December 7, 2001
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.
There are three ways for TBALink members to get the full-text versions of these opinions from the Web:
Howard H. Vogel
EMMETT EARL FALCON v. GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, et al Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel Attorneys: Byron Davis, Jr. and M. Scot Ogan, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Richard K. Smith, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Gaylord Entertainment Company. Steve C. Norris, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Emmett Earl Falcon. 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 case, the employer contends (1) the trial court erred in concluding that the Last Injurious Exposure Rule applied to the facts of this case and (2) the trial court erred in finding the employee was not barred from recovery because of a misrepresentation in the employment application process. In this case, the employee had two successive employers. The trial court found that the employee developed symptoms of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome while he worked for the first employer but that the employee's condition was aggravated from his work for the second employer. We agree with the trial court that the Last Injurious Exposure Rule applies to this case. As discussed herein, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/falconemmett.wpd
JOHNNY JENKINS v. KEMPER INSURANCE CO. Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel Attorneys: Clint Woodfin, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Kemper Insurance Company. Bruce D. Fox, Clinton, Tennessee, for the appellee, Johnny Jenkins. Judge: BYERS 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 S 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found the plaintiff sustained an 80 percent permanent partial disability to his right leg as a result of his knee injury. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/jenkinsj.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE, ex rel STEVEN M. WRZESNIEWSKI, v. LORI L. MILLER Court:TCA Attorneys: Kevin W. Shepherd, Maryville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, and Kim Beals, Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee, State of Tennessee, ex rel Steven M. Wrzesniewski. Judge: FRANKS First Paragraph: Appellant was not ordered to pay child support when divorce was granted. Subsequently, retroactive child support was ordered. On appeal, we affirm. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/millerl.wpd
KIMBERLY J. SVACHA, et al. v. WALDENS CREEK SADDLE CLUB, et al. Court:TCA Attorneys: Robert L. Ogle, Jr., Sevierville, Tennessee for the Appellants Kimberly and William Svacha. David H. Parton, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, for the Appellees Benjamin and Mary Darnell, and Waldens Creek Saddle Club. Judge: SWINEY First Paragraph: The Trial Court granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment relying, at least in part, on oral testimony from one of the Plaintiffs. This testimony was not transcribed, filed with the Trial Court, and provided to this Court as part of the record on appeal. Due to the somewhat peculiar procedural aspects of this case, we conclude that Defendants had the responsibility to file a transcript of this testimony. Because we cannot evaluate the propriety of the grant of summary judgment without having before us this evidence relied on by the Trial Court, we vacate the grant of summary judgment. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/svachakj.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CORY MILLIKEN Court:TCCA Attorneys: Dwight E. Scott, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Cory Milliken. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kim R. Helper, Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. Johnson, District Attorney General; and Tom Thurman, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WELLES First Paragraph: The Defendant, Corey L. Milliken, pled guilty to two counts of first degree premeditated murder and one count of aggravated robbery. His agreed sentence was two concurrent life sentences for the murders and a consecutive twelve year term for the aggravated robbery, for an effective sentence of life plus twelve years. The Defendant timely filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily. After a hearing the trial court denied relief and the Defendant appealed as of right. Finding no error in the trial court's ruling on the Defendant's petition, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/millikenc.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TIMOTHY L. ROBERTSON Court:TCCA Attorneys: Nicholas D. Hare, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Timothy L. Robertson. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Mark A. Fulks, Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. Johnson, III, District Attorney General; and Erik R. Herbert, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: SMITH First Paragraph: The defendant, Timothy L. Robertson, was indicted on two counts of unlawful possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell; one count of felony possession of a weapon; and one count of driving on a revoked or suspended license. Following the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress, he pled guilty to one count of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to resell, a Class B felony, and one count of felony possession of a weapon, a Class E felony. In accordance with the terms of his plea bargain agreement, the remaining counts of the indictment were dismissed. Pursuant to Rule 37(b)(2)(1) of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure, the defendant reserved the right to appeal as a dispositive question of law the issue of whether his custodial arrest and the subsequent search of his vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution, and Tennessee Code Annotated Section 40-7-118(b)(1)(c). We conclude that the officers were required to make a custodial arrest of the defendant to prevent his continued violation of the driver's license law, and that the subsequent search of his vehicle was valid as incident to that arrest. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/robertsontimothyl.wpd
PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
For the HTML Text Version:
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
To STOP receiving TBALink Opinion-Flash: