Carl Scott and Alma Scott, v. Rogers Group, Inc.
This is a case involving breach of contract. Plaintiffs/appellants, Carl Scott and Alma Scott (referred to herein as “the Scotts”) appeal from the order of the trial court granting summary judgment to defendant/appellee, Rogers Group, Inc. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Barry Stokes and Pamela Stokes v. Torina Arnold
The Chancery Court for Dickson County terminated a mother’s parental rights to three young children and allowed the foster parents to proceed with the adoption of the children. Because we find that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence upon which to base the termination of the mother’s parental rights, we reverse. |
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
Steven B. Dargi and Andrea L. Dargi v. The Terminix International Company, State of Tennessee, et al. - Concurring
The plaintiff repeatedly cursed and insulted the defendant’s attorney during a taped deposition. The attorney played portions of the tape during the trial. The trial court found that the plaintiff’s utterances constituted criminal contempt. We affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Johnnie Lamont Dalton v. State of Tennessee
The appellant, Johnnie Lamont Dalton, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. On May 5, 1997, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to murder second degree during the voir dire of a jury, wherein he was charged with the offense of murder first degree. The petitioner, collaterally, attacks his guilty plea and conviction for murder second degree upon the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. More specifically, he contends that trial counsel failed to (a) adequately investigate and prepare for trial; (b) failed to interview and subpoena state witnesses; and (c) failed to subpoena potential witnesses, including one witness who the defendant contends would have established that the defendant was not the murderer. The petitioner asserts that were it not for the above actions, he would not have pled guilty on the mistaken advice of counsel. After a review of the record, we AFFIRM the trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In the Matter of: K.E.C.D., a child Under the Age of 18 Years
This appeal involves a dispute over the surname of a child born to unmarried parents. The biological father (“Father”) of the minor child, seeks reversal of the juvenile court’s denial of his motion to change the child’s last name. Over the objections of the mother (“Mother”),1 Father sought to change his son’s last name to his own to reflect his paternity. For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.2 |
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Ferris E. Watson v. Lynn Rose Watson
This case involves a dispute over custody of two children upon their parents’ divorce. The trial court awarded custody to Lynn Rose Watson (“Mother”) with visitation to Ferris E. Watson (“Father”). Father appeals, claiming he is comparatively the better parent. We affirm the award of custody to Mother. |
Stewart | Court of Appeals | |
Robert Bean, Franklin Shaffer, David Autry, Mack Roberts, v. Ned Ray McWherter, Governor of the State of Tennessee, et al.
The appellants have asked the court to rehear this appeal because we did not address the facial conflict between the definitions of Class II and Class III wildlife, leaving the public without any guidance as to what species are in Class II. Since the possession of Class II wildlife without a permit is a crime, and no permit is required for the possession of those species in Class III, the determination of what is included in Class II is the critical determination. And a person of ordinary intelligence must be able to make it. State v. Thomas, 635 S.W.2d 114 (Tenn. 1982). |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Brown vs. Wal-Mart
|
Lawrence | Supreme Court | |
Rutherford Co. Bd. of Ed. vs. Rutherford Co. Comm.
|
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
Gragg vs. Gragg
|
Supreme Court | ||
State vs. Daniel
|
Supreme Court | ||
State vs. Daniel
|
Supreme Court | ||
Gregory James Harper vs. State
|
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
E1999-02098-C)A-R3-CV
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance vs. Brian Howard, et al
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
E1999-02550-COA-R3-CV
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. Danny Spradlin
|
Blount | Supreme Court | |
Rhonda Pritchett V.Brewer, Krause & Brooks & American Mining Insurance Co .
|
Davidson | Workers Compensation Panel | |
02525-COA-R3-CV
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
01C01-9808-CR-00325
|
Overton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
00747-COA-R3-CV
|
Sullivan | Court of Appeals | |
03C01-9902-CC-00055
|
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Ricky Lee Turner
|
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jeffrey L. Lawson v. University of Tennessee
We granted this Rule 9, T.R.A.P., application to determine whether the defendant University of Tennessee (“the University”) can be sued for a violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. We find that it cannot be sued for such violations under the current state of the law. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying the University’s motion to dismiss. |
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
E1999-02516-COA-R9-CV
|
Knox | Court of Appeals |