William A. Dalton, et al. v. Gerald W. Dale, et al.
M2002-01205-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

Defendant appeals adverse summary judgment as to diminution in value of a 1995 Jaguar XJ6 automobile based upon alleged undisputed expert testimony. Judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.

Robert Pirtle v. Tennessee Board of Paroles, et al.
M1998-00454-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. McCoy

This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Tennessee Board of Paroles regarding the revocation of his parole. After exhausting his administrative remedies, the prisoner filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County asserting that he did not commit the crime that triggered the revocation of his parole. The trial court eventually dismissed the petition on the ground that it was not timely filed, and the prisoner has appealed. While his appeal was pending, the prisoner was released from the Department of Correction. Accordingly, because this appeal is now moot, we vacate the trial court's order and remand the case with directions to dismiss the prisoner's petition.

State of Tennessee v. Jared Michael Christein
E2001-01856-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The appellant, Jared Michael Christein, was convicted by a jury in the Sullivan County Criminal Court of second degree murder, felony murder, and especially aggravated robbery. The appellant's second degree murder conviction was merged into his felony murder conviction and he was sentenced to life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years incarceration for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: whether sufficient evidence existed to support his convictions and whether the trial court properly charged the jury on the appropriate lesser-included offenses. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Charles W. Wellman
E2001-03055-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant was convicted of assault, a Class A misdemeanor, in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-101 and sentenced to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with ninety days to be served in the county jail and the remainder on supervised probation. On appeal, in addition to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, he argues that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence and erred by ordering that he serve ninety days in confinement. We conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and the record supports the trial court’s sentencing determinations. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Conner Bros. Excavating Co., Inc. v. Long
E2001-01268-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: William M. Barker, J.
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm, Judge
We granted this motion for a full court review of the Special Workers' Compensation Panel decision to determine whether the appellant, Clyde L. Long, proved by a preponderance of the evidence that his injury occurred as a result of a work-related incident as required in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-103(a). After a careful review of the record, we hold that the evidence preponderates against the holding of the trial court and Special Workers' Compensation Panel, and that the appellant's injury did arise out of and within the scope of his employment. The judgment of the trial court and the Special Workers' Compensation Panel is reversed. Because the trial court made no other factual findings, the case is remanded to the trial court with instructions to make factual findings regarding: (1) the compensable medical benefits due to the appellant; (2) the temporary disability benefits to which Mr. Long is entitled, and; (3) the proper permanent disability award to which Mr. Long is entitled. Additionally, in the interest of expediting the payment of Mr. Long's medical expenses and the receipt of disability benefits, we direct the trial court to hold such hearing within sixty days of the date of this Court's order.

State of Tennessee v. Ronald Paul
M2002-00810-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge John H. Gasaway, III

The petitioner, Ronald Paul, appeals the Robertson County Criminal Court's disposition of his petition for post-conviction relief. The petition alleged ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. The lower court ruled that, because appellate counsel's single issue raised on direct appeal was deemed waived by the appellate court, the petitioner would be entitled to a delayed appeal. The court also dismissed without prejudice the remaining allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, indicating that the petitioner could file a new petition for post-conviction relief after the conclusion of the delayed direct appeal. Because we lack jurisdiction in this appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Donnie Thompson
M2002-01499-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jim T. Hamilton

A Maury County jury convicted the defendant, Donnie Thompson, of voluntary manslaughter and attempted voluntary manslaughter. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I standard offender to the maximum sentences of six years for voluntary manslaughter and four years for attempted voluntary manslaughter, with the sentences to run consecutively. On appeal, the defendant contends his sentences are excessive. We reduce the sentence for voluntary manslaughter to five years, affirm the four-year sentence for attempted voluntary manslaughter, and order the sentences to run concurrently.

