Here is today's issue of TBALink Opinion-Flash. What follows is the document name, first paragraph and the names of the attorneys for the parties (If you know one of them you might want to give them a call, chances are they don't know about the opinion yet) of each electronic opinion/rules released TODAY from the three appellate courts.
- 06-New Opinons From TSC
- 00-New Opinons From TSC-Rules
- 00-New Opinons From TSC-Workers Comp Panel
- 05-New Opinons From TCA
- 02-New Opinons From TCCA
There are three ways to get the full opinion from the Web: (TBALink members only)
TBALink Co-Chief Editor
CHARLES M. CARY, Jr. v. CATHY ANN CARY, Court:TSC For Appellant: For Appellee: Terry Abernathy Cathy Ann Cary, Pro Se Selmer, Tennessee 284 North High Bells, Tennessee 38006 First Paragraph: We granted this appeal to determine whether a provision in an antenuptial agreement by which a prospective spouse waives alimony is void because it violates public policy. The trial court held that such a provision in an antenuptial agreement, which waived alimony, was valid and enforceable and, therefore, denied the spouses application for alimony. The Court of Appeals,, however, reversed, holding that the waiver of alimony provision was void as against public policy, and remanded to the trial court to consider whether to award alimony. Judge: ANDERSON, C.J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/CARYCHAS.OPN.WP6 STATE OF TENNESSEE, v. BRIAN KEITH KIMBROUGH, Court:TSC For Appellant: For Appellee: Charles W. Burson A. C. Wharton Attorney General and Reporter Shelby Cty Public Defender Jerry L. Smith W. Mark Ward Deputy Attorney General Assistant Public Defender Nashville, TN 37243 Memphis, TN 38103 First Paragraph: We review this cause in order to address an issue of first impression: whether attempt to commit felony-murder exists as an offense in Tennessee. We conclude that it does not and affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals reversing the appellee's conviction. Judge: Birch, J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/KIMBRO.OPN.WP6 IN RE: IRA H. MURPHY, v. BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY, Court:TSC For Appellant: For Appellee: Laura L. Chastain A. C. Wharton, Jr. Deputy Chief Disciplinary Counsel Memphis, Tennessee Nashville, Tennessee First Paragraph: The issue raised by this appeal is whether the petitioner, a disbarred attorney, has satisfied the requirements for reinstatement of his license to practice law contained in Rule 9, 19.3, Rules of the Supreme Court, by clear and convincing proof. A Hearing Panel of the Board of Professional Responsibility concluded that the petitioner had failed to carry the burden of proof for reinstatement. The Chancery Court, however, reviewed the Hearing Panel decision and held the petitioner was entitled to "conditional reinstatement" of his license to practice law. Judge: ANDERSON, C.J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/MURPHYI.OPN.WP6 STATE OF TENNESSEE, v. RICHARD ODOM, a/k/a OTIS SMITH, and CONCURRING/DISSENTING OPINION Court:TSC FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: ON APPEAL A.C. WHARTON CHARLES W. BURSON Shelby County Public Defender Attorney General and Reporter W. MARK WARD MICHAEL E. MOORE Assistant Public Defender Solicitor General Memphis, TN Nashville, TN BROCK MEHLER Capital Case Resource Center Nashville, TN AT TRIAL EDWARD THOMPSON JOHN W. PIEROTTI CAROLYN WATKINS District Attorney General Assistant Public Defenders Memphis, TN DON D. STROTHER PHILLIP GERALD HARRIS Assistant District Attorneys General Memphis, TN First Paragraph: In this capital case, the defendant, Richard Odom, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first-degree murder committed in the perpetration of rape. At the sentencing hearing, the jury found three aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) the defendant had been previously convicted of one or more violent felonies; (2) the murder was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel; and (3) the murder was committed during the defendant's escape from lawful custody or from a place of lawful confinement. Tenn. Code Ann. 39-13-204 (i)(2), (5), and (8). The jury found the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt and sentenced the defendant to death by electrocution. We address five issues: (1) Whether the standard of review for trial court rulings on suppression issues is a "preponderance of the evidence" standard, or an "any material evidence" standard; (2) Whether this Court should adopt a rule of law requiring the electronic recording of custodial interrogations; (3) Whether the trial court's failure to admit portions of the testimony of John Hutson, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist, at the sentencing phase of the trial, was reversible error; (4) Whether the change in Tenn. Code Ann. 39-13-204(e) adding the language "No distinction shall be made between mitigating circumstances as set forth in subsection (j) and those otherwise raised by the evidence which are specifically requested by either the state or the defense to be instructed to the jury" is evidence of the legislature's intent that trial courts specifically charge the jury on nonstatutory mitigating factors; and (5) Whether the definition of "serious physical abuse" in the "heinous, atrocious, and cruel" aggravator of Tenn. Code Ann. 39-13-204 (i)(5) is unconstitutionally vague. Judge: Birch, J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/ODOMRICH.OPN.WP6 URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/ODOMRICH.CON.WP6 STATE OF TENNESSEE, v. MARIO LAMONT WILSON, Court:TSC For the Appellee: For the Appellant: Hughie Ragan Charles W. Burson Jackson, TN Attorney General & Reporter Michael E. Moore Solicitor General Michael W. Catalano Associate Solicitor General Nashville, TN James G. Woodall District Attorney General Donald H. Allen Asst. District Attorney General Jackson, TN First Paragraph: A jury convicted defendant, Mario Lamont Wilson, of three counts of aggravated assault and of felony reckless endangerment and possession of a deadly weapon with the intent to commit a felony. