Please enter some keywords to search.
| Daniel M. Johnson v. Schlegel Tennessee, Inc. A/K/A/ Btr
E2001-01570-WC-R3-CV
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 defendant appeals the trial judge's decision that the plaintiff has a permanent disability to the mental faculties which was caused by exposure to chemicals in the workplace. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed BYERS, SR.J., in which ANDERSON, J., and THAYER, SP.J., joined. F. R. Evans, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellants, Schlegel Tennessee, Inc. a/k/a BTR Sealing Systems, North America Operations d/b/a BTR, Inc. and Cigna Property & Casualty. Rex A. Dale, Lenoir City, Tennessee, for the appellee, Daniel M. Johnson. MEMORANDUM OPINION Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the finding, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial courts in workers' compensation cases. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). Facts The plaintiff was thirty years of age at the time of this trial. He had a twelfth grade education with no college, but was trained vocationally in the Army as a heavy weld mechanic. He began working for the defendants in May, 1991, as a mold operator producing automotive seals. In 1997 he began working as a coater operator, the position he held at the time of the chemical exposures alleged in this cause of action. The plaintiff's duties as coater operator required him to mix and pour toxic chemical coatings, prime, coat, and bake parts for automotive seals. During this process, the various chemicals that he mixed were fed into a reciprocating disk that spun the chemicals at high speed into an aerosol to coat the automotive seals which moved through the coater on a production line. The plaintiff alleges that fumes from this process were supposed to be vented out by an exhaust fan that did not work. When he told his supervisor that the fan did not work, the supervisor told him that it had not worked in quite a while. As a result, the plaintiff alleges, over spray from the spinning reciprocating disk landed outside the area of the coating operation and all around the floor in the area where he worked. The plaintiff alleges that on March 1, 1998, he started having allergic reactions to the chemicals to which he was being exposed at work. The effects of these reactions included rashes, chemical burns on his face, welts all over his body, discolored skin, and loss of motivation. He reported these problems to his supervisor and went to the emergency room for treatment of the symptoms. Over approximately the next eighteen months, as the plaintiff continued working, the symptoms appeared repeatedly and he continued to be treated for them. During this time the defendants paid some temporary total disability benefits when the plaintiff needed treatment and was unable to work. In addition to his physical symptoms, the plaintiff alleges that mental symptoms began to appear from his exposure to the chemicals at work. Several witnesses testified at trial that the plaintiff was emotionally upset, had lost weight, and was nervous and depressed following his exposure to the chemicals. Witnesses also described the plaintiff as panicky, anxious, and paranoid. The plaintiff testified that he now has memory and motivation problems as well as trouble sleeping due to anxiety. The plaintiff saw several different psychiatrists and psychologists for diagnosis and treatment of his mental problems that he alleges were caused by his chemical exposure in the workplace. The reports of these physicians led to the trial court's finding that the plaintiff suffers a psychological problem that was triggered byan initial allergic or toxic reaction that led to subsequent psychological events which resulted in a major depressive episode. -2-
Authoring Judge: Byers, Sr.J.
Originating Judge:Frank V. Williams, Chancellor |
Johnson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/18/02 | |
| Olivia Connor v. Chester County Sportswear Co
W2001-02114-WC-R3-CV
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer appeals the award of disability benefits to an employee who felt her knee pop when she stood and twisted to flush the commode while using the restroom at work. We reverse. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Trial Court Reversed. JOE H. WALKER III, SP.J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and JOE C. LOSER, SP.J., joined. William F. Kendall III, Jackson, TN, for the Appellant, Chester County Sportswear. Michael A. Jaynes, Jackson, TN, for the Appellee, Olivia Connor. MEMORANDUM OPINION The review of the findings of the trial court is de novo with a presumption of the correctness of the decision unless a preponderance of the evidence is contrary to those findings. Spencer v. Towson Moving & Storage, Inc., 922 S.W.2d 58 (Tenn. 1996). The relevant facts are not in dispute. Claimant was forty-two years old and employed with Defendant as a seamstress. She is about five feet five inches tall and weighed approximately 26 pounds. Claimant awoke on the morning of the accident, got out of bed, and felt a little catch in her left knee. She went to work and after about an hour took a restroom break. The restroom had stalls that are described as basic stalls, no different from other stalls. The commode was a standard commode with a handle on the side, described as no different from a commode at home or anywhere else. Claimant described what happened after using the commode: "As I started to get up, I had to turn to pull my pants up, and when I did, my knee twisted...." When asked, "But where you were twisting was to flush the commode. Correct?," she answered "Yes, sir." Claimant testified that the twisting injury caused her to feel as if everything was torn in her left knee. Dr. Nord determined she suffered a torn medial meniscus in her left knee. He described her injury as caused by standing up and twisting at the same time. He tried conservative treatment, which did not help. An arthroscopy was performed to try to take care of the torn cartilage. She had an excessive amount of chondromalacia and arthritis, and the treatment was not successful. She ultimately required total left knee replacement. Her right knee began to have pain as a result of more pressure put on that knee. Following left knee surgery, Claimant's right knee continued to deteriorate and ultimately required total right knee replacement. The employer treated the injury as non-compensable under the Workers' Compensation statute. The trial court awarded benefits. As pertinent to the issue on appeal, the trial court found: "Personal comfort activities, such as seeking toilet facilities, are generally regarded as compensable. Even though the Plaintiff's use of the bathroom was not necessarily beneficial to the employer, it was a part of her employment because of its being necessary for healthy job performance. The use of the bathroom was sanctioned by and provided for the benefit of the employees, and therefore, the cause is compensable as arising out of the course and scope of her employment." I. T.C.A. _ 5-6-12(a)(5) states the injury, in order to be compensable, must be one "arising out of" and "in the course of" employment. It does not state the employee must be doing something beneficial for his or her employer. Thus, the question focuses on whether the activity bears a reasonable relationship to the employment. The phrases "arising out of" and "in the course of employment" are not synonymous. Woods v. Harry B. Woods Plumbing Co., 967 S.W.2d 768, 771 (Tenn. 1998). Both elements must be satisfied to impose liability on the employer. Thornton v. RCA Serv. Co., 188 Tenn. 644, 221 S.W.2d 954, 955 (1949). "In the Course of Employment" "In the course of" refers to the time, place and circumstances of the injury by accident. Loy v. North Bros. Co., 787 S.W.2d 916 (Tenn. 199). Activities termed as "personal comfort activities" are generally regarded as necessities in the workplace. These include such incidental acts as seeking toilet facilities. This activity is generally found to be sufficiently related to employment to be in the course of employment. In Carter v. Volunteer Apparel, Inc. (holding an employee had a compensable claim when injured in a break area prior to the commencement of normal working hours), the Court,
Authoring Judge: Joe H. Walker III, Sp.J.
Originating Judge:Joe C. Morris, Chancellor |
Chester County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/18/02 | |
| Donald Sisk v. Nexair, Llc
W2001-03077-WC-R3-CV
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6- 225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer appeals the award of permanent disability benefits to an employee. Because the existence and extent of a worker's permanent disability are questions of fact, the trial court is within its discretion to accept evidence presented by one medical expert over that of another expert. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Joe H. Walker III, Sp.J.
Originating Judge:Joe C. Morris, Chancellor |
Madison County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/18/02 | |
| Norman Matthews v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02895-CCA-R3-PC
The appellant, Norman Matthews, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In March 2000, Matthews pled guilty to burglary of a building and received an eight-year sentence. On appeal, Matthews argues that: (1) it was error for the post-conviction court to allow trial counsel to remain in the courtroom during the evidentiary hearing, despite invocation of "the rule" providing for sequestration of witnesses, and (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After review, we affirm the judgment of the Shelby County Criminal Court.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Judge Bernie Weinman |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/02 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Wesley Pickett
W2001-02458-CCA-R3-CD
The appellant, Wesley Pickett, appeals the verdict of a Shelby County jury finding him guilty of theft of a motor vehicle valued between one thousand and ten thousand dollars and two counts of vandalism causing damage over five hundred dollars. On appeal, Pickett raises the single issue of whether the evidence is sufficient to support his convictions. After review, we find the evidence sufficient. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Originating Judge:Judge Joseph B. Dailey |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/02 | |
| State of Tennessee v. James Dale Walker
E2002-00263-CCA-R3-CD
The Defendant, James Dale Walker, pled guilty to aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class C felony, and sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class E felony. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the Defendant received concurrent sentences of six years and two years, respectively, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied alternative sentencing and ordered the Defendant to serve his effective sentence of six years in the Department of Correction. It is from this order that the Defendant now appeals as of right. We reverse the trial court's order that the Defendant serve his sentences in total confinement and remand to the trial court for consideration of some form of alternative sentence.