Lindsay Taylor et al v. Al Beard et al
W2001-00347-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert L. Childers

We granted review to determine whether Tennessee should adopt a cause of action allowing a child to recover for loss of parental consortium due to an injury to the child's parent. The trial court dismissed the claims for loss of parental consortium after finding that no such cause of action exists. The Court of Appeals affirmed. We hold that this Court should not adopt a common law cause of action for loss of parental consortium in personal injury cases and that the issue of whether to create such a cause of action is a matter of legislative discretion. We therefore affirm the Court of Appeals' judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Ricky Woods
W2002-00299-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

A Madison County jury convicted the defendant, Ricky Woods, of aggravated burglary, theft of property valued over $500, and vandalism of property under $500. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range II multiple offender for the convictions for aggravated burglary and theft and imposed concurrent sentences of eight years for aggravated burglary, three years for theft, and eleven months and twenty-nine days for vandalism. On appeal, the defendant contends (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions; and (2) the sentences are excessive. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Anthony McNabb, et al., v. Highways, Inc., et al.
E2001-00867-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lawrence H. Puckett

We granted this appeal to determine whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendant based on the plaintiff’s failure to join all of the tortfeasors in a single proceeding under Samuelson v. McMurtry, 962 S.W.2d 473 (Tenn. 1998). The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment after concluding that the plaintiff’s settlement with one tortfeasor did not require dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint against a second tortfeasor. After reviewing the record and the applicable authority, we hold that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendant based on the plaintiff’s failure to join the tortfeasors in a single proceeding and that Samuelson is not applicable to the facts of this case. We therefore affirm the Court of Appeals’ judgment and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

Conner Brothers Excavating Company v. Long
E2001-01268-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Judge Wheeler A. Rosenbalm

We granted this motion for a full court review of the Special Workers' Compensation Panel decision to determine whether the appellant, Clyde L. Long, proved by a preponderance of the evidence that his injury occurred as a result of a work-related incident as required in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-103(a). After a careful review of the record, we hold that the evidence preponderates against the holding of the trial court and Special Workers' Compensation Panel, and that the appellant's injury did arise out of and within the scope of his employment. The judgment of the trial court and the Special Workers' Compensation Panel is reversed. Because the trial court made no other factual findings, the case is remanded to the trial court with instructions to make factual findings regarding: (1) the compensable medical benefits due to the appellant; (2) the temporary disability benefits to which Mr. Long is entitled, and; (3) the proper permanent disability award to which Mr. Long is entitled. Additionally, in the interest of expediting the payment of Mr. Long's medical expenses and the receipt of disability benefits, we direct the trial court to hold such hearing within sixty days of the date of this Court's order.

Rick Kyle v. Earl Williams & Michelle Williams
E2002-00091-SC-R09-CV
Authoring Judge: Chancellor Jerri S. Bryant
Trial Court Judge: Chief Justice Frank F. Drowota, III,

We granted the plaintiff's application for permission to appeal to determine whether the Chancellor erred in holding that a contractor is unlicensed for purposes of Tennessee Code Annotated section 62-6-103(b), and therefore is limited to a recovery of documented expenses proven by clear and convincing evidence, where the contractor possessed a valid contractor's license when the contract was formed but did not maintain a valid license throughout the entire time contracting services were performed under the contract. After carefully considering the relevant statutes, we conclude that the Chancellor properly held that a contractor who does not maintain a valid license throughout the entire contract period is unlicensed for purposes of Tennessee Code Annotated section 62-6-103(b) and limited to a recovery of documented expenses proven by clear and convincing evidence.

State of Tennessee v. Jerry Wayne Pointer
M2001-02269-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

The defendant, Jerry Wayne Pointer, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and sentenced as a violent offender to life imprisonment without parole. On appeal, he contends that the trial court erred in denying his motions to suppress evidence seized from his person and his home, in ruling that his prior convictions were admissible for impeachment purposes, in allowing testimony of a prior violent incident between him and the victim, and, additionally, that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for first degree premeditated murder. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tony S. Walker v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02921-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty

The petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for first degree felony murder, for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment. He argues that: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and (2) the post-conviction court erred in finding that his statement taken by law enforcement officers did not violate his constitutional rights. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court's denial of the petition.

State of Tennessee v. Tommy William Davis
E2002-00511-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper, II

The defendant, Tommy William Davis, was convicted of Class D theft of property over $1,000 and was sentenced to a term of six years incarceration, as a Range II offender. On appeal, he argues that the trial court should have granted a judgment of acquittal at the close of the state’s proof, and he challenges the length of his sentence as premised on an invalid enhancement factor. Our review convinces us that the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction and that, although improper enhancement factors were applied, a sentence of six years is appropriate.

