Vickie Nash vs. Thomas Nash
E2002-01597-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: William K. Swann
This appeal of a judgment for divorce entered by the Knox County Circuit Court questions whether the Trial Court erred in its classification and division of a 401(k) retirement account and in its award of rehabilitative alimony. We affirm in part, modify in part and remand.

Sam Weaver vs. Knox County Board of Zoning Appeals
E2002-02000-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: John F. Weaver
Sam C. Weaver filed a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking an order of the trial court setting aside the decision of the Knox County Board of Zoning Appeals ("the BZA") granting Crown Communications, Inc., and BellSouth Personal Communications, Inc., dba Cingular Wireless, (collectively "the cellular companies") permission to construct a 195-foot cellular tower on property owned by one of Weaver's neighbors. The trial court dismissed the petition. We affirm.

Mitch Stooksbury vs. American National Property
E2002-02385-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
Mitch and Gina Stooksbury ("Plaintiffs") purchased homeowners insurance from American National Property and Casualty Company ("Defendant"). After Plaintiffs' home was destroyed by fire, they were informed by Defendant that their insurance policy had been cancelled prior to the date of loss because of an underwriting risk arising from missing railing on a deck. Defendant claimed to have mailed a cancellation notice and refund check to Plaintiffs in accordance with the terms of the policy. Plaintiffs denied receiving the cancellation notice or refund check. A jury concluded Defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it mailed the cancellation notice to Plaintiffs. The jury also concluded Defendant acted unfairly and in bad faith, and that Defendant's failure to pay the loss was through fraudulent and deceptive practices. The Trial Court entered a judgment for Plaintiffs in the amount of $92,750, for damages pursuant to the insurance contract, plus prejudgment interest on that $92,750. The Trial Court also assessed a 25% bad faith penalty and an additional 5% for punitive damages. Both parties appeal. We affirm the judgment for Plaintiffs in the amount of $92,750 and the prejudgment interest awarded on that $92,750. The bad faith penalty and award of punitive damages is reversed.

Lisa Kay Rogers vs. Richard Barrett Rogers
E2002-02300-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Howell N. Peoples
In this divorce action, the trial court divided marital property and awarded child support and rehabilitative alimony. Both parties raise issues on appeal. We affirm, as modified.

New Covenant Baptist Church vs. Panther Sark
E2002-02693-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II

New Covenant Baptist Church vs. Panther Sark
E2002-02693-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard

E.C. Mitchell v. Larry Mitchell
M2001-01609-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
This case comes before the Court upon consideration of the record and Appellant's brief pursuant to this Court's order filed on April 3, 2002. Appellant, Evalina Casey Cheadle Mitchell, hereinafter referred to as the Mother, seeks relief from the trial court's sua sponte order requiring the parties to mediate certain issues, requiring the minor children to attend periodic counseling and requiring the parties to submit to counseling themselves. We reverse the trial court's order and remand this case for a full hearing consistent with Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-401, et seq.

Paul Seibers v. Melissa Cunnningham
M2002-02782-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull
This appeal stems from a parental dispute over the custody of a 16-year-old boy and a 12-year-old girl. Their father filed suit in the DeKalb County Juvenile Court seeking to remove the children from their mother's custody because they were dependent and neglected. The juvenile court granted the father custody of his son but decided that his daughter should remain with her maternal grandmother in the custody of the Department of Children's Services. The father pursued a de novo appeal to the Circuit Court for DeKalb County. After the children's mother moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that it was untimely, the father filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02(1) motion seeking relief from his untimely notice of appeal. The circuit court granted the father the requested relief and, following a bench trial, granted the father custody of both children. The mother asserts on this appeal that the circuit court lacked authority to grant the father relief from his untimely notice of appeal and, in the alternative, that the father was not entitled to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02(1) relief for excusable neglect. We have determined that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the father's Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02(1) motion and, therefore, that the father's appeal to the circuit court should have been dismissed because it was untimely.

Dept of Children's Services vs. RB
E2002-01950-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: John W. Walton
Trial Court terminated father's parental rights for failure to support child. On appeal, we affirm.

Bankers Trust y vs. Timothy Collins
E2002-02109-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
In this declaratory judgment action, the Trial Court held that recorded trust deeds and notes had priority over unrecorded trust deeds and notes and dismissed the action. We affirm.

