Sylvester Young v. Nashville & Davidson County
M2000-02455-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
A prisoner allegedly slipped and fell on a wet floor in the Davidson County Jail, injuring his back. He brought suit against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County for deprivation of civil rights and negligence. The Chancery Court dismissed his civil rights claim on a Rule 12.02(6) motion, and transferred the negligence claim to Circuit Court. After a bench trial, the Circuit Court dismissed the negligence claim. We affirm.

Joyce Mullins v. Crotty Corp.,
M2002-00159-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wooten, Jr., Judge
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 questions the trial court's findings as to causation, permanency, extent of vocational disability and mileage reimbursement. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the evidence fails to preponderate against the findings of the trial court. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (22 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP. J., in which FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C. J., and JOHN K. BYERS, SP. J., joined. Kirk L. Clements, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Crotty Corp. and Employee Benefit Insurance Company Edwin Sadler and James D. Madewell, Cookeville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Joyce Mullins MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Ms. Mullins, initiated this civil action to recover workers' compensation for an alleged work related injury by accident. After a hearing on all issues raised by the pleadings, the trial court awarded permanent partial disability benefits based on 75 percent to the left arm and reimbursement of $2,313.3 for mileage incurred to receive authorized medical treatment. The employer, Crotty Corp., and its insurer have 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) (22 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.

Kenny Searcy v. Unipres U.S.A., Inc.,
M2002-00245-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp .J.
Trial Court Judge: C. L. Rogers, Judge
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 trial court erred in concluding the plaintiff's impairment was the result of his work related injury and (2) the award of permanent partial disability benefits based on 35 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) (22 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP .J., in which FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C. J., and JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., joined. M. Clark Spoden and Irene L. Wolfe, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant Unipres U.S.A., Inc. Clinton L. Kelly, Hendersonville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Kenny Searcy MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Mr. Searcy, initiated this civil action against the employer, Unipres, to recover workers' compensation benefits for injuries suffered in an alleged work related accident occurring on July 2, 1999. By its late filed answer, the employer admitted liability but questioned the extent of its liability for permanent disability benefits. Following a trial on December 27, 21, the trial court awarded, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits based on 35 percent to the body as a whole. The employer has appealed. For injuries occurring on or after July 1, 1985, 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) (22 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.

John Hessmer v. Fernando Miranda
M2001-02056-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
This appeal involves a state prisoner's efforts to pursue medical malpractice and wrongful death claims arising from the death of his mother. The prisoner filed a pro se complaint in the Circuit Court for Davidson County against his mother's treating physician and a nurse. The defendants filed a joint motion for summary judgment supported by their own affidavits. The trial court granted the prisoner additional time to obtain opposing affidavits and then dismissed the prisoner's complaint after he was unable to do so. The prisoner complains on appeal that his incarceration prevented him from obtaining the opposing affidavits and asserts that the trial court erred by declining to appoint a "special master" to aid him in the discovery process. We have determined that the prisoner was not entitled to the assistance of a special master and that the trial court properly dismissed the prisoner's complaint because he failed to demonstrate the existence of a material factual dispute that would warrant a trial.

Newell Smith v. Brenda Smith
M2001-02231-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Charles K. Smith
Wife filed petition for civil contempt against former Husband for failure to pay alimony as set forth in the Martial Dissolution Agreement and final decree. Husband responded, arguing that he did not have the ability to pay the alimony as agreed. The trial court found Husband in willful contempt of the previous order of the court due to his failure to pay the first two alimony installments and ordered Husband incarcerated if he did not appeal or make those payments within thirty days. Because the trial court found that Husband did not have the ability to pay at the time of the contempt hearing, we vacate the order incarcerating Husband if he does not pay.

Vincent D. Carson (Cason) v. Richard M. Gilleland
M2002-01082-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wootten, Jr.
This personal injury action by an undercover law enforcement officer resulted in judgment against appellant and two co-defendants. Appellant is an inmate with the Department of Corrections and after filing a pro se answer to the complaint took no further action in defense and more than two years after his answer was filed the case was heard in his absence and resulted in a judgment for $5,000,000.00. Plaintiff appeals and we affirm the action of the trial court.

Naomi Hausler v. Discounts R. Us
M2002-01465-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: John D. Wootten, Jr.
Plaintiff, pro se, appeals the action of the trial court in denying her Petition in the Nature of a Petition to Vacate a Void Judgment and Collateral Attack. We affirm the trial court.

Dwight James v. State
M2002-01557-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves Dwight James' unsuccessful attempt to qualify as a candidate for Hickman County Road Superintendent and be placed on the August, 2002, election ballot. The trial court granted the Tennessee Highway Officials Certification Board's summary judgment motion, finding that the Board had not acted arbitrarily, capriciously or illegally in not certifying Mr. James as qualified to run for the office of County Road Superintendent. We have determined that the appeal is moot.

William Waters v. Dept. of Correction
M2002-00917-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

William Waters v. Dept. of Correction
M2002-00917-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

James Boyd vs. Billy Riley
M2002-01384-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
This appeal, filed pro se, involves two separate law suits that were filed and pursued in the trial court without consolidation and heard without consolidation on appeal. One complaint alleges negligence, and the other complaint alleges malpractice. The trial court dismissed both actions, and we affirm the actions of the trial court.

Joe Mitchell v. CCA
M2002-00371-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones

Joe Mitchell v. CCA
M2002-00371-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones

Marcus Lewis v. Dept of Correction
M2002-00608-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Marcus Lewis v. Dept of Correction
M2002-00608-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

State of Tennessee v. James Anthony McCurry
W2002-00298-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The Defendant pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to sell; reckless driving; two counts of driving with a suspended, cancelled, or revoked license; possession of cocaine; aggravated assault; and felony evading arrest. The trial court sentenced him to an effective sentence of twelve years and ordered him to serve his sentence on probation. The Defendant's probation officer subsequently filed a probation violation report, and following a probation revocation hearing, the trial court revoked the Defendant's probation. In this appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court improperly relied on rebuttal testimony as substantive evidence at the hearing and thus that the court improperly revoked his probation. Finding no error by the trial court, we affirm the trial court's decision to revoke probation in this case.