State of Tennessee v. Tommy William Davis - Concurring
E2002-00511-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper, II

While I concur with the majority that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction for theft of property over $1,000, I reach that result from a somewhat different approach than that taken in the principal opinion. The majority concludes that the defendant’s presence in and operation of a borrowed vehicle is sufficient proof to support a finding of constructive possession of contraband contained therein. Concededly, this has been the conclusion reached by this Court in a number of its decisions. See, e.g., State v. Gonzalo Moran Garcia, No. M2000-01760-CCA-R3-CD, 2002 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 146, at *111 (Tenn. Crim. App. Nashville, Feb. 20, 2002); State v. Brown, 915 S.W.2d 3, 7-8 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). However, having re-read the opinion of the Tennessee Supreme Court in State v. Shaw, 37 S.W.3d 900 (Tenn. 2001), I am convinced that mere presence in and operation of a vehicle containing contraband is, without other proof of a power or intention on the part of the defendant to exercise dominion and control over the contraband, insufficient to establish “constructive possession.” Nevertheless, I believe that the record of the instant case provides sufficient other proof that, when coupled with the proof of the defendant’s presence in and operation of the vehicle containing contraband, establishes the constructive possession necessary in this case to sustain a theft conviction.

State of Tennessee v. Donald P. Wilcox
E2002-01229-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

The defendant, Donald P. Wilcox, appeals the Sullivan County Criminal Court's denial of his request for probation for his guilty pleas to violating a habitual traffic offender order, a Class E felony; violating the registration law, a Class C misdemeanor; and possession of alprazolam pills, marijuana, and drug paraphernalia, Class A misdemeanors. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

Michelle Devers v. Aqua Glass Corporation,
W2001-02832-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield, Chancellor
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. In this appeal, the employer insists "the trial court erred in finding that the plaintiff had sustained a compensable injury under the Workers' Compensation Act and, as a result thereof, suffered an 18 percent permanent partial disability to each arm." As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (21 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and W. MICHAEL MALOAN, SP. J., joined. Steven Maroney, J. Arthur Crews and Jay Dustin King, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Aqua Glass Corporation Edward L. Martindale, Jr., Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellee, Michelle Devers MEMORANDUM OPINION This civil action was initiated by the employee or claimant, Michelle Devers, to recover workers' compensation benefits for gradually occurring work related injuries to her hands and arms. The employer answered by asserting that the claimant failed to give timely written notice of her injuries and denying every allegation of the complaint. After a trial on the merits, the trial court awarded her, among other things, benefits based on 18 percent permanent partial disability to both arms. The employer has appealed, contending the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2) (21 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher K. Knight
W2001-02995-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed Mcginley

A Hardin County jury convicted the defendant of two counts of aggravated assault. On appeal, he contends: (1) the trial court erred by refusing to grant a mistrial during jury voir dire; (2) the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion for new trial based on alleged juror misconduct; and (3) the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Rebecca McMurry v. Metro Government of Nashville
M2000-02902-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This appeal is brought by an employee of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County who slipped and fell while working and, as a result, injured her knee. The employee brought suit pursuant to the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act to recover damages for her lost earning capacity, pain and suffering, and expenses. Prior to this suit, Metro paid the employee's medical expenses and compensated her for the work that she missed during her recovery. The trial judge awarded the employee $24,000, finding that Metro was at fault, but that the employee's injury was merely the exacerbation of a previous knee injury. The trial court also awarded the employee $2,858.30 in discretionary costs, but disallowed a $900 charge for the trial preparation fee of the employee's expert. The employee appeals the trial court's final order. We affirm the trial court in all respects.

Ray Dunnagan v. Foamex
W2001-03076-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris, Chancellor
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. In this appeal, the employer insists (1) the action is time barred, (2) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the employee's restrictive lung disease was caused by exposure to silica at work and (3) the award of permanent partial disability based on 65 percent to the body as a whole is excessive. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (21 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and W. MICHAEL MALOAN, SP. J., joined. Joseph M. Crout, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Foamex Ricky L. Boren, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellee, Ray Dunnagan MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Ray Dunnagan, initiated this civil action on April 5, 21 to recover workers' compensation benefits for an alleged occupational disease resulting from exposure to chemicals at work. By its answer, the employer denied liability. After a trial on the merits, the trial court resolved the issues in favor of the employee, awarding, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits based on 65 percent to the body as a whole. The employer has appealed. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2) (21 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.

