Judy Carolyn Lawson vs. Cynthia Gale Rines
E2002-02152-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
This is a wrongful death action. The Trial Court excluded proof of the deceased's Social Security benefits at trial. Judy Carolyn Lawson ("Plaintiff") made an offer of proof showing only the amount of monthly Social Security benefits received. The jury returned a verdict in Plaintiff's favor, and the Trial Court granted Plaintiff's motion for prejudgment interest. Service Radio Cab Co., Inc. ("Defendant") appeals the award of prejudgment interest. Plaintiff appeals regarding the exclusion of proof of Social Security benefits. We affirm, in part, and reverse, in part.

Knox Court of Appeals

Sevier County vs. John Waters, Trustee
E2002-02309-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
This is a land condemnation case. On November 18, 1988, Sevier County ("the County") filed a petition for condemnation seeking to condemn property in the county for a new jail. The petition was tried to a jury some 13 plus years later, on June 19 and 20, 2002. The jury awarded compensation of $335,500. This verdict was $158,500 more than the amount deposited in court by the County. The trial court entered judgment on the jury's verdict; the trial court supplemented the award by an award of pre-judgment interest of $267,468.75 and decreed that the total judgment of $425,968.75 would accrue interest at the rate of 10% per annum. The County appeals, arguing (1) that the trial court erred in excluding evidence pertaining to a controversy over the ownership of the property; (2) that pre-judgment interest is discretionary with the court and that the court below should have considered the disputes among the property owners as a factor impacting the delay in getting this matter to trial; (3) that the trial court erred in the way it calculated pre-judgment interest; and (4) that the trial court erred in decreeing that the judgment of $425,968.75 would accrue post-judgment interest at the rate of 10% per annum. We affirm.

Sevier Court of Appeals

Donald Xiques vs. Charme Knight
E2003-00435-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
Plaintiff sued defendant claiming defendant divulged confidential information to FBI and that agency refused to hire him, due to defendant's action, which violated his constitutional right to privacy. The Trial Court ruled that plaintiff was estopped to maintain action because he had been unsuccessful in a prior action in the federal court against the same defendant. On Appeal, we affirm.

Knox Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Calvin Jerome Oliver
M2002-02438-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

The defendant, Calvin Jerome Oliver, pled guilty in the Marshall County Circuit Court to aggravated robbery, a Class B felony; aggravated burglary, a Class C felony; two counts of attempted aggravated robbery, a Class C felony; and three counts of aggravated assault, a Class C felony. The trial court merged his attempted aggravated robbery convictions into his aggravated robbery conviction and sentenced him as a Range II, multiple offender to eighteen years in the Department of Correction (DOC). The trial court sentenced him to seven years for the aggravated burglary conviction and eight years for each aggravated assault conviction, all to be served concurrently to each other but consecutively to the eighteen-year sentence for an effective sentence of twenty-six years in the DOC. The defendant appeals, claiming the trial court erred by refusing to apply and give proper weight to mitigating factors. We affirm the judgments of the trial court, but we remand the case for correction of a clerical error regarding the aggravated burglary judgment.

Marshall Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Brandon Ray Roland
E2002-00927-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Curtis Smith

Following a jury trial, Defendant, Brandon Ray Roland, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder, first degree felony murder and theft of property over $10,000. The trial court merged the felony murder conviction into the premeditated first degree murder conviction and sentenced Defendant to life imprisonment. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant to three years for the theft conviction and ordered the sentence to run concurrently with the life sentence. In his appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction for first degree murder; (2) the trial court erred in not granting a new trial because of improper juror conduct; (3) the trial court erred in not suppressing a letter written by Defendant while in juvenile detention; and (4) the Rhea County Juvenile Court erred in transferring Defendant to stand trial as an adult. Defendant does not appeal his conviction for theft. Following a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Rhea Court of Criminal Appeals

Bill Goins vs. Creditcorp
E2002-01927-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
This appeal reaches us in the form of several consolidated class action lawsuits. In each action the Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants, who are owners and/or operators of check cashing companies, effectively made short-term loans to Plaintiffs and charged them exorbitant and usurious interest rates, in violation of various state and federal statutes. After negotiation, the parties reached a settlement agreement, which was presented to and approved by the Trial Court. At issue in this appeal is the interpretation of a provision in the settlement agreement. Plaintiffs filed a "motion to enforce" which alleged that Defendants violated the settlement agreement by willfully failing to forgive and release certain debts of Plaintiffs resulting from transactions taking place on or before September 30, 1997. Defendants argued, among other things, that the agreement did not require them to release the debts at issue. The Trial Court dismissed Plaintiffs' motion to enforce the settlement agreement. We vacate the Court's judgment and remand the case for an evidentiary hearing.

Bradley Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. John A. Turbyville
E2002-00629-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of reckless aggravated assault. He received a sentence of seven years incarceration as a Range II multiple offender convicted of a Class D felony. On appeal the appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and that the trial court erred in denying him any form of alternative sentencing. Appellate review is available for these two issues despite the fact that the appellant failed to file a timely motion for new trial under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 33(b). However, review of these issues is dependent on either a timely filed notice of appeal, or in the interest of justice, a waiver of the timely filing of a notice appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 4(a). Because the appellant filed a late motion for a new trial, his notice of appeal is likewise tardy. Neither has the appellant sought a waiver of the timely filing of the notice of appeal. Under these circumstances the appeal is DISMISSED.

