JOHN D. COOKE III v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ET AL.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
John D. Cooke III, pro se.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael E. Moore,
Solicitor General; Arthur Crownover II, Senior Counsel, for the
appellee, Tennessee Department of Correction, West Tennessee State
Penitentiary, and West Tennessee State Penitentiary - Site II -
Disciplinary Board.
Judge: INMAN
First Paragraph:
The plaintiff sought a common law writ of certiorari to review the
action of a prison disciplinary board. The Circuit Court held that
the correction of the Board's decision was not subject to judicial
review. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/cookejohndiii.wpd
ISAAC HALL v. SHIRLEY A. HALL
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Brenda S. Bramlett, Shelbyville, Tennessee, for the plaintiff, Isaac
Hall.
John W. Rodgers, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, for the defendant, Shirley A
Hall.
Judge: INMAN
First Paragraph:
The plaintiff left the defendant's residence through her kitchen which
opened into a carport, three steps lower. The defendant had left a
pair of shoes on the steps which the plaintiff did not see owing to
darkness because he failed to turn on the light. The undisputed
evidence reveals evidence of negligence on the part of each party, but
under McIntyre, the negligence of each should be compared. Summary
judgment for the defendant is reversed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/hallisaac.wpd
KEVIN ALLEN KYLE v. MARY LOU CLIMER KYLE
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Michael B. McWherter of Jackson for Appellant, Mary Lou Climer Kyle
Mary Jo Middlebrooks and Betty Stafford Scott of Jackson for Appellee,
Kevin Allen Kyle
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
Wife appeals from trial court's division of marital property and award
of alimony in divorce proceeding. Wife contends the trial court made
numerous errors in the classification and division of various assets
and in the alimony award. Husband contends that the trial court did
not err in its division of marital property, contends that Wife can be
rehabilitated, and seeks an award of rehabilitative alimony to
terminate at a specific date. Husband further contends that trial
court erred in awarding attorney's fees to Wife, and Husband seeks
attorney's fees and costs related to defending this appeal. We affirm
in part, reverse in part, modify in part and remand.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/kylekevina.wpd
IN RE L.C.B.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Jennifer Davis Roberts, Dickson, Tennessee, for the appellants, R.D.
and P.D..
David D. Wolfe, Dickson, Tennessee, for the appellee, M.B.
Judge: CAIN
First Paragraph:
M.B. and P.B. were husband and wife with four children born during the
marriage. L.C.B., the fourth of these children, was born in 1997,
nine years after M.B. had undergone a vasectomy. P.B. had engaged in
an extramarital affair with