Deborah Griffin v. Ace USA
W2002-01433-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris, Chancellor
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 found the plaintiff had sustained a 4 percent permanent partial impairment to her body as a whole as a result of an injury to her left arm,1 which aggravated a previous impairment to her right arm. The employer appeals the trial court's judgment. The employer contends that the plaintiff's injury was to a scheduled member, not to the body as a whole, and that the evidence did not preponderate in favor of the amount of the trial court's award. We conclude that the plaintiff may recover only for the injury to her left arm, a scheduled member, and we modify the plaintiff's award to 5 percent permanent partial disability to the left arm. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed as Modified and Remanded JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J. and JOE C. LOSER, SP. J., joined. P. Allen Phillips, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Ace USA. Jack Manhein, Jr., Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellee, Deborah Griffin. MEMORANDUM OPINION At the time of trial, the plaintiff, who is married and is the mother of a child, was forty years of age. She has a twelfth-grade education. The plaintiff's work history is, for the most part, that of 1 The trial judge and the testifying physicians refer to the plaintiff's injuries as being to the "upper extremities." However, the Workers' Compensation Act refers to "arms." a food service worker. In 1991, the plaintiff's right arm was broken in an automobile accident. The accident was not job-related. As a result of that injury, the plaintiff has a metal plate in her right arm. On March 22, 2, the plaintiff received a work-related injury to her left ring finger, resulting in amputation of the finger, for which she received compensation based upon a 25 percent loss of use of her left arm. On March 14, 21, while working as a crust stacker for the defendant, the plaintiff's left arm was caught by mechanical flippers on a production line. Her radius and ulnar bones were severely fractured. The plaintiff testified that as a result of the left arm injury she is unable to bend her wrist, that she cannot perform household chores because of the loss of grip, that her left arm is weaker, and that she has pain in her left arm. She further testified that as a result of the injury to her left arm she has to use her right arm more often, which has caused her right shoulder to hurt. The physician who was treating the plaintiff's arm fracture released her to return to work on July 1, 21, without any restrictions. However, the plaintiff was still under restrictions as a result of the March 2 injury. The plaintiff was doing a light-duty job at the time of trial. On July 21, 21, the plaintiff submitted a resignation letter to Aurora Foods, Inc. The plaintiff reported to Aurora that she resigned because she was having pain in both of her arms due to the two accidents she had while working at Aurora. The trial court found that the plaintiff's injury to her left arm aggravated and exacerbated the prior injury to her right arm, resulting in a 4 percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. Medical Evidence Dr. W. Randolph Fly, an orthopedic surgeon, saw the plaintiff immediately after the left arm injury2 and performed surgery that consisted of opening the arm and placing plates on the broken bones. Dr. Fly continued to see the plaintiff over a period of several weeks and testified that she progressed normally in the healing process, which included pain and weakness in her arm during the time of treatment. Dr. Fly stated on May 8, 21, that the plaintiff could return to work with restrictions of no lifting over 5 to 1 pounds, no fine manipulation with her left hand, and limited hours of work. On July 1, 21, Dr. Fly found that she had reached maximum medical improvement. He fixed no restrictions on her as a result of the injury to her left arm. He testified the previous restrictions for the injury to her fingers were still in effect. Dr. Fly testified he only 2 Dr. Fly's notes on the date of the plaintiff's injury indicate that the plaintiff reported pain in her left shoulder. Th ere wa s no furth er me ntion o f left should er pa in by D r. Fly. -2-

Darrell Lamar Fritts v. State of Tennessee
M2001-03126-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

The petitioner, Darrell Lamar Fritts, filed in the Davidson County Criminal Court a petition for habeas corpus relief, alleging that the plea bargain process employed by the State of Tennessee is unconstitutional per se, thus rendering two of his convictions, which resulted from guilty pleas, void. The trial court denied the petition and the petitioner timely appealed. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Terry Wayne Luna
M2001-02752-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Charles D. Haston, Sr.

The Defendant, Terry Wayne Luna, was convicted by a jury of aggravated sexual battery. He was sentenced to twenty years in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for a mistrial because the Defendant was unduly prejudiced by a non-responsive answer to a question asked by defense counsel on cross-examination. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Michael Harrington v. Grant Smith
M2002-00840-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Defendant appeals a grant of summary judgment against him on a promissory note and an additional judgment against him for breach of contract. We affirm the action of the trial court.