Sullivan Court of Criminal Appeals

R. Scott Martin v. John Curtis King
E2002-03055-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
This is a breach of contract case. R. Scott Martin ("Plaintiff") sued John Curtis King ("Defendant"), alleging that Defendant had breached his agreement to give Plaintiff a 3% interest in Defendant's landfill venture. The trial court found that the parties' agreement did not pertain to or cover the particular landfill business out of which Plaintiff sought a 3% interest. The trial court did conclude that Plaintiff was entitled to a judgment against Defendant for $4,500 for monetary contributions made by Plaintiff in connection with the parties' agreement. Plaintiff appeals, contending that the trial court erred in finding that a novation had occurred, in admitting parol evidence, and in calculating damages. We affirm.

Scott Court of Appeals

Roy Malone vs. Scott Probasco
E2002-03135-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III
In this appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County the Plaintiff/Appellant, Roy Michael Malone, Sr., argues that the Trial Court erred in granting the Defendant/Appellee, Scott L. Probasco, Jr., a summary judgment. We affirm and remand.

Hamilton Court of Appeals

In Re: Estate of Ilene S. Ramey
E2003-00544-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Richard E. Ladd
At issue in this appeal is whether this will contest action, brought by Tommy Snapp and Eddie Snapp as intestate heirs at law, is barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations found at T.C.A. 32-4-108. Plaintiffs have challenged the validity of the will of Ilene S. Ramey on grounds that it was executed outside the presence of two witnesses as required by T.C.A. 32-1-104. In their complaint they allege that the witnesses to the will were wrongfully coerced by their employment supervisor, Defendant Sherri H. Jones, to sign affidavits falsely stating that they were in the presence of Ms. Ramey when she executed her will. The Trial Court held the action to be time-barred because it was filed more than three years after admission of the will to probate, ruling that "under the authority of Phillips v. Phillips, 526 S.W.2d 439 (Tenn.1975), the Complaint alleges no facts that could amount to a concealment of the claim." The Court dismissed the complaint under Tenn.R.Civ.P. 12.02(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm.

Sullivan Court of Appeals

Lynn Raiteri Ex Rel. Mary Cox v. NHC Healthcare
E2003-00068-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Harold Wimberly
Lynn Raiteri, as the daughter and next friend of the late Mary Helen Cox ("Mrs. Cox"), sued NHC Healthcare/Knoxville, Inc. ("the defendant"), as well as others, for the wrongful death of Mrs. Cox, whose death allegedly resulted from improper care at the defendant's nursing home. We granted the plaintiff's Tenn. R. App. P. 9 application for an interlocutory appeal in order to review the trial court's order granting the defendant's motion to compel mediation and arbitration pursuant to the dispute resolution procedures contained in the defendant's nursing home admission agreement. We reverse.

Knox Court of Appeals

Conchita Johnson vs. Greg Johnson
E2003-00130-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
The Trial Court entered Judgment for back child support, ordered increase in continuing child support, and awarded custodial parent attorney's fees. Father, who sought change of custody, appealed. We affirm.

Sevier Court of Appeals

Clarence Matz, et ux vs. Wuest Diagnostics
E2003-00167-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
Defendants granted summary judgment in medical malpractice action on grounds the statute of limitation had run. On appeal, we vacate and remand.

Knox Court of Appeals

Brinda J. Hill v. Arcade Marketing Printing, Inc.
E2002-01936-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III, Chancellor
The plaintiff appeals the trial court's decision resolving all issues in favor of the defendant and dismissing the plaintiff's complaint, finding specifically: that the plaintiff failed to give proper, statutorily required notice of her alleged injuries; that the plaintiff's alleged injuries were not causally related to her job with the defendant company; and that the plaintiff was estopped from pursuing workers' compensation benefits for her alleged injuries. We affirm the judgment of the Chancery Court.

Knox Workers Compensation Panel

Angela Taylor vs. Douglas Fezell
E2002-02937-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
In post-divorce action by husband, the Trial Court refused to void trust provision in Marital Dissolution Agreement and calculated child support. Husband appealed, we affirm.

Greene Court of Appeals

Bobby Cunningham v. Terry Lester
M2002-00887-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: J. B. Cox
This dispute arises from an auction sale of real property. The trial court awarded plaintiff buyer specific performance of one contract and denied specific performance of a second contract. We affirm.

Bedford Court of Appeals

J.S. Haren Company vs. Kelly Services
E2002-03116-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
This appeal asserts that the Trial Court erred in entering judgment against the Appellant/Defendant, Kelly Services, Inc., for breach of contract. We reverse and dismiss the judgment of the Trial Court and remand.

Knox Court of Appeals

Judy Longmire vs Kroger
E2002-03119-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
In this action for damages for injuries suffered when plaintiff fell on defendant's premises, the Trial Court granted defendant summary judgment. On appeal, we vacate and remand.