KHB Holdings vs. Mark Duncan
E2002-02062-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Daryl R. Fansler
KHB Holdings, Inc. ("KHB") sued Mark A. Duncan and Tina L. Duncan ("the Duncans"), alleging that the Duncans had terminated KHB's contract to construct a residence for them. The trial court found that KHB's corporate charter had been revoked two years prior to the date on which KHB ostensibly contracted with the Duncans; denied KHB's motion to substitute its sole shareholder, Kenneth H. Boyd ("Boyd"), for the corporation; and held that KHB had failed to establish it was entitled to recover based upon a theory of quantum meruit. We affirm.

In The Matter of : Estate of J.C. Qeener
E2002-02311-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: William H. Russell
Trial Court entered Judgments against Estate for claimants on theories of resulting and/or constructive trusts, finding decedent's intent from a draft copy of Will never executed. On appeal, we affirm in part and reverse in part.

Fred Slaughter vs. Laura Slaughter & Daniel Crowe
E2002-02477-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson
The Trial Court gave Judgments for plaintiffs against defendants and cross-defendant Slaughter was given Judgments for compensatory and punitive damages against co-defendant Crowe and her deed to Crowe was voided. On appeal, we affirm all Judgments except for the Judgment for punitive damages which is remanded for trial on damages.

Willis Edwards vs. Katherine Heckmann
E2002-02292-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
This appeal involves a boundary line dispute between Willis Edwards and Wendall Edwards ("Plaintiffs") and Katherine and Gregory Heckmann ("Defendants"). Plaintiffs and Defendants presented proof from their respective surveyors regarding the appropriate boundary line for the disputed area of land. The surveyors testified in detail regarding the natural and artificial landmarks, etc., they relied upon in arriving at their differing conclusions. The Trial Court concluded Defendants' surveyor was accurate and entered judgment accordingly. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

Big Nine Productions vs. International Creative Management
E2002-02452-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
DLLP, LLC, dba Big Nine Productions ("DLLP") sued International Creative Management, Inc., aka ICM ("ICM") and Rock On Tours, Inc. (collectively "the defendants") for damages and other relief arising out of the alleged failure of the defendants to follow through with a concert featuring the defendants' principal, a musical group known as the Moody Blues. The defendants moved the court to compel arbitration under an alleged agreement providing for arbitration in New York City. The trial court ordered arbitration, but decreed that it would be conducted in Chattanooga. The defendants appeal, arguing that the trial court was without authority to order arbitration other than in New York City. By way of a separate issue, the appellee, DLLP, contends that the trial court ordered "non-binding" arbitration and that it erred in doing so in the absence of the parties' consent, said consent being required by Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 31, Sec. 3(d). It seeks an outright reversal of the court's order. We hold that the trial court ordered "binding" arbitration; that such arbitration was required under the terms of the parties' agreement; and that the trial court erred in failing to order that the arbitration would be conducted in New York City. Accordingly, we modify the trial court's order. As modified, the order is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Julia M. Ward
E2002-01381-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

The Defendant, a teacher, was indicted for three counts of assault against one of her students. She offered to enter a plea of nolo contendere on Count II in exchange for judicial diversion and the dismissal of the remaining two counts. The State rejected the Defendant's plea of nolo contendere and maintained that the Defendant would have to plead guilty in order to receive judicial diversion. The Defendant refused the offer and requested pretrial diversion. The State denied the Defendant's request. The Defendant filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the Knox County Criminal Court. The trial court denied the petition. The trial court then filed an order permitting interlocutory appeal to this Court. This Court granted the Defendant's application for interlocutory review. In this appeal, the Defendant argues that the State abused its discretion by denying the Defendant pretrial diversion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Gloria Chambliss vs. DennisStohler
E2002-02413-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: W. Neil Thomas, III
Gloria Jean Chambliss saw Dennis L. Stohler, M.D. ("Defendant") for medical care and treatment for problems related to her right knee. Ms. Chambliss was dissatisfied with the results of Defendant's treatment. Ms. Chambliss and her husband, Willie Chambliss ("Plaintiffs") sued Defendant for medical malpractice. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, which the Trial Court granted. Plaintiffs filed a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 59.04 motion to alter or amend the judgment and also a motion to allow the filing of an amended affidavit of Plaintiffs' expert. The Trial Court denied the motions to alter or amend. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

Bryan Pearson v. State of Tennessee
E2002-02817-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Buddy D. Perry

The pro se appellant appeals from the summary dismissal of his petition for the writ of habeas corpus. Finding that summary dismissal was appropriate under the circumstances of this case, we affirm the judgment of the lower court.

