|

June 14, 2001
Volume 7 Number 108

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):
-
| 00 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court |
| 01 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court Workers' Compensation
Panel |
| 00 |
New Document(s) or Proposed Rule(s) from the Tennessee Supreme
Court |
| 02 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals |
| 01 |
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.
Howard H. Vogel
Knoxville, Tennessee
Editor-in-Chief, TBALink

GARY L. HOLT, SR. v. OZBURN-HESSEY MOVING COMPANY and AMERICAN
ALTERNATIVE INSURANCE CORPORATION
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
Jeffrey P. Boyd, Jackson Tennessee, for the appellant, Ozburn-Hessey
Moving Company
James R. Tomkins, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Gary L.
Holt, Sr.
Judge: RUSSELL
First Paragraph:
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in
accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated Section 50-6-225(e)(3)
for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The Appellant appeals from the amount of the award of permanent
partial disability benefits. After a complete review of the entire
record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm
the award made by the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/holtgaryopn.wpd
KRISTIN B. HUNTLEY v. WILLIAM SIDNEY HUNTLEY
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
John P. Konvalinka and Mathew D. Brownfield, Chattanooga, Tennessee,
for the Appellant, William Sidney Huntley.
Glenna M. Ramer, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Kristin B.
Huntley.
Judge: SWINEY
First Paragraph:
In this child support modification action, the Trial Court held that a
significant variance existed between William Sidney Huntley's
("Defendant") child support obligation set by the parties' Marital
Dissolution Agreement ("MDA") and the amount mandated by the Child
Support Guidelines ("Guidelines"). The Trial Court ordered an
increase in child support consistent with the Guidelines. Because the
Guidelines' flat percentage amount of child support totaled
approximately $6,600 per month, the Trial Court ordered it be divided
between child support payments of $3,100 and payments to a
non-educational trust ("Trust") in the amount of $3,500. Defendant
appeals and primarily contends that his child support obligation
should not be increased to the Guidelines' flat percentage amount
because that amount exceeds a reasonable amount of child support and
because the MDA controls his child support obligation despite any
increases in his income. Kristin B. Huntley ("Plaintiff") also raises
issues on appeal, primarily regarding the Trust. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/huntley.wpd
ROY EUGENE SCHRIMSHER v. SHERRY LYNN SCHRIMSHER
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Gerald C. Russell, Maryville, Tennessee, for Appellant, Sherry Lynn
Schrimsher (Roberts)
Charles E. Ridenour, Sweetwater, Tennessee, for Appellee, Roy Eugene
Schrimsher
Judge: GODDARD
First Paragraph:
This is a post divorce custody dispute. Mother seeks custody of the
two minor children because she believes the children are dependent and
neglected. Father seeks an increase in child support for the
children. Mother requested the Trial Judge to hear the testimony of
the children who were 12 and 11 at the time. The children were the
witnesses to the acts complained of in the petition to change custody.
Mother could only present hearsay evidence from the children. The
Trial Judge refused to hear the testimony of the children and
continued custody with Father and increased Mother's child support.
Mother then filed this appeal. We vacate the decision of the trial
court and remand for the purpose hereinafter set out.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/schrimsherroy.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES WESLEY OSBORNE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Edward C. Miller, Public Defender, Dandridge, Tennessee, for the
appellant, James Wesley Osborne.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Elizabeth B. Marney,
Assistant Attorney General; Alfred C. Schmutzer, Jr., District
Attorney General; and Charles L. Murphy, Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WEDEMEYER
First Paragraph:
The Defendant, James Wesley Osborne, was convicted by a Jefferson
County jury of first degree murder. The Defendant was sentenced to
life imprisonment. The Defendant appeals, arguing the following: (1)
that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of first degree
premeditated murder, (2) that the trial court's manner of jury
selection was in violation of Rule 24(c) of the Tennessee Rules of
Criminal Procedure, (3) that the trial court erred by admitting into
evidence photographs of a serrated knife found in the victim's home
and photographs of two bayonets found in the Defendant's vehicle, (4)
that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence an order of
protection obtained by the victim against the Defendant and previous
threats made by the Defendant to the victim and members of her family,
(5) that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence testimony
that the victim hid the Defendant's gun collection shortly before she
was killed; (6) that the trial court erred by allowing autopsy
photographs of the victim to be admitted into evidence, and (7) that
the trial court erred in denying the Defendant's request for a
voluntary manslaughter jury instruction. Finding no reversible error,
we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/osbornejw.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 2001 Tennessee Bar Association
|