Opinions

Hulshof vs. Hulshof
01A01-9806-CH-00339
Trial Court Judge: Patricia J. Cottrell

Nickelson vs. Sumner Co. Bd. of Ed.
01A01-9807-CV-00375
Trial Court Judge: Patricia J. Cottrell

Sherlock vs. Kwik Sak, et al
01A01-9807-CV-00346
Trial Court Judge: Patricia J. Cottrell

Haywood vs. Haywood
01A01-9808-CH-00442
Trial Court Judge: Patricia J. Cottrell

Eldridge vs. Eldridge
01A01-9808-CV-00451
Trial Court Judge: Thomas Goodall

Eldridge vs. Eldridge
01A01-9808-CV-00451

Davis vs. Computer Maintenance Svc.
01A01-9809-CV-00459
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz

Drake vs. Manson, et al
01A01-9810-CV-00525
Trial Court Judge: Bobby H. Capers

Alfonzo T. Peck vs. State
03C01-9809-CR-00329
Trial Court Judge: Douglas A. Meyer

Rocky Hipps vs. State
03C01-9807-CC-00237
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

State vs. Timothy V. Bowling
03C01-9805-CR-00167
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

State vs. James David Shropshire
E1998-00872-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Baumgartner
In March 1996, James David Shropshire, the defendant and appellant, was convicted in the Knox County Criminal Court of aggravated sexual battery and simple assault. Following the jury's verdict, the trial court dismissed the simple assault charge. On appeal, the defendant challenges his conviction for aggravated sexual battery. He raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; (2) whether a variance between the bill of particulars and the proof adduced at trial was fatal; (3) whether the defendant's conviction violated the double jeopardy clauses of the United States and Tennessee Constitutions; (4) whether the state made improper closing arguments; and (5) whether the trial court erred in allowing the state to introduce evidence that the defendant had committed prior bad acts. Because the jury heard evidence that the defendant committed a crime other than that for which he was on trial, which was the subject of an acquittal, the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Doe vs. Sundquist
01S01-9901-CV-00006

Thomas Eugene Graham vs. State
03C01-9809-CR-00337

State vs. James Oakley
03C01-9808-CR-00297

State vs. Blane Scott Holder
03C01-9812-CC-00439

Mulheim vs. Knox Co. Board of Education
03S01-9808-CH-00089

State vs. James Cannon
03C01-9808-CR-00272
Trial Court Judge: Stephen M. Bevil

State vs. Fred W. Kincaid, Jr.
03C01-9707-CR-00306
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

State vs. Fred W. Kincaid, Jr.
03C01-9707-CR-00306
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

Emma Crowe v. Diocese of Memphis Housing Corp
02S01-9807-CH-00071
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. J. Steven Stafford,
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. Plaintiff filed a complaint for workers' compensation benefits on October 7, 1996, alleging severe psychological and emotional injury, or aggravation of same, arising out of her conditions at work. The trial court found that the statute of limitations had run on the plaintiff's claim prior to the filing of her complaint and dismissed the complaint. The court also made findings, for the record, that the plaintiff gave proper notice and that the plaintiff had failed to meet her burden of proving causation of a compensable injury. We affirm the judgment of the trial court dismissing plaintiff's complaint for the reasons herein stated.

Doe vs. Sundquist
01S01-9901-CV-00006

State vs. Cedron Orgain
01C01-9808-CC-00334
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer

Willie Lee Benford vs State
01C01-9905-CR-00157

State vs. Bruce Edward Rochefort
01C01-9902-CR-00029