Please enter some keywords to search.
| Washington vs. Department of Corrections
01A01-9506-CH-00276
Originating Judge:Robert S. Brandt |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 05/23/97 | |
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Monroe County | Court of Appeals | 05/23/97 | |
| Taylor, et. al. vs. T&N Office Equipment
01A01-9609-CV-00411
|
Sumner County | Court of Appeals | 05/23/97 | |
| 01A01-9612-CV-00563
01A01-9612-CV-00563
Originating Judge:Henry Denmark Bell |
Williamson County | Court of Appeals | 05/23/97 | |
| 02S01-9611-Ch-00101
02S01-9611-Ch-00101
Originating Judge:Robert A. Lanier |
Supreme Court | 05/23/97 | ||
| Williams vs. Williams
01A01-9610-CV-00468
|
Court of Appeals | 05/23/97 | ||
| Jim Voss vs. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co., et al
02A01-9604-CV-00082
Originating Judge:W. B. Acree |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| Horton vs. State
03C01-9604-CR-00161
Originating Judge:Stephen M. Bevil |
Hamilton County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| Gordon Burks vs. Belz-Wilson Properties, et al
02A01-9607-CV-00154
Originating Judge:Karen R. Williams |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| Willie & Bobbie Lomax vs. Headley Homes, et al
02A01-9607-CH-00163
Originating Judge:C. Neal Small |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| Joseph Myers & Carl Klimek vs. Pickering Firm, Inc.
02A01-9605-CV-00124
Originating Judge:Robert A. Lanier |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| State vs. Whaley
03C01-9608-CR-00307
Originating Judge:Douglas A. Meyer |
Hamilton County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/22/97 | |
| State vs. Danny Dorris
01C01-9606-CR-00242
Originating Judge:Jane W. Wheatcraft |
Sumner County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Carol A. Hilliard v. Tn. State Home Health Services, et al.
01S01-9609-CH-00193
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employee contends, in this appeal, that there is a genuine issue of material fact concerning causation and that the summary judgment of dismissal should be reversed. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the case should be remanded for trial. In 1971 and 1972, the claimant underwent gallbladder surgery and a hysterectomy. In conjunction therewith, she was given two blood transfusions. Over the next several years, she carried on a normal life and exhibited no more than normal health problems. However, in 1988, the claimant visited a doctor complaining of extreme fatigue, a symptom of hepatitis C. In 1989, she visited a doctor who noted she had an enlarged liver, also a symptom of hepatitis C. By 1992, the claimant's fatigue had become worse and she experienced a series of colds and viruses. She was again diagnosed with an enlarged liver, and hepatitis C was diagnosed for the first time. She has seen several doctors, including Dr. Ellen B. Hunter, whose deposition was filed in support of the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Dr. Hunter testified that hepatitis C sufferers often remain asymptomatic for many years. The claimant testified that the signs of the disease began after she started working for the employer providing nursing care for medical patients. She said she never had any major health problems before that, a circumstance confirmed by her family doctor in his affidavit. Dr. Hunter testified the condition could have been caused by the above transfusions or by working with patients having hepatitis C. She confirmed that a health care worker such as the claimant "is at risk for acquiring hepatitis C." The trial court granted a summary judgment of dismissal. Appellate review is controlled by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56. Downen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 811 S.W.2d 523 (Tenn. 1991). The pleadings and evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the opponent of the motion. Wyatt v. Winnebago Indus., Inc., 566 S.W.2d 276 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1977). Summary judgment is to be rendered only when it is shown that there is no genuine issue as to a material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56. It is almost never an option in workers' compensation cases. Berry v. Consolidated Systems, Inc., 84 S.W.2d 445 (Tenn. 1991). In a summary judgment hearing, even where the parties have no right to a jury trial, the trial judge is not at liberty to weigh the evidence. 2
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Robert E. Burch, |
Stewart County | Workers Compensation Panel | 05/21/97 | |
| Thomas G. Honeycutt, and wife Fanny M. Honeycutt, b. Bobby Jerald Price and wife, Betty J. Price
03A01-9610-CH-00329
Defendants Bobby Jerald Price and his wife Betty J. Price, appeal a judgment of the Chancery Court for Knox County wherein the Court fixed the boundary line between property owned by them and property owned by Plaintiffs Thomas G. Honeycutt and his wife, Fanny M. Honeycutt, in accorance with the Honeycutts' insistence. (See Appendix.)
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Originating Judge:Chancellor Frederick D. McDonald |
Knox County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Hepp vs. Joe B's & Schultz
01A01-9604-CV-00183
Originating Judge:James E. Walton |
Montgomery County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| 01CO1-9605-CC-00197
01CO1-9605-CC-00197
|
Robertson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Francine Kuntz
01S01-9609-CH-00187
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. This appeal presents us with an issue involving venue in a workers' compensation case. As discussed below, the panel concludes the judgment of the trial court, dismissing the case for improper venue, should be affirmed. The employer's insurer, Yasuda, commenced this action in Davidson County where, according to the complaint, its principal place of business is located. The employee moved, without supporting affidavits, to dismiss for improper venue. The trial court granted the motion without an evidential hearing.1 The relevant facts are undisputed. The employee is a resident of Robertson County; the corporate employer has its principal office in Sumner County, where the injury occurred; and the employer's insurer has its principal office in Davidson County. The trial judge dismissed the complaint for improper venue because, according to the employee's brief, the employee "may not have a different residence than (sic) the employer for the purpose of determining proper venue under the Workers' Compensation Law of Tennessee." Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court. Presley v. Bennett, 86 S.W.2d 857 (Tenn. 1993). In a significant number of past cases, our Supreme Court held that a workers' compensation action was a transitory one and that venue was to be determined by considering both the provision of the Workers' Compensation Act with respect to venue and the general rules relating to transitory actions. Those cases were overturned by that court's opinion in Five Star Express, Inc. v Davis, 866 S.W.2d 944 (Tenn. 1993), wherein it said in conclusion, ".... we now hold that venue in workers' compensation actions is to be determined solely by the workers' compensation venue statute -- section 5-6-225(c)(1) -- and any other authority indicating otherwise is hereby expressly overruled." The section provides as follows: (c)(1) The party filing the petition may, at such party's option, instead of filing the same before the county judge or chair, file the same as an original petition in either the circuit, criminal or chancery 1 The employee has filed a separate action for benefits in Robertson County. 2
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr., |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 05/21/97 | |
| State vs. Penelope Karnes
01C01-9606-CR-00249
Originating Judge:J. O. Bond |
Wilson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Stroud vs. Stroud
01A01-9607-CH-00291
Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton |
Giles County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Rust vs. Rust
01A01-9608-CH-00361
Originating Judge:Robert E. Corlew, III |
Rutherford County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| State vs. Daryl Conner
02C01-9512-CR-00358
Originating Judge:Joseph B. Brown |
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| 01CO1-9605-CC-00218
01CO1-9605-CC-00218
|
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| Patterson vs. Amos, et. ux.
01A01-9609-CH-00410
|
Perry County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 | |
| X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Hamilton County | Court of Appeals | 05/21/97 |