Knox Court of Appeals

Steve Conklin vs. State
E2002-03130-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Approximately seventeen years ago, Steve Conklin (Plaintiff") was convicted by a jury in the McMinn County Criminal Court of raping a child under the age of thirteen years. Plaintiff's conviction was affirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeals in 1987. Plaintiff was represented by appointed counsel, Fredric J. Chester, Jr. ("Chester"). Chester represented Plaintiff both at trial and on the direct appeal. Many years later, Plaintiff was granted post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel and a new trial was ordered. The State of Tennessee ("State") declined to retry Plaintiff, who then was set free. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in the Claims Commission ("Commission") against the State seeking monetary compensation for the alleged legal malpractice of Chester which Plaintiff claims resulted in his being imprisoned improperly for fourteen and one-half years. According to Plaintiff, Chester should be deemed a state employee because he was appointed by the court. The State disagreed and filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The State argued that the Commission lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's legal malpractice claim because Chester was not a "state employee". The Commission dismissed the lawsuit solely because Plaintiff failed to respond timely to the State's motion to dismiss. We hold Chester was not an employee of the state and, therefore, the Commission lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's legal malpractice claim. The result reached by the Commission is affirmed.

McMinn Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Shun D. Jones
W2001-01313-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

The Appellant, Shun D. Jones, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of two counts of rape and was sentenced to twenty years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the verdict. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

Ronald W. Rice v. David Mills, Warden
E2003-00328-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Eugene Eblen

The petitioner, Ronald W. Rice, filed in the Morgan County Criminal Court ("the habeas court") for habeas corpus relief, alleging that he received an illegal sentence for his conviction for an aggravated rape which occurred in 1983. The habeas court granted the petitioner relief. On appeal, the State contends that the habeas court erred in finding that the petitioner was entitled to relief. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the Morgan County Criminal Court, reinstate the petitioner's aggravated rape conviction, and remand to the Williamson County Criminal Court ("the convicting court") for correction of the judgment of conviction.

Morgan Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. E.G.P.
E2003-00433-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: C. Van Deacon
The Juvenile Court of Bradley County ordered that a placement should be found by the Department of Children's Services ("DCS") for a sixteen-year-old mother with her two and one-half-year-old child, the latter of whom had been in foster care most of his life. Time constraints were imposed and DCS did not or was unable to comply with the judgment, which resulted in a finding of contempt. The DCS appeals, and presents a litany of issues for review, one of which alleges that the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate a placement. The judgment is vacated in toto and the case is remanded.

Bradley Court of Appeals

Barry Winfred Ritchie v. State of Tennessee
E2002-02609-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Douglas A. Meyer

In a series of steps designed to challenge his 1981 convictions for armed robbery and aggravated rape, Petitioner, Barry Winfred Ritchie, filed various pro se motions including (1) a motion for post-conviction relief and/or writ of error coram nobis, (2) a motion for relief of judgment pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, (3) a petition for common law writ of certiorari, and (4) a motion to quash the indictments and correct an illegal sentence. All pleadings are predicated on the same allegation that the Hamilton County Criminal Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to try and convict Petitioner of the charged offenses. Following a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Hamilton Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Howard B. Higley
E2001-02525-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Douglas A. Meyer

A Hamilton County jury convicted the Defendant of driving under the influence (DUI), second offense. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to the following: "11 months, 29 days suspended after 6 months day for day (11 months, 29 days suspended probation after the 6 months)." The trial court also revoked the Defendant's driver's license for two years, ordered the Defendant to pay a $610 fine, and ordered the Defendant to avoid alcohol throughout the probation period. In addition, the trial court imposed twenty days of community service to be completed within one year. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: 1) that the trial court erred by denying the Defendant's motion to suppress the results of a breathalyser test, 2) that the trial court erred by limiting the testimony of the Defendant's accident re-construction expert's testimony about the Tennessee Department of Transportation's statistics regarding traffic accidents that occurred at the intersection in question, and 3) that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing the Defendant to a sentence in excess of the maximum sentence available by statute for a DUI second offense. Finding no reversible error as concerns the conviction, we affirm the conviction. We vacate the sentence and remand for entry of an amended judgment.

Hamilton Court of Criminal Appeals

Donald Lacy v. Wesley Cox
E2003-00709-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
Donald R. Lacy ("Plaintiff") sued Jennifer Brandon for damages arising from an automobile accident. After deliberating for approximately two hours, the jury asked the Trial Court if they were required to award Plaintiff any monetary damages if they found fault on the part of Brandon. Based on the question, Plaintiff surmised the jury's deliberations were not going his way. As a result, Plaintiff moved for a voluntary dismissal without prejudice, believing he was entitled to do so as a matter of right. The Trial Court, also believing Plaintiff was entitled to dismiss his lawsuit without prejudice as a matter of right even though the jury was deliberating, granted the motion. We conclude Plaintiff was not entitled to voluntarily dismiss his lawsuit without prejudice as a matter of right at that stage in the proceedings, and as a consequence the dismissal is with prejudice.

Sevier Court of Appeals