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Wilsons felony reckless endangerment conviction and sentence, but reversed and dismissed the convictions for aggravated assault and possession of a deadly weapon. We granted permission to appeal to consider whether the Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it dismissed Wilsons convictions for aggravated assault. Although we conclude that Wilsons convictions for aggravated assault may not stand, we do not adopt entirely the reasoning of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Rather, we affirm the dismissal of the aggravated assault charges because the evidence is insufficient to prove that Wilson intentionally and knowingly caused another to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury. Judge: White, J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/WILSONML.OPN.WP6 MICHELLE LYNN DURHAM and Gibson Circuit No. 7089 husband ROBERT WAYNE DURHAM, v. LUTHER WEBB and wife, SUE WEBB, individually and d/b/a WEBBS BRITISH PETROLEUM STATION and W. PAUL ARNOLD, individually and d/b/a ARNOLD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Court:TCA TIMOTHY L. WARNOCK and JOHN B. ENKEMA, Bass, Berry & Sims, Nashville, Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellants. FLOYD S. FLIPPIN, Adams, Ryal & Flippin, Humboldt Attorney for Defendants/Appellees Luther Webb and wife, Sue Webb, individually and d/b/a Webbs British Petroleum Station. First Paragraph: Michelle Lynn Durham and Robert Wayne Durham (plaintiffs or by name) brought this suit in the Circuit Court of Gibson, County against Luther Webb and wife Sue Webb, individually and d/b/a Webbs British Petroleum Station (defendants), seeking damages for defendants alleged negligence that caused plaintiff Michelle Durham to fall in defendants parking lot, causing injuries. The trial court granted defendants motion for summary judgment, from which this appeal is taken. The sole issue presented is whether the trial court erred in granting defendants motion for summary judgment. We find no error and affirm. Judge: TOMLIN, Sr. J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/DURHAMML.OPN.WP6 ELLERS, OAKLEY, CHESTER and RIKE, INC., v. DPIC COMPANIES, SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANIES and ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, Court:TCA Archie Sanders, III Memphis, Tennessee Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellant Albert C. Harvey John W. Rodgers Memphis, Tennessee Attorneys for Defendants/Appellees First Paragraph: RULE 10 ORDER AND OPINION This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(a) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee. In this case, Appellant, Ellers, Oakley, Chester & Rike, Inc. (hereinafter Ellers), contracted to provide engineering, architectural, and consultant services to two companies. Ellers later sued these companies for breach of contract, and each filed counterclaims against Ellers. Ellers had a contract for professional liability insurance with Appellee, Security Insurance Company of Hartford (hereinafter Security). Ellers notified Security of the counterclaims and took the position that both countersuits should be treated as one for insurance purposes. Security then sent Ellers a letter indicating that the two claims would be treated separately and that a separate deductible would be applied to each. Ellers subsequently filed this lawsuit against Security. Judge: HOLLY KIRBY LILLARD, J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/ELLERS.WPD.WP6 ANNE ADAMS HURDLE, By and through her Attorneys-In-Fact, WALKER HARDY HURDLE, III and WILLIAM F. HURDLE, and WALKER HARDY HURDLE, III and WILLIAM F. HURDLE, Individually, v. WALKER HARDY HURDLE, JR. and Wife, MARY ANN HURDLE Court:TCA G. Rice Byars, Jr. Memphis, Tennessee Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Appellees Hal Gerber Lewie R. Polk, III Memphis, Tennessee Attorneys for Defendants/Appellants First Paragraph: RULE 10 ORDER AND OPINION This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(a) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee. In this case, appellant, Walker Hardy Hurdle, Jr,. and Appellee, Anne Adams Hurdle, were divorced in 1973. They entered into a property settlement agreement which was incorporated into the divorce decree. The property settlement agreement required Mr. Hurdle, inter alia, to make a will leaving half his estate upon his death to the parties two sons and to convey certain properties to an alimony trust. Mr. Hurdle subsequently remarried and children were borne of the second marriage. Appellees filed this lawsuit alleging that Mr. Hurdle was making huge gifts of assets to his second wife and their children, dissipating the estate that would be left to the sons of Mr. Hurdle and Appellee under Mr. Hurdles will. Mr. Hurdle denied this allegation, arguing that the divorce decree required only that he have a will leaving half his estate to the parties sons and that he had complied with this requirement. Mr. Hurdle also argued that, despite gifts to his second wife and their children, his estate, including the alimony trust, is now larger than it was at the time of the divorce decree, so there was no dissipation of his estate. Judge: HOLLY KIRBY LILLARD, J. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/HURDLEAA.WPD.WP6 KESTERSON FOODS, v. RONNIE W. SCOTT, Court:TCA David A. Riddick of Jackson For Plaintiff-Appellant William R. Neese of Dresden For Defendant-Appellee First Paragraph: In this non-jury case, plaintiff, Kesterson Foods, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing its suit against defendant, Ronnie Scott. The pertinent facts have been stipulated by the parties and are as follows. On April 5, 1990 Scott, as a limited partner, and James and Norma Foust, as general partners, formed a limited partnership entitled Foust and Scott, L.P. (hereinafter Partnership), the primary purpose of which was to operate a convenience store in Camden, Tennessee. Under the terms of the partnership agreement, Scott made a capital contribution of $26,000.00 to the Partnership. The capital contribution plus 12 percent interest per annum was to be repaid by the plaintiffs under an amortization plan in sixty (60) monthly payments of $591.58. The Partnership failed to make the scheduled payments to Scott and in June of 1992, the balance due was $17,026.61. In March of 1993, the Partnership and Scott negotiated a security agreement and financing statement, giving Scott a security interest in the convenience stores inventory. The security agreement provided, in pertinent part: This security interest is granted in consideration of the Secured Parties [Scott] forbearance from declaring a default, demanding payment in full and starting collection activities and to secure a certain obligation, evidenced in the Limited Partnership Agreement dated April 5, 1990, in the principal amount of twenty-six thousand dollars ($26,000), payable in sixty monthly installments of principal and interest at a variable rate, and other charges as provided therein, together with any extensions, modifications, and renewals thereof. Judge: W. FRANK CRAWFORD, PRESIDING JUDGE, W.S. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/KESTERSO.OPN.WP6 OWEN SELBY, v. DR. PATRICIO ILABACA and GEORGE WHITWORTH, Court:TCA David M. Sullivan of Memphis For Plaintiff-Appellant Tim Edwards, James F. Horner, of Glassman, Jeter, Edwards & Wade, P.C., of Memphis For Defendant-Appellee, Whitworth First Paragraph: This is a libel suit. Plaintiff, Owen Selby, appeals from the order of the trial court granting summary judgment to defendant, George Whitworth. The sole issue as stated in plaintiffs brief is: Whether the trial court erred in this libel action by finding plaintiff had not shown the defendant acted with actual malice. Judge: W. FRANK CRAWFORD, PRESIDING JUDGE, W.S. URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/selby.opn.WP6 DAVID ROY GOINS,v. STATE OF TENNESSEE, Court:TCCA For Appellant: For Appellee: Gregory D. Smith Charles W. Burson Attorney Attorney General & Reporter One Public Sq., Suite 321 Clarksville, TN 37040 Hunt S. Brown (on appeal) Assistant Attorney General Criminal Justice Division Sherman Fetterman 450 James Robertson Parkway Assistant Public Defender Nashville, TN 37243-0493 P.O. Box 386 Tazewell, TN 37879 Shayne Sexton (on appeal and at hearing) Asst. Dist. Attorney General P.O. Box 455 Tazewell, TN 37879 First Paragraph: The petitioner, David Roy Goins, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The issues presented for our review are as follows: (1) whether the petitioner received the effective assistance of counsel; and (2) whether the petitioner's guilty pleas were knowingly and voluntarily made. We find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. Judge: GARY R. WADE, JUDGE URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/GOINSDR.OPN.WP6 STATE OF TENNESSEE,v CAREY MONGER, Court:TCCA FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE: ROGER SEY CHARLES W. BURSON 118 S. Main St. Attorney General & Reporter Greeneville, TN 37743 AMY L. TARKINGTON Asst. Attorney General 450 James Robertson Pkwy. Nashville, TN 37243-0493 C. BERKELEY BELL District Attorney General CECIL C. MILLS, JR. Asst. District Attorney General 113 W. Church St. Greeneville, TN 37743 First Paragraph: The defendant was indicted for driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI) and found guilty of same after a jury trial. After a sentencing hearing, the defendant was sentenced to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with ten days to be served in confinement She was also assessed a fine of $260.00. Judge: JOHN H. PEAY, Judge URL:http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/MONGER.OPN.WP6
Feel free to forward this Opinion-Flash on to any attorney you know of with an internet address, who is not a TBALink member. To Join TBALink - Http://www.tba.org/join.html/
Would you like to receive the TBALink Opinion-Flash each day via e-mail?
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: SUBSCRIBE
3) Leave the body of the message blank
Non TBA members are WELCOME to subscribe...it's free!!
Would you like to STOP receiving the TBALink Opinion-Flash?
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: UNSUBSCRIBE
3) Leave the body of the message blank
© Copyright 1998 Tennessee Bar Association