Paul Ivy v. Tennessee Department of Correction M2001-01219-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Department of Correction regarding a disciplinary proceeding at the Deberry Special Needs Facility in Davidson County. The prisoner filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County alleging the disciplinary board acted illegally, arbitrarily, and vindictively by violating the Department's Uniform Disciplinary Procedures when it disciplined him for attempted escape. The Department filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(6) motion to dismiss, and the trial court, citing Sandin v. Conner, 512 U.S. 472, 115 S.Ct. 2293 (1995), dismissed the petition. The prisoner has appealed. We have determined that the order dismissing the prisoner's petition should be reversed in part and that the case should be remanded for further consideration in light of Willis v. Tennessee Dep't of Corr., 113 S.W.3d 706 (Tenn. 2003).
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Mark Percy v. Dept of Correction M2001-01629-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves a dispute between a multiple rapist and the Tennessee Department of Correction regarding the prisoner's sentence expiration date. The prisoner filed a petition for a declaratory order in the Chancery Court for Davidson County asserting that the Department had misclassified him and that he was eligible to be released because his sentence had expired. The Department responded with a motion for summary judgment supported by an affidavit of a sentencing technician asserting that the prisoner had been correctly classified and that his sentence had not expired. The trial court granted the summary judgment and dismissed the petition. We find that the trial court reached the correct result, and, therefore, we affirm the judgment dismissing the prisoner's petition.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Mark Tinsley v. Suzanne Tinsley M2001-02319-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Burch
Mother sought modification of child support and a judgment against Father for contempt in the form of retroactive child support due to his failure to supply her with a yearly statement of his income as required by the final divorce decree. The trial court ordered a modification of the prospective child support, determining the amount of the obligation by averaging Father's fluctuating income for the three years prior to the hearing and awarded Mother a $54,192.00 judgment for retroactive child support during the five years that Father failed to provide his income statements to Mother. Because the trial court correctly calculated the prospective child support obligation, we affirm the amount of Father's monthly obligation in the amount of $1,300.00 from the date the petition was filed. However, because the trial court has no authority to award retroactive child support modification, we vacate the $54,192.00 judgment for retroactive child support. We remand the case for further proceedings to set reasonable attorney fees.
Cheatham
Court of Appeals
Cecelia Hutcheson v. Andrew W. Hutcheson M2000-02340-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Arthur E. Mcclellan
On August 18, 2000, Appellant was held to be in civil contempt of court for failure to pay alimony and failure to deliver property to his former wife in compliance with the previous divorce judgment in the case. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
William Steele v. Richard Berkman M2001-02250-COA-R10-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This appeal arises from a medical malpractice complaint filed by the Appellees in the Circuit Court of Davidson County against the Appellant, six other doctors, and two hospitals. The Appellant filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court denied the Appellant's motion for summary judgment. The Appellant filed an application for extraordinary appeal with this Court pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. This Court granted the application for extraordinary appeal. For the reasons stated herein, we reverse the trial court's denial of summary judgment against the Appellant.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
W2001-01941-COA-R3-JV W2001-01941-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Christy R. Little
Madison
Court of Appeals
James Emmett Moses, Jr. v. State of Tennessee W2001-01394-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III
The Petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated burglary, two counts of robbery and one count of theft under $500.00. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Petitioner as a Range III persistent offender to twelve years for the aggravated burglary conviction, thirteen years for each of the robbery convictions, and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the misdemeanor theft conviction. The sentencing court imposed consecutive sentences for the robbery convictions, resulting in an effective sentence of twenty-six years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. This Court affirmed the sentences on appeal, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the Petitioner's application for permission to appeal. The Petitioner subsequently filed for post-conviction relief, claiming that his plea was constitutionally defective because he was inadequately represented and that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered. The trial court denied relief. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Defendant, Jeret Phillips, appeals from the order of the Sullivan County Criminal Court which revoked Defendant's probation and required him to serve his sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The defendant, Billy Harold Arnold, appeals his misdemeanor theft conviction for which the Sullivan County Criminal Court sentenced him to eleven months twenty-nine days, all suspended except for thirty days confinement, "day for day." He contests the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission into evidence of prior similar conduct, and his sentence. We affirm the trial court, although we also note that a "day for day" term of confinement does not bar application of relevant good conduct credit statutes.
Sullivan
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Walter Lee Allen E1998-00416-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
Jefferson
Supreme Court
State vs. Walter Lee Allen E1998-00416-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
The appellant, Timothy S. Oglesby, pled guilty to the offense of felonious possession of a weapon. He received a two (2)-year sentence. Contemporaneously with the entry of the guilty plea the appellant and the State entered an agreed order purporting to reserve a certified question of law for appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(i). The certified question of law alleged to be dispositive of the case is stated in the agreed order as “the denial of his suppression motion.” We hold that the absence in the judgment of the certified question of law or of a statement incorporating the agreed order into the judgment compels a dismissal of this appeal. In addition, the failure of the agreed order to set forth the certified question with sufficient specificity compels the dismissal of this appeal even if the agreed order had been incorporated by reference into the judgment.