State of Tennessee v. Chad Crabtree
E2001-02374-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stephen M. Bevil

The defendant, Chad Crabtree, was convicted of three counts of rape of a child, Class A felonies. The trial court imposed concurrent twenty-five-year sentences. In this appeal, the defendant asserts (1) that the trial court erred by denying his access to certain records regarding the victim and the lead investigator; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support one of his convictions; (3) that the trial court was not impartial; (4) that a witness for the state improperly bolstered the credibility of the victim; and (5) that the sentence was excessive. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

10-99-034-C
10-99-034-C
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

Jerry Lytle v. Fru-Con, Inc.,
W2002-01337-WC-R3-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 trial court erred in accrediting the testimony of the plaintiff, (2) the trial court erred in accepting the expert opinion of an examining physician over that of a treating physician, and (3) the award of permanent partial disability benefits based on 2 percent to the body as a whole is excessive. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the trial court committed no reversible error and the evidence fails to preponderate against the trial court's findings.. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (22 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., joined. W. Stephen Gardner and Robert Joseph Leibovich, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Fru-Con Pala Industrial, Joint Venture David Hardee, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellee, Jerry Lytle MEMORANDUM OPINION This civil action was initiated by the employee or claimant, Mr. Lytle, to recover workers' compensation benefits for a work related injury by accident. At the conclusion of the trial on February 26, 21, the trial court awarded, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits based on 2 percent to the body as a whole. The employer-appellant 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) (22 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. Anthony Tony Sandy
M2001-02376-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert L. Jones

Defendant, Anthony "Tony" Sandy, was indicted by the Lawrence County Grand Jury for first degree murder. Defendant was convicted by a jury of the lesser-included offense of voluntary manslaughter. The trial court sentenced Defendant, as a Range I standard offender, to serve four years and six months in the Tennessee Department of Correction and imposed a fine of $10,000, which was assessed by the jury. In this appeal as of right, Defendant argues that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the trial court erred in sentencing Defendant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Reginol L. Waters
M2001-02682-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steve R. Dozier

A Davidson County jury convicted the defendant, Reginol L. Waters, of two counts of aggravated rape, one count of aggravated robbery, and one count of aggravated burglary. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I offender to twenty-three years for the first count of aggravated rape, twenty-five years for the second count of aggravated rape, ten years for aggravated robbery, and as a Range II offender to ten years for aggravated burglary. The trial court further ordered the two sentences for aggravated rape and the sentence for aggravated burglary be served consecutively and the sentence for aggravated robbery be served concurrently, for an effective sentence of fifty-eight years. In this appeal of right, the defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress testimony regarding the "showup" identification of the defendant; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress the defendant's statements to the police; (3) whether the trial court erred in admitting the tape recording of the victim's telephone call to the police; (4) whether the state failed to establish a proper chain of custody for evidence found during a search of the defendant's vehicle; (5) whether the two convictions for aggravated rape should be merged; (6) whether the conviction for aggravated burglary violates due process because it was incidental to the offenses of aggravated rape and aggravated robbery; and (7) whether the sentences are excessive. Upon review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Charles E. Delapp, Jr., a.k.a. Charles E. Jackson, Jr.
W2001-02370-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The defendant, Charles E. Delapp, Jr., a.k.a. Charles E. Jackson, Jr., appeals as of right his conviction by a Lauderdale County Circuit Court jury for reckless aggravated assault, a Class D felony, and the resulting five-year, six-month sentence. He contends (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction and (2) that his sentence is excessive. We affirm the trial court's judgment of conviction.

State of Tennessee v. Sammy D. Childers
W2002-00006-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed Mcginley

The Appellant, Sammy D. Childers, appeals his jury convictions for two counts of aggravated assault. Following these convictions, the Circuit Court of Hardin County sentenced Childers to concurrent sentences of five years, with ninety days to be served in confinement, followed by four years and nine months of supervised probation. On appeal, Childers raises one issue for our review; whether he is entitled to a new trial because of alleged juror misconduct. After reviewing the record before us, we find this issue to be without merit and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Buford Barrett v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02862-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

The petitioner, Buford Barrett, appeals the McNairy County Circuit Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for rape of a child and resulting twenty-year sentence. He claims that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney (1) refused to let him testify at trial; (2) failed to subpoena his cousin, who could have testified that the petitioner was not present when the alleged crime occurred; (3) failed to request a DNA test for the victim; and (4) failed to investigate the facts surrounding a statement that his wife gave to the police in which she admitted that she had sexually abused the victim. In addition, the petitioner contends that the cumulative effect of his attorney's deficiencies prevented him from receiving a fair trial. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition.

Dept of Children's Srvcs vs. A.N.G. & S.L.G
E2002-01114-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Thomas J. Wright
The State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services ("State" or "DCS") obtained temporary custody of the three minor children of A.N.G. ("Mother") and S.L.G. ("Father")(collectively referred to as "Parents") after Parents' two year old son was found in a roadway near their home. DCS later sought to terminate Parents' parental rights. After a trial, the Juvenile Court determined there were sufficient grounds to terminate Parents' parental rights and doing so was in the best interests of the children. Parents appeal, claiming DCS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that there were sufficient grounds to terminate their parental rights. Parents also claim DCS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of their parental rights would be in the best interests of the children. We affirm the judgment of the Juvenile Court.