The defendant, Stella Rodifer, was convicted of forgery, a felony; six counts of worthless checks under $500.00, misdemeanors; and one count of worthless checks over $1,000.00, a felony. The defendant was sentenced to consecutive terms of two and four years, respectively, on each of the felonies. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of 11 months and 29 days on each misdemeanor, two of which were ordered to be served consecutively for an effective sentence of seven years, 11 months, and 27 days. The trial court granted probation on the misdemeanors and sentenced the defendant to a Community Corrections program on the felonies. Four months later, the trial court revoked the alternative sentences and ordered the defendant to serve four years for forgery; eight years for felony worthless checks; and 11 months and 29 days (two consecutive) for each of the six counts of worthless checks, for an effective sentence of 13 years, 11 months, and 27 days. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the trial court erred by revoking her alternative sentences and by imposing lengthier, consecutive sentences. The judgments are affirmed.
The petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief on his second degree murder conviction, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he had effective assistance of trial counsel. Following his entry of a plea of guilty to second degree murder, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, he alleged that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to thoroughly investigate and prepare his case, and that were it not for the deficiencies in counsel's representation, he would not have entered his plea of guilty. At the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition, finding that the petitioner had failed to offer any proof to support his allegations. After a careful review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Robert Derrick Johnson M1998-00546-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: William Charles Lee
Bedford
Supreme Court
State vs. Robert Derrick Johnson M1998-00546-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: William Charles Lee
Bedford
Supreme Court
William Martin vs. Douglas Sizemore, et al M1997-00203-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves a disciplinary proceeding against a licensed architect. Following a lengthy hearing, the Tennessee Board of Examiners for Architects and Engineers concluded that the architect had engaged in misconduct in the practice of architecture in connection with four projects and suspended his certificate of registration for three years. The architect appealed the Board's decision to the Chancery Court for Davidson County. The trial court reversed the Board's decision after determining that the decision was not supported by substantial and material evidence. On this appeal, the Board asserts that its suspension of the architect's certificate of registration has adequate evidentiary support. The architect renews his argument that the Board's proceedings violated his procedural due process rights because the attorney who prosecuted the State's case against him also served as the Board's lawyer in other matters. Except for a portion of the charges involving one project, we concur with the trial court's conclusion that the Board's decision lacked evidentiary support because the State failed to present expert testimony regarding the applicable standard of care. We have also determined that the architect has not carried his burden of demonstrating that the Board was actually biased against him because the lawyer who prosecuted the State's case also provided other, unrelated legal services to the Board. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment as modified herein and remand the case to the Board for further proceedings.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Brenda King vs. Danny King, D.V.M. M1999-02556-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. The parties divorced after 31 years of marriage. The trial court granted the wife a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct. The wife was awarded alimony in futuro in the amount of $6000 per month for two years. After two years, the wife would receive $4500 per month and, upon remarriage, the amount of alimony in futuro would decrease to $2000 per month. The trial court also ordered the husband to pay $10,000 of the wife's attorney's fees. Both parties appeal; the wife appeals the division of marital property and the husband appeals the award of alimony. We affirm in part, modify in part, and reverse in part, affirming the award of alimony in futuro, modifying the amount of alimony and eliminating the award of alimony in futuro after the wife's remarriage.
The State of Tennessee has applied to this court for permission to pursue an interlocutory appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 10. In its application, the State complains that because the grand jury had yet to take action to charge the respondents in connection with a homicide, the Greene County Circuit Court was not empowered to conduct pretrial conferences, to enter pretrial orders, to set a trial date, or to order the state to file its notice of intent to seek the death penalty or life without possibility of parole. We grant the Rule 10 appeal and generally vacate the lower court's pretrial conference orders.
Greene
Court of Criminal Appeals
Ronald Davis vs. The Tennessean, et al M1999-01602-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
The plaintiff filed a libel action against a newspaper, The Tennessean, its publisher and its editor, alleging his reputation had been harmed by a sentence in an article which stated that he had shot a man, when, in fact, his co-defendant had killed the victim. The trial court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff to be "libel proof" in this matter because he had been convicted of aiding and abetting in the murder and incarcerated for the remainder of his life for the crime, "render[ing] any reputation he may have had virtually valueless." We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Kimberly Caudill vs. William Howard Foley M2000-01512-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman
This appeal arises from an action seeking attorney's fees from a previous child custody action. After divorce, Mother was awarded custody of Child. Upon remarrying, Mother sought to move to Florida with Child. Father protested and sought primary custody of Child. Judge, finding the child relocation statutes unconstitutional, awarded Father custody. Mother hired Lawyer for an appeal of this ruling. While this appeal was pending, Father brought suit for child support. Lawyer sought recusal of Judge due to previous contact between them when Judge was an attorney. Judge refused to recuse himself and disqualified Lawyer. This action was appealed. While this appeal was pending, the child custody appeal was decided by this court and Child was returned to Mother's custody. Mother brought action in the trial court seeking fees from this first trial and appeal which Judge denied. Mother appealed this denial, with the result that the failure of Judge to recuse, the disqualification of Lawyer and the attorney's fees appeals were consolidated before this court. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The Appellant, Michael A. Foster, was indicted by a Shelby County Grand Jury for possession of cocaine in excess of .5 gram, a class B felony. Under the terms of a plea agreement, Foster pled guilty to criminal attempt to possess cocaine less than .5 gram, a class D felony. The plea agreement further provided that Foster would receive a sentence of two years with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that Foster's two-year sentence be served in confinement in the Shelby County Correction Center. On appeal, Foster argues that the trial court erred in denying an alternative sentence. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The Appellant, Quentin Lewis, appeals from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing in the Shelby County Criminal Court. In his petition, Lewis collaterally attacks his conviction for aggravated robbery upon grounds that his trial counsel was ineffective. After review of this issue on appeal, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
E2001-01163-COA-R3-JV E2001-01163-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Roane
Court of Appeals
E2001-00228-COA-R3-CV E2001-00228-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Telford E. Forgerty, Jr.
