|

June 2 , 2000
Volume 6 -- Number 083

What follows is the case style or name, first paragraph, author's
name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion
released eletronically today to TBALink.
- This Issue (IN THIS ORDER):
-
| 01 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court |
| 03 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court Workers' Compensation
Panel |
| 00 |
New Document(s) or Proposed Rule(s) from the Tennessee Supreme
Court |
| 01 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals |
| 02 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
| 00 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Attorney General (PDF format)
|
| 00 |
New Judicial Ethics Opinion(s) |
| 00 |
New Formal Ethics Opinion(s) from the Board of Professional Responsibility
|
-
There are three ways for TBALink members to get the full-text
versions of these opinions from the Web:
Do a key word search in the Search Link area of TBALink. This option will allow you to view and save
a plain-text version of the opinion.
Browse the Opinion List area of TBALink. This option will allow you to download the original
version of the opinion.
Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This option
will allow you to download the original document.
Lucian T. Pera
Editor-in-Chief, TBALink

LINNIE CLEEK v. WAL-MART STORES, INC.
Court:TSC
Attorneys:
Donna Brown Wilkerson, Jackson, Tennessee for the appellant, Ms.
Linnie Cleek.
Jeffrey P. Boyd, Jackson, Tennessee; B. Chadwick Rickman, Jackson,
Tennessee, for the appellee, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Judge: BARKER
First Paragraph:
The primary issue in this workers' compensation direct appeal is
whether the evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings
that the appellant is 20% permanently and partially disabled. We are
also asked to decide whether the appellant is entitled to an
additional period of temporary total disability benefits after she
made a nominal return to work but later resigned because of pain
associated with her original injury. This case was argued before the
Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel on August 13, 1999, but
before an opinion was issued by the Special Panel, the case was
transferred to the Supreme Court for an en banc hearing.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/CreekWal-Mart.wpd
REBECCA DAY
VS.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
For the Appellant: For the Appellee:
Bruce D. Fox Weldon E. Patterson
108 S. Main Street 800 South Gay Street
P.O. Box 530 Knoxville, TN 37929
Clinton, TN 37716
Judge: CORLEW
First Paragraph:
This worker's compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance
with the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated S50-6-225 (e) (3)
(1998 Supp.) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of
findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Trial Court, after
considering all of the evidence, found the worker to lack credibility,
and determined that she was not entitled to recover under the workers'
compensation law, and after consideration of the entire record, we
affirm the Trial Court's decision.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/day.wpd
KIRBY DIES v. PERMA PIPE, INC.
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
For Appellants: For Appellee:
Randolph A. Veazey B. Keith Williams
Connie Jones Taylor, Taylor, Lannom, & Williams
Glasgow & Veazey Lebanon, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Judge: CLEMENT
First Paragraph:
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with
Tenn. Code Ann. 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings
of fact and conclusions of law. The employer alleged eight bases of
appeal: 1) whether the injury arose out of and in the course of the
claimant's employment, 2) whether notice of the injury was provided to
the employer, 3) whether the trial court was within its discretion in
accepting the testimony of one expert over that of another, and 4)
whether the amount of the award was appropriate. The panel affirms on
each issue.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/kirbydies.wpd
RACHEL JEANETTE McCORMICK v. YASUDA FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY,
ET AL.
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
Bruce Timothy Pirtle, McMinnville, Tennessee, for the appellants,
Yasuda Fire & Marine Insurance Company and Calsonic Aeries
Corporation, Inc.
Frank D. Farrar and William J. Butler, Lafayette, Tennessee, for the
appellee, Rachel Jeanette McCormick.
Judge: GAYDEN
First Paragraph:
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with the Tenn. Code
Ann. Section 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme
Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Appellant,
Calsonic Yorozu Corporation (hereinafter "CYC") raises seven issues
arguing that the trial court erred by (1) failing to find Plaintiff's
claim was barred by Plaintiff's voluntary intoxication and willful
disregard of safety procedures, (2) holding that part of Plaintiff's
disability was due to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, (3) not
applying the "concurrent injury rule", (4) holding Plaintiff gave
adequate notice of her bilateral carpal syndrome to Defendants, (5)
awarding compensation for unauthorized medical treatment, (6)