Coffee
Court of Criminal Appeals
Omawali Shabazz, aka Fred Edmond Dean vs. Greeley Wells E2001-02315-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
In this suit, wherein Omawali Ashanti Shabazz, a/k/a, Fred Edmond Dean, seeks to acquire certain materials held in the office of the District Attorney General. The Trial Court denied the relief he sought because, under Tenn.R.Crim. P. 16, he was not entitled to the material while a post-conviction proceeding was pending. We affirm.
Sullivan
Court of Appeals
Omawali Shabazz, aka Fred Edmond Dean vs. Greeley Wells E2001-02315-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
In this suit, wherein Omawali Ashanti Shabazz, a/k/a, Fred Edmond Dean, seeks to acquire certain materials held in the office of the District Attorney General. The Trial Court denied the relief he sought because, under Tenn.R.Crim. P. 16, he was not entitled to the material while a post-conviction proceeding was pending. We affirm.
Sullivan
Court of Appeals
David Schwab v. David Miller M2001-00932-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: R.E. Lee Davies
The Chancery Court of Williamson County held that in order to claim a major benefit of an employment contract the employee had to be employed when the other contingencies in the contract were met. We affirm the lower court's interpretation.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
ANR Pipeline Co., Colonial Pipeline Co., Columbia Gulf Transmission Co., et al. v. TN Board of Equalization M2001-01098-COA-R12-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Pipelines for the transport of petroleum products were installed sub-surface by various companies which acquired easements over affected freeholds. These pipelines were assessed as real estate for purposes of taxation. Petitions for Review were filed by the Pipeline Companies alleging that the pipelines were personal property. The decision of the Board of Equalization is reversed.
Williamson
Court of Appeals
Marilyn Yount v. Bruce Yount M2001-01335-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
The trial court granted a divorce to the wife, and awarded her alimony in futuro of $2,000 per month. The husband argues on appeal that the wife does not need any alimony, and that he himself does not have the ability to pay the alimony. The proof shows that he does indeed have the ability to pay, but that the wife's needs are more appropriately served by an award of rehabilitative alimony. We modify the alimony award accordingly.
The appellant, Gonzalo Moran Garcia, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of possession of one thousand grams or more of methamphetamine with intent to deliver, a class A felony. He raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his pre-trial motion to suppress; (2) whether the trial court erred in admitting at trial the testimony of Daniel A. Rosales, an officer employed by the Houston Police Department in Texas; (3) whether the evidence underlying the appellant’s conviction is sufficient; and (4) whether the trial court erred in rejecting his proposed jury instructions. Following a thorough review f the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case to the trial court for a new trial.
After careful review of the record, I write separately because I reach a different conclusion than that expressed in the majority opinion with respect to the defendant's motion to suppress the evidence obtained during the search of his vehicle. I agree with the majority on all other matters raised in this appeal.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
Don Long vs. Ralph & Edna Langley W2001-01490-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Acree
Trial Court Judge: George R. Ellis
This a lawsuit between the two stockholders of Gene Langley Ford, Inc., an automobile dealership. The issues involve the percentage of ownership owned by the two stockholders and whether the defendant paid himself an excessive salary for managing the business. The Chancellor held that the plaintiff owns forty-nine (49%) of the stock and the defendant owns fifty-one percent (51%). He further held that the defendant's salary was not excessive. We reverse the Chancellor's decision regarding the ownership of the stock and hold that each party owns fifty percent (50%). We affirm the Chancellor's decision that the defendant's salary was reasonable.
Gibson
Court of Appeals
Eagle Vision vs. Odyssey Medical W2001-01772-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos
This is an action for misappropriation of trade secrets in which the manufacturer of a surgical product allegedly misappropriated the product design and marketed a competing product after the developer discontinued its relationship with manufacturer. Trial court granted summary judgment in favor of manufacturer on all claims. We reverse and remand.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Shelia Bland vs. Jerry Bland W2001-01705-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
Husband appeals from a final decree of divorce as to the amount of alimony awarded and the award of attorney fees. We affirm and modify.
Henderson
Court of Appeals
Alfred/Florence Garionis vs. Andre Pride & Charles Holland W2001-01682-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Acree
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers
The plaintiffs filed a suit for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident. Through their attorney, they reached a settlement of their claims. Thereafter, they sought to set aside the settlement upon the grounds that they had not authorized their attorney to accept the defendants' offer. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found that the plaintiffs had authorized their attorney to settle the case and entered an order enforcing the settlement. We hold that the findings of the trial court are supported by a preponderance of the evidence and affirm the lower court.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Joyce Howell vs. Phillip Howell W2001-01167-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
