|

October 24, 2001
Volume 7 Number 197

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 |
| 09 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals |
| 03 |
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

JANIE LOU COBB v. HENRY I. SIEGEL, INC.
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
Jill A. Hanson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Henry I.
Siegel Company.
Donald E. Parish, Huntingdon, Tennessee, for the appellee, Janie Lou
Cobb.
Judge: LOSER
First Paragraph:
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann.
S 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and
conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employer contends the
evidence preponderates against the trial court's award of permanent
partial disability benefits based on 42 percent to the body as a
whole. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment
should be affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/cobbjanie.wpd
ED DAVIS v. CITY OF MILAN, TENNESSEE
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
C. Mark Donahoe, Jackson, For Appellant, Ed Davis
C. Timothy Crocker; Michael A. Carter, Milan, For Appellee, City of
Milan
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
Farmer sued city for damages resulting from a fire that destroyed his
barn alleging that the city's utility division was negligent in
installing a pole and wire on his property and was also negligent in
failing to prevent an electrical surge that caused the failure in the
wiring. The trial court granted summary judgment to city, and
plaintiff appeals. We reverse.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/davised.wpd
DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY v. GEORGE MICHAEL BROWN
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Jerry M. Martin, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant.
David S. Bunn, Bristol, Virginia, and Gregory K. Haden, Kingsport,
Tennessee, for Appellee.
Judge: FRANKS
First Paragraph:
Trial Court declared coverage under policy issued by plaintiff to
defendant for a motor vehicle accident, holding the vehicle operated
by defendant was a replacement vehicle. On appeal, we reverse.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/directins.wpd
EMMETT K. DUNLAP v. NANCY DAVIS, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Emmett K. Dunlap, Pro Se
Tom Anderson, Jackson, For Appellees, Nancy Davis, et al
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
Plaintiff-inmate, acting pro se, filed a petition for writ of
certiorari to review a judgment of the general sessions court
dismissing his case. The trial court denied plaintiff's petition and
he appeals. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/dunlapemm.wpd
JAMES ROGER NELSON v. VICTORIA KAY GOAD NELSON
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Joe R. Judkins, Wartburg, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Victoria Kay
Goad Nelson.
James W. Brooks, Jr., Wartburg, Tennessee, for the Appellee, James
Roger Nelson.
Judge: SWINEY
First Paragraph:
James Roger Nelson ("Husband") filed a Complaint for Absolute Divorce
("Complaint") against Victoria Kay Goad Nelson ("Wife"). Wife filed
an Answer and a Counter-Complaint for divorce. Wife admitted to
Husband she had been and still was involved in an extramarital affair
with a co- worker. Before trial, Husband obtained a temporary
restraining order against Wife, and Wife obtained an Order of
Protection against Husband. Wife testified Husband had subjected her
to verbal and physical abuse in front of their minor children. Wife
also testified Husband had threatened her with a gun while their
children were at home with them. The Trial Court granted both parties
a divorce, divided the parties' property, and awarded custody of the
children to Husband. The Trial Court based its custody decision upon
Wife's extramarital affair and the fact that Husband, at the time of
trial, had the more stable home environment. The Trial Court failed,
however, to address Wife's allegations that she was abused by
Husband. Wife appeals the custody award and portions of the Trial
Court's property division. We vacate, in part, and affirm, in part,
and remand.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/nelsonjrv
VENELSIA STEPHENS v. THE SHELBY COUNTY GOVERNMENT, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Florence M. Johnson, Memphis, For Appellant, Venelsia Stephens
Carroll C. Johnson, Memphis, For Appellees, Shelby County Government,
et al
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
County employee sued county for on-the-job injury benefits resulting
from carpel tunnel syndrome. Employee filed suit over one year after
the county denied her claim for benefits. After a nonjury trial, the
trial court dismissed plaintiff's case with prejudice as barred by the
one-year statute of limitations. Employee appeals. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/stephensvenv
ROY TAYLOR v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Roy Taylor, Pro Se
No Appearance by Tennessee Department of Correction
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
Prisoner filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of two
disciplinary actions the Tennessee Department of Corrections filed
against him. The Circuit Court of Lauderdale County dismissed the
action, finding that the petition was not filed within the sixty-day
limitation period set out in T.C.A. S 27-9-102 (2000). We affirm in
part and reverse in part.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/taylorroy.wpd
JUDITH R. THOMAS v. WILLIAM A. THOMAS
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Jean Brown, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Judith R. Thomas.
Amelia G. Crotwell, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, William A.
Thomas.
Judge: SUSANO
First Paragraph:
This is a post-divorce proceeding. Judith R. Thomas ("Mother") filed
a petition for contempt and for an increase in child support. William
A. Thomas ("Father") answered and filed a counterclaim, seeking a
decrease in his support obligation. Following a bench trial, the
court below determined that while Father had failed to comply with
some of the provisions of the parties' marital dissolution agreement
("MDA"), his failure to comply was not willful; therefore, the court
declined to hold him in contempt. The court also held that Father's
child support obligation should not be changed. Both parties raise
issues on this appeal. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/thomasjr.wpd
TENNESSEE FARMERS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. SA W. JEONG, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Michael E. Callaway, Cleveland, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company.
Jimmy W. Bilbo, Cleveland, Tennessee, for the appellees, Sa W. Jeong,
Jack Sung K. Lee, and Hyunlan Lee.
Judge: SUSANO
First Paragraph:
Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company ("Tennessee Farmers")
brought a declaratory judgment action against Sa W. Jeong ("the
injured party"); her daughter, Hyunlan Lee; and her son-in-law, Jack
Sung K. Lee (the defendants Lee are referred to herein collectively as