improperly ordering a lump sum award, and (7) entering its judgment
contrary to the Rules of Civil Procedure.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/MccormickRJ.wpd
AMERICAN MATERIALS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC.,v. THE CITY OF CHATTANOOGA and
THE CHATTANOOGA CITY COUNCIL, and ADAMS LITHOGRAPHING COMPANY, ET AL.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
John R. Anderson, Harry R. Cash and B. Allison Edgmon, Grant,
Konvalinka & Harrison, P.C., Chattanooga, Tennessee for
Plaintiff-Appellee.
Phillip A. Noblett, City Attorney's Office, City of Chattanooga,
Tennessee, for Defendants- Appellees.
John W. Murrey, III, Hugh J. Moore, Jr., Philip B. Whitaker, Jr., and
William R. Hannah, Witt, Gaither & Whitaker, P.C., Chattanooga,
Tennessee for Intervening Defendants/Appellants.
Judge: FRANKS
First Paragraph:
This is an appeal from the Chancellor's refusal to allow movants to
intervene in the case. Movants filed a motion to intervene after the
parties had entered a consent judgment, and the Chancellor overruled
the motion. On appeal, we affirm the Chancellor's determination.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/AmtlvChatt.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES M. LANE, JR.
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Larry Roddy, Sale Creek, Tennessee, for the appellant, James M. Lane,
Jr.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter, R. Stephen Jobe,
Assistant Attorney General, William H. Cox III, District Attorney
General, David M. Denney, Executive Assistant District Attorney
General.
Judge: WITT
First Paragraph:
James M. Lane, Jr. appeals by permission of the trial and appellate
courts. Indicted for two counts of aggravated perjury, he alleges
that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to reverse the
district attorney general's denial of pretrial diversion. Because the
prosecutor relied upon improper grounds for denying diversion, we
reverse the trial court's finding that the prosecutor did not abuse
his discretion in denying diversion. We remand to the trial court
with instructions that the prosecutor enter into a memorandum of
understanding for pretrial diversion with the defendant.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/LaneJM.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROBERT A. NORRIS and LIDA MEADOR
WITH DISSENTING OPINION
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Joe L. Finley, Assistant Public Defender, for the appellant, Robert A.
Norris. Randall A. York, Crossville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Lida Meador.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter, Ellen H. Pollack,
Assistant Attorney General, William Edward Gibson, District Attorney
General, David Alan Patterson and Anthony J. Craighead, Assistant
District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WITT
First Paragraph:
This direct appeal presents a certified question of law pursuant to
Rule 37(b)(2)(i), Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. The
defendants pleaded guilty to manufacture of a controlled substance,
subject to reservation of a certified question. In their certified
question, the defendants contend that law enforcement officers
conducted an unreasonable search and seizure when the officers made
thermal image scans of their home, that the search warrant did not
allege sufficient facts to establish probable cause, and that the
information upon which the search warrant was issued was stale. One
defendant received judicial diversion and is not properly before this
court on a Rule 3 appeal, and we decline to grant her a Rule 10
extraordinary appeal. We conclude that thermal imaging is not an
unconstitutional search, and the affidavit information was not stale.
However, because the search warrant affidavit failed to establish
probable cause for the search, we reverse the trial court's denial of
Norris's motion to suppress. Norris's conviction is vacated and his
charge is dismissed. Meador's appeal is dismissed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/NorrisRA.wpd
WITH DISSENTING OPINION
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/NorrisRAD_dis.wpd

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
Feel free to forward this Opinion Flash on to anyone you know
of with an e-mail address.
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
See the intrsuctions at the beginning of this edition of Opinion
Flash.
JOIN TBALink!
While Opinion Flash is a free service of the Tennessee Bar Association,
you must be a subscriber to TBALink, the premier Web site for
Tennessee attorneys, in order to access the full-text of the opinions
or enjoy many other features of TBALink. TBA members may join
TBALink for just $50 per year. To join, go to: http://www.tba.org/join.html/
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
Would you like to receive the TBALink Opinion Flash free each
day by e-mail? Anyone, whether a TBA member or not, is welcome
to subscribe ... it's free!
For the Plain Text Version:
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
For the HTML Text Version:
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: SUBSCRIBE HTML
3) Leave the body of the message blank
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
To STOP receiving 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 2000 Tennessee Bar Association
|