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Originating Judge:Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr. |
Blount County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/02 | |
| John Carbino v. Portland Utility Const. Co., Llc,
M2001-01840-WC-R3-CV
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 and its insurer question (1) the trial court's finding that the employee's aortic dissection was an injury by accident arising out of his employment and (2) the award of permanent partial disability benefits based on 85 percent to the body as a whole for the combined effects of that injury and a subsequent compensable back injury. 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 JAMES L. WEATHERFORD, SR. J., joined. Bridgett A. Wohlpart, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellants, Portland Utility Construction Company, LLC, and Travelers Property Casualty Corporation Lucius P. Hawes, Jr., Hopkinsville, Kentucky, for the appellee, John Carbino MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, John Carbino, initiated this civil action on September 17, 1999 to recover workers' compensation benefits for two separate allegedly work related injuries. The first injury is alleged to have occurred on January 26, 1998, the second on June 23, 1999. On July 3, 21, after an earlier trial on the merits, the trial court awarded, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits on the basis of 85 percent to the body as a whole. The employer, Portland Utility Construction Company, and its insurance carrier, Travelers, have 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) (21 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Originating Judge:Carol Mccoy, Chancellor |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/17/02 | |
| Arlie Bingham vs. John Doles
W2002-00104-COA-R3-CV
This appeal arises from a boundary line dispute. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendant, an adjacent land owner, alleging that a proposed addition to the defendant's home would encroach onto the plaintiff's property. The trial court ruled that defendant had gained title to the disputed property under the doctrines of adverse possession and title by acquiescence. The plaintiff appealed challenging the court's ruling on adverse possession. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Originating Judge:Ron E. Harmon |
Hardin County | Court of Appeals | 10/17/02 | |
| CH-02-0287-3
CH-02-0287-3
Originating Judge:D. J. Alissandratos |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Michael A. Maddox v. State of Tennessee
M2002-00282-CCA-R3-PC
The Petitioner was found guilty by a jury of five counts of sexual battery by an authority figure, a Class C felony, and two counts of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. The trial court sentenced the Petitioner to an effective sixteen-year term. This Court affirmed the Petitioner's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. The Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the post-conviction court denied. The Petitioner now appeals the denial of post-conviction relief, arguing that his counsel at trial was ineffective. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Originating Judge:Judge W. Charles Lee |
Marshall County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Judy Rodriguez v. Metro Gov't. of Nashville
M2001-02500-COA-R3-CV
Municipal employee filed a petition for review of civil service commission order terminating her employment. The chancery court affirmed the order of the commission, finding that the record contained substantial and material evidence to support the termination. The employee has appealed. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Helen Hall vs. James Hall
W2002-00786-COA-R3-CV
Plaintiff-wife sued defendant husband for a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct and irreconcilable differences. After a nonjury trial, a divorce was awarded to wife and she was awarded alimony in futuro and part of her attorney fees. Husband has appealed the award of in futuro alimony. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Martha B. Brasfield |
Tipton County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Timothy Wayne Grimes
M2001-01460-CCA-R3-CD
A Dickson County Circuit Court jury convicted the defendant, Timothy Wayne Grimes, of possession of a Schedule IV controlled substance with intent to deliver, a Class D felony, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range III, persistent offender to eight years in a community corrections program. The defendant appeals, claiming that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury as to the lesser included offenses of simple possession and casual exchange. We conclude that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury regarding simple possession of the controlled substance. Although we hold that casual exchange is not a lesser included offense of possession with intent to deliver, we also conclude that the trial court should have instructed the jury regarding the casual exchange inference provided in Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-419. We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the case for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge:Judge Robert Burch |
Dickson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Jackie Reynolds vs. Tammy Battles
W2002-00031-COA-R3-CV
This is an appeal from on order denying a Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02 motion to set aside a default judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs for $1,200,000. We vacate the order of the trial court and remand for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Originating Judge:C. Creed Mcginley |
Hardin County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Anna Lamb v. State
M1998-00910-COA-R12-CV
This appeal stems from a mother's allegations that her mentally impaired daughter was sexually abused while in the custody of the Alvin C. York Agricultural Institute. The mother filed a claim on her daughter's behalf with the Division of Claims seeking $300,000 in damages. The claim was transferred to the Tennessee Claims Commission where, following a hearing, a Commissioner dismissed the claim because the mother had failed to establish that her daughter had been sexually abused while she was in the State's custody. The mother asserts on this appeal that the evidence preponderates against the Commissioner's findings. We affirm the Commissioner's dismissal of the claim.