Cocke
Court of Appeals
Mohamed Ali, M.D., vs. Fredia Moore and Danny Story E2000-02534-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Thomas J. Seeley, Jr.
The Trial Court held the statute of limitations had run on plaintiff's Complaint. On appeal, we dismiss the appeal as not being timely filed.
Washington
Court of Appeals
Deborah Warren vs. James Ferguson W2000-02027-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: James H. Bradberry
This appeal involves a complaint to establish parentage and set child support. The court below ordered genetic testing, which proved that James R. Ferguson is the natural father of the children at issue. The court also entered a judgment of $8,623.00 for retroactive child support, $280.00 for the cost of genetic testing, and the court reserved the issue of current support until Mr. Ferguson is released from prison. We vacate the trial court's final order based on our conclusion that the trial court erred in failing to rule on Mr. Ferguson's Motion for the Appointment of Counsel, or alternatively, his request that the matter be held in abeyance until he is released from incarceration.
Weakley
Court of Appeals
Robert LeeGrand v. Trinity Universal Insurance W2000-02664-SC-WCM-CV
Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris
The appellant presents the following issues for review: (1) Whether the trial court erred in ruling that the plaintiff did not sustain an injury that arose out of his employment; (2) whether the trial court erred in ruling that the plaintiff received no permanent disability from his injuries; (3) whether the trial court erred in failing to make a specific finding as to the benefit rate, and (4) whether the trial court erred in failing to award plaintiff discretionary costs. Although we hold that the plaintiff's injury arose out of the plaintiff's employment, we affirm the trial court's conclusion that the plaintiff received no permanent disability from his injury.
The defendant, Darrell Presnell, who was indicted for especially aggravated robbery, was convicted of the lesser included offense of aggravated robbery. The trial court imposed a sentence of ten years. In this appeal of right, the defendant contends that (1) there was a fatal variance between the presentment and the proof at trial; (2) the trial court erred by instructing the jury on aggravated robbery as a lesser included offense; and (3) the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on the lesser included offense of robbery. Because the trial court failed to instruct on the lesser offense of robbery, the judgment must be reversed and the case must be remanded for a new trial.
The state appeals the trial court's dismissal of its prosecution of the defendant, Mark A. Shultz, for driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI). It contends that the trial court's conclusion that the case had been left unresolved too long could not lawfully justify dismissal. We reverse the trial court and remand the case for further proceedings.
Sevier
Court of Criminal Appeals
Willis Lee Melton v. Butch Bowman , d/b/a Bowman's M2000-02960-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr., Sp.J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John J. Maddux Jr., Judge
The issue on appeal presented by employer/appellant is whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant the appellant's motion pursuant to Rule 6.2(1)(5) of the Tenn. R. Civ. P. The panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed because the notice requirement of due process was not satisfied.
Overton
Workers Compensation Panel
James Morris v. Zurich American Ins. Co., et al. M2000-02090-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr., Sp.J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. J. O. Bond, Judge
The issues on appeal are (1) whether the trial court erred in determining that the employee suffered a compensable work-related shoulder injury, and (2) whether the vocational disability ratings as awarded were excessive. The panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.