"the Lees"), asking the trial court to "declare whether or not
Tennessee Farmers is obligated to afford liability coverage to [the
Lees] in connection with the lawsuit filed against them by [the
injured party]." At the conclusion of a bench trial, the trial judge
ruled in favor of the defendants, finding that the word "reside" and
its derivatives "resident" and "residing," particularly as the latter
two words are used in the policy language excluding coverage of a
claim by a "covered person" or one "residing in the same household,"
are ambiguous, and that the language of the policy should be construed
against Tennessee Farmers as the drafter of the policy. The court
ordered Tennessee Farmers to provide liability coverage to the Lees
with respect to the subject lawsuit. Tennessee Farmers appeals,
raising issues as to whether the trial court correctly ruled that the
policy is ambiguous, and whether the trial court was correct in
finding that the word "resident" was susceptible to a reasonable
meaning that would exclude the injured party from the ambit of the
subject exclusionary language in the policy. We find that the subject
policy provision is not ambiguous; however, we conclude that the
injured party was not "residing in [the Lees'] household" as that
language has been construed by applicable case law. Accordingly, we
affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/tnfarmers.wpd
UNION PLANTERS NATIONAL BANK as Executor and Trustee of the Will of
JAMES A. LeROY, deceased v. BETTYE CLAIRE REINHARDT DEDMAN, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Marion S. Boyd, Jr., Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Union
Planters National Bank, as Executor and Trustee under the Will of
James A. LeRoy, deceased.
Allan J. Wade, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellees, Betty Claire
Reinhardt Dedman, John Dedman, Bernice A. LeRoy, Jill LeRoy Dimiceli,
and Sue LeRoy Henderson.
Judge: FARMER
First Paragraph:
This case is a dispute over the correct valuation of the residuary
portion of Testator's estate for purposes of determining whether it
was sufficient to pay estate taxes where Testator had directed by Will
that such taxes be paid from the residuary. Testator's executor
submits that the correct valuation date is the date of death; that
neither post-death income nor appreciation of assets in the residuary
should be included in the valuation; that income tax paid by the
estate on income with respect to a decedent (IRD) should be included
in a calculation of the death tax fund deficiency; that attorney's
fees incurred as a result of protracted litigation should be included
in the death tax fund deficiency calculation. Executor asks us to
determine whether such deficiencies are apportionable among those
receiving gifts passing outside of probate. We hold that the correct
valuation date of the residuary for the purpose of determining its
sufficiency to pay the death taxes is the date of Testator's death.
Post-death increases should not be utilized. If the residuary on the
date of death was insufficient to pay the estate taxes, these taxes
are apportionable among all those interested in the estate. We
further hold that although the IRD income tax and attorney's fees
reduce the estate, they are not includible in the death tax fund
deficiency so as to be apportionable to recipients of out of probate
transfers.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/unionplanters.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. VINCENT HATCH
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
A. C. Wharton, Jr., District Public Defender, Tony N. Brayton,
Assistant Public Defender, and Mary K. Kent, Assistant Public
Defender, on appeal; Vincent L. Hatch, Pro Se, at trial.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General, J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney
General, William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General, and James A.
Wax, Assistant District Attorney General.
Judge: CLARK
First Paragraph:
One day before his scheduled jury trial for first degree murder, the
appellant sought and was granted the right to represent himself. He
now appeals from his conviction by a Shelby County jury for the
offense of first degree murder, asserting that the convicting evidence
was insufficient and that the trial court denied him his
constitutional right to the assistance of counsel. We affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/hatchv.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. FRANK C. PEASE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Frank C. Pease, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Elizabeth B. Marney,
Assistant Attorney General; James N. Ramsey, District Attorney
General; and Janice G. Hicks, Assistant District Attorney General, for
the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: RILEY
First Paragraph:
The defendant, Frank C. Pease, appeals his conviction for criminal
contempt. The sole issue for our determination is whether the
evidence was sufficient to support his conviction. Since the contempt
finding was based upon defendant's anticipated, rather than actual,
refusal to follow the court's order, we reverse the judgment of the
trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/peasefc.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. GEORGE OSBORNE WADE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Steve McEwen, Mountain City, Tennessee, (on appeal); and Joseph P.
Atnip, District Public Defender, Dresden, Tennessee, (at trial), for
appellant, George Osborne Wade.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Mark E. Davidson,
Assistant Attorney General; Thomas A. Thomas, District Attorney
General; and James David Kendall, Assistant District Attorney, for
appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: SMITH
First Paragraph:
An Obion County jury convicted the defendant for one count of felony
evasion of arrest, one count of felony reckless endangerment, and one
count of misdemeanor evasion of arrest. The trial court sentenced the
defendant to six (6) years as a Range II multiple offender for his
conviction for felony evasion of arrest, which was merged with his
conviction for reckless endangerment. The trial court also sentenced
the defendant to eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days for his
conviction for misdemeanor evasion of arrest, to be served
concurrently with his sentence for his felony conviction. The
defendant filed for a motion for new trial, and the trial court held a
hearing on that motion on the same date that it held the sentencing
hearing. Subsequently, the defendant filed a second motion for new
trial, which the court treated as an amended motion for new trial. On
appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at
trial, his sentence, and the trial court's refusal to grant his motion
for new trial based on the threatening statements made to jurors
during a break in their deliberations. After reviewing the record, we
find that none of these claims merit relief and therefore affirm the
defendant's conviction.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/wadegeo.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
|