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
|
Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | ||
| State v. Michael Pate
M2001-00076-COA-R7-CV
This case originated in the Juvenile Court of Dickson County, Tennessee and was appealed to the circuit court pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-159(a). Michael Pate appeals the action of the circuit court adopting the juvenile court action with slight modifications. We affirm the action of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Originating Judge:Allen W. Wallace |
Dickson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| 2000-00161-COA-R3-CV
2000-00161-COA-R3-CV
Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Bruce Martin vs. Beverly Martin
W2002-00819-COA-R3-CV
This is a divorce case. Prior to their marriage, the husband and the wife executed a prenuptial agreement. The agreement stated that upon divorce, if jointly-held property were sold, each party would be credited his or her share of separate property contributed to the purchase of the jointly-held property, with the remaining funds divided according to each party's ownership share. After the parties married, they purchased land with the intention of converting it into a catfish farm. The husband and the wife both contributed financially towards the purchase of the land. Both parties worked full time. The husband used his machinery that he owned separately and expended labor to convert the land to a catfish farm. The wife maintained their home. The parties divorced. At the divorce hearing, the husband argued that, under the terms of the prenuptial agreement, he should be credited for his labor and the use of his heavy machinery to improve the farm land. The trial court declined to do so, and credited the husband and the wife with their respective financial contributions. The parties' personal property was divided equally. The husband appeals, arguing that he should have been credited for his labor and the use of his heavy machinery, and also disputing the division of the personal property. The wife asserts that she should have received a larger percentage of the proceeds from the sale of the property. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:Ron E. Harmon |
Benton County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Jesse E. Rogers v. State of Tennessee
E2001-02869-CCA-R3-PC
The petitioner, Jesse E. Rogers, entered "best interest" guilty pleas to five counts of rape of a child. He was sentenced to twenty-five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for each offense, with the sentences to be served concurrently. The petitioner subsequently filed for post-conviction relief. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief and the petitioner timely appealed. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:Judge James Edward Beckner |
Hawkins County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Ginnie Leach vs. Tim Taylor
W2002-01091-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Clayburn L. Peeples |
Gibson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Henry Kerr v. Earl Lemoine
M2001-00986-COA-R3-CV
Appellant judgment creditor appeals from the action of the trial court in post-judgment proceedings allowing installment payments of the underlying judgment. The record before the Court is inadequate for appellate review, and acting within our discretion, we remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Originating Judge:Carol L. Mccoy |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| Ginnie Leach vs. Tim Taylor
W2002-01091-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Clayburn L. Peeples |
Gibson County | Court of Appeals | 10/16/02 | |
| First Citizens Nat'l Bank for Will Wray vs. Janice Wray
W2002-00525-COA-R3-CV
This case involves a trust. The decedent established a trust in his will. His son-in-law and a bank were designated as co-trustees. A parcel of property with a home was placed into the trust. The trust allowed one of the beneficiaries, the decedent's grandson, and his wife to live in the house at no charge. The beneficiary and his wife divorced, and as part of their marital dissolution agreement, the beneficiary gave his ex-wife his possessory interest in the home, at no charge. The son-in-law/trustee died, leaving the bank as the sole trustee. The bank required the ex-wife to begin paying rent; she declined. The bank then filed the instant lawsuit against the ex-wife for past rent from the time they first requested rent from her, and also a declaratory judgment permitting the bank to sell the home. The trial court found that the trustees ratified the terms of the MDA between the beneficiary and the ex-wife, allowing her to remain in the home rent-free until the trust expired. The bank appeals. We reverse, finding that the trustees could not ratify the MDA, a contract to which the trust was not a party.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:Lee Moore |
Lake County | Court of Appeals | 10/15/02 | |
| Willie Joseph Lagano v. State of Tennessee
M2001-01576-CCA-R3-CO
Petitioner, Willie Joseph Lagano, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court. The trial court summarily dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing. Petitioner appealed. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Originating Judge:Judge Seth W. Norman |
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/15/02 | |
| State of Tennessee v. Gregory Key
M2002-00154-CCA-R9-CD
Defendant, Gregory Key, was indicted by the Rutherford County Grand Jury on two counts of aggravated sexual battery. During a hearing on several pretrial motions, defense counsel, Darrell Scarlett, advised the trial court of a joint business venture between himself and Detective Lawson, an investigating officer in the case. The court entered an Order disqualifying Defendant's attorney from further representation, finding that the relationship constituted an appearance of impropriety. Pursuant to Rule 9 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, Defendant appeals the trial court's disqualification of his attorney and argues that he waived any conflict or appearance of impropriety after full disclosure.
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Originating Judge:Judge James K. Clayton, Jr. |
Rutherford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/15/02 |