoner in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction filed for divorce, claiming that her husband was guilty of inappropriate marital conduct. The husband answered and counterclaimed, and moved the court to order the wife to file a Bill of Particulars, setting forth the facts she was relying upon as grounds for the pending divorce. The court did not respond to the husband’s motion, nor did it respond to the husband’s Motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Testificandum, but granted the wife an absolute divorce without affording the husband the opportunity to present any evidence. We reverse, and vacate the trial court’s order.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Judge Muriel Robinson |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Terry Yates v. The Chattanooga Police Dept., Ervin N. Dinsmore, Public Safety Administrator, et al.
03A01-9602-CH-00069
This is an appeal from the judgment of the chancery court for Hamilton County, whereby the court affirmed the decision of the City Council of the City of Chattanooga finding the appellant, a police officer, guilty of violating Chattanooga Police Manual Orders and imposing disciplinary sanctions. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Don T. Murray
Originating Judge:Chancellor Howard N. Peoples |
Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | ||
Department of Human Services and William D. Gardner and Joann Gardner, v. Dana D. Defriece, In the Matter of John Defriece, a Minor
03A01-9604-JV-00150
The trial court terminated the parental rights of Dana D. Defriece (Mother) to her son, John Defriece (John)(DOB: Januar 9, 1988). Mother appeals, raising three issues that present the followig questions:
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Originating Judge:Judge C. Van Deacon, Jr. |
Bradley County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie, v. David K. Hinchy and Pearline HInchy
03A01-9604-CH-00138
David K. Hinchy and Pearline Henchy, who are residents of Indiana, appeal judgment of the Chancery Court for Cocke County. The Chancellor, first, granted a default judgment against them in favor of Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie, who are residents of Florida. The Court also ordered the sale of certain real estate, the proceeds of which would be applied to the satisfaction of the indebtedness secured by the real estate and, preliminarily, a personal judgment in the amount of $18,200, plus interest at the rate of 8.65 percent per annum from October 1, 1989. Second, after sale of the property and giving credit for payments previously made, he awarded a definciency judgment in the amount of $15,719.97, which included court costs and expenses of the sale.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Chancellor C.S. Rainwater, Jr. |
Cocke County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Jimmy E. Smith v. Connie Sue Argo Smith
01A01-9602-GS-00074
The counter-plaintiff, Connie Argo Smith, appeals from the Trial Court’s judgment awarding her a divorce on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment. The Trial Court also awarded her the marital residence and contents, a 1990 Astro Mini Van, and $100,000.00 cash. The Trial Court required the counter-defendant, Jimmy E. Smith, to pay all marital debts including the mortgage on the home. The court also awarded Mr. Smith a farm, commercial property, the “Smart Station” property, a houseboat, a bass boat, a Chevrolet truck, Mercedes automobile, riding mower, tractor, personal effects and unspecified stocks.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Originating Judge:Judge Richard Mcgregor |
Warren County | Court of Appeals | 10/04/96 | |
Pamela Lemoine Ford v. Michael Burke Ford
02A01-9507-CH-00153
In this post-divorce proceeding, Pamela Ford (“wife”) filed a petition to modify child support and alimony. Although the trial court declined to increase alimony, the court increased the amount of child support that Michael Ford (“husband”) was obligated to pay based upon his increased income. Wife has appealed and argues that the trial court erred in several respects. First, she asserts that the trial court erred in holding that the husband’s receipt of principal from an irrevocable trust is not “gross income” as that term is defined within the child support guidelines. Next, she contends that the trial court improperly failed to consider the value of the trust in increasing child support. Furthermore, wife argues that the trial court should have imputed income to husband based upon his voluntary unemployment. Finally, wife argues that the trial court erred in denying her request for an increase in alimony. For the reasons stated below, the judgment below is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Originating Judge:Judge Joe G. Riley. Jr. |
Dyer County | Court of Appeals | 10/03/96 |