Macon
Workers Compensation Panel
Sonnie Gail Phillips Wood v. Porter Cable Corporation, W2000-01771-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: L. Terry Lafferty, Senior Judge
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) (2) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Defendant/Appellant Van De Kamp's, Inc., and Defendant/Appellee Porter Cable Corporation, appeal the judgment of the Chancery Court of Madison County awarding Plaintiff/ Appellee, Sonnie Gail (Phillips) Wood, thirty percent (3%) permanent partial disability to the right arm and twenty percent (2%) to the left arm. Van De Kamp's, Inc. raises three additional appellate issues: (1) Whether the trial court erred in finding that the "Last Injurious Exposure Rule" applied to the facts in this case; (2) Whether the trial court erred in granting Porter Cable Corporation a directed verdict at the close of Plaintiff's proof; and (3) Whether Porter Cable Corporation's inaction when given notice of Plaintiff's injury estops them from denying liability. Defendant Porter Cable raises three additional appellate questions: (1) Whether the trial court erred in applying the "Last Injurious Exposure Rule"; (2) Whether it was harmless error for the trial court to grant Porter Cable Corporation a directed verdict; and (3) Whether equity was achieved when Plaintiff's injury worsened at Van De Kamp's. From our review of the record, we affirm the trial court's judgment as modified. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed as Modified. L. TERRY LAFFERTY, SR. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and JOE C. LOSER, SP. J., joined. Jeffrey P. Boyd, Jackson, Tennessee, for Defendant/Appellant, Van De Kamp's; and Michael V. Tichenor, Memphis, Tennessee, for Defendant/Appellee, Porter Cable Corporation. Art D. Wells, Jackson, Tennessee, for the Plaintiff/Appellee, Sonnie Gail Phillips Wood. MEMORANDUM OPINION Sonnie Gail Phillips Wood, age 32, a self-employed residential cleaner, testified that at the time of her employment with Porter Cable Corporation ("Porter Cable"), her name was Sonnie Phillips, but she is now married. Plaintiff did not complete the eighth grade, with no further educational attempts. Plaintiff began working for Porter Cable in August 1996 as an assembler and pain commenced in her hands in August 1997. Plaintiff worked both the router line and belt sand line, which required the continuous and repetitive use of her hands with a power screwdriver. When her hands began to "swell like a balloon," she notified Walter Longmire, a shift manager, about her condition. Longmire suggested that she "suck it up." Plaintiff's pain continued and radiated into her shoulders. She told the plant nurse, Connie Leaper, who suggested that it might be tendinitis and that she should take Ibuprofen and use splints. On her own, Plaintiff saw Dr. Timothy Hayden, who suggested that her problems could be from her work. Dr. Hayden referred her to Dr. Keith Nord. Dr. Nord recommended that she wear braces at night and at work, but they did not help. In April 1998, Dr. Nord advised her that she had carpal tunnel syndrome and recommended that she take off work at Porter Cable. In September 1998, Plaintiff decided to leave employment at Porter Cable due to certain problems, her hands were painful and that if she continued to work, her hands might become permanently damaged. Between September and November of 1998, Plaintiff worked for International Paper Company for a very short time. She began working for Van De Kamp's Inc. ("Van De Kamp's") in early November 1998. Plaintiff began working the pancake and waffle line, in which the pancakes and waffles came down a line bunched up, so she had to pick them up and stack them four at a time and put them in bins for packing. Plaintiff worked a twelve-hour shift. On the very first day, Plaintiff felt intense pain but did not tell anybody for about a month because she was new on the job. In December 1998, Plaintiff reported her injury to her employer and was provided a panel of three physicians. Since Dr. Nord was on the list, she returned to see Dr. Nord and he placed her on light duty, but Van De Kamp's did not honor her restrictions and put her back on the waffle line. Since her hands became worse and she could not do the job, she left Van De Kamp's in December 1998. Plaintiff worked at various jobs until she started her own residential cleaning service. As to her daily routine, Plaintiff testified that she has some problems with vacuuming, and house cleaning. She has difficulty in brushing her seven year old daughter's hair and cannot lift her weights since her wrists are weak. Plaintiff conceded that she did not have surgery for her wrist and/or hand problems. Mr. Jason Wood, Plaintiff's husband of one and one-half years, testified that he met Plaintiff while they worked at International Paper in October 1998. He stated that his wife cannot lift a cast iron skillet or heavy pots, and in the mornings he must help her daughter get ready for school. Plaintiff cannot do weeding in the garden or twist off tops of jars and bottles. Mr. Wood did not know Plaintiff when she worked at Porter Cable and is not familiar with her problems at that plant. He stated that when they dated in October 1998, she had no problems with her hands and he never helped her to open jars. -2-
Madison
Workers Compensation Panel
Wayne Wood, Meadowbrook Insurance & Association Self Insurance Services, Inc. v. Sammy Benson M2001-00107-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr., Sp.J.
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins, Judge
The issue on appeal is whether the trial court erroneously granted a partial lump sum commutation of permanent total disability benefits. This panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed as modified.
Wayne
Workers Compensation Panel
Donnie Sartain v. Eldeco, Inc., et al M2000-02634-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Ben H. Cantrell, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart, Chancellor
In this case, the employer contends the trial court erred in awarding permanent partial disability in the amount of 75% to the body as a whole and in allowing vocational expert testimony amounting to a legal conclusion. As discussed herein, the panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.
Franklin
Workers Compensation Panel
Bobby Smith v. Findlay Industries, Inc., et al M2000-02327-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Chancellor
The employer/appellant contends the trial court erred in 1) awarding 1% permanent partial disability to the right upper extremity, and 2) computing the employee's average weekly wage and benefit rate. As discussed herein, the panel has concluded that the judgment awarding 1% permanent partial disability to the right upper extremity should be affirmed, and that the determination of the average weekly wage and benefit rate is incorrect and should therefore be remanded to the trial court.