Melvin E. Beard v. State of Tennessee
M2002-02140-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

Petitioner, Melvin E. Beard, appeals from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In his appeal, Petitioner alleges that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the negotiation and entry of Petitioner's best interest plea to the charge of sale and delivery of cocaine, that his best interest plea was involuntary, and that the factual basis presented by the State was insufficient to support his plea. After a careful review of the record in this matter, we conclude that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's findings of fact. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Terrance W. Price
M2002-00991-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Defendant, Terrance W. Price, pled guilty to fifteen counts of money laundering, a Class B felony, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, a Class C felony. He pled guilty reserving the right to appeal a certified question of law pursuant to Rule 37(b)(2)(i) of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. The certified question of law on appeal is whether Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-14-901, - 903, Money Laundering Act of 1996, violates Article XI, Section 8 or Article I, Section 8 of the Tennessee Constitution by exempting from its application violation of gambling laws, found in Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-501 et seq. After a careful review, we conclude that the statutes do not violate the Tennessee Constitution, and therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Bales
E2001-01075-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

The defendant, Mark Anthony Bales, pled guilty to attempted second degree murder. After accepting his plea, the trial court sentenced the defendant to serve eleven years as a Range I standard offender. The defendant now appeals his sentence arguing that the trial court erred (1) by finding that when the defendant committed the instant crime, he treated the victim with exceptional cruelty; (2) by giving insufficient weight to two applicable mitigating factors, the defendant's excellent social history and his lack of a criminal record; and (3) by sentencing the defendant to a term of years that made him ineligible for consideration for an alternative sentence. After a thorough review of the record, we find that none of the defendant's allegations merit relief and accordingly affirm his sentence.

State of Tennessee v. Kenneth Michael Byrd, alias
E2002-01589-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ray L. Jenkins

Issue: Whether the issuance of a capias tolls the expiration of a probationary sentence. Upon this record, we conclude it does not. We reverse the revocation of the defendant's probation, concluding his probationary sentence had expired.

State of Tennessee v. Dennis Pylant
M2001-02335-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace

The appellant, Dennis Pylant, was found guilty in the Cheatham County Circuit Court of felony murder committed in the perpetration of aggravated child abuse. The appellant received a sentence of life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant raises several issues for our consideration, namely the sufficiency of the evidence, evidentiary issues, and a complaint regarding the jury instructions. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

John Doe, et al. v. Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, et al.
M2002-02076-SC-R23-CQ
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julia Smith Gibbons

Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 23, we accepted certification of questions of law from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. We are asked by the federal district court to construe Rule 9, section 25 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Tennessee. Specifically, we are asked to determine whether Richard Roe, a layperson (i.e., a non-attorney), may be charged with contempt for disclosing that he filed a complaint with the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility against an attorney in violation of the confidentiality provision embodied in Rule 9, section 25, and if so, by whom and before what tribunal? For the reasons given herein, we answer that the confidentiality requirement of Rule 9, section 25 applies to non-lawyers and lawyers alike. The appropriate sanction for a violation of Rule 9, section 25 is an action of contempt. Contempt proceedings may be initiated by the attorney against whom the complaint has been filed, the complainant, the Board of Professional Responsibility, or this Court. Finally, we hold that such a petition for contempt should be filed in this Court, whereupon assignment shall issue to a special master to conduct an evidentiary hearing. The record and findings of fact of the special master shall then be sent to this Court whereupon a determination of guilt and punishment, if any, will follow.

State of Tennessee v. Kenneth Jordan
M2002-01010-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

The defendant, Kenneth Jordan, entered pleas of guilt to aggravated burglary and aggravated assault. The trial court imposed Range I sentences of six years for each offense to be served concurrently. At the conclusion of a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of one year with split confinement. The defendant was given the choice of serving one year with work release and the balance on probation, or participating in a Lifeline Therapeutic Community Program with the opportunity to apply for early release. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the trial court failed to adequately consider the statutory guidelines and should have granted probation. The judgments of conviction are affirmed and the effective sentence is modified to require 90 days in jail with work release followed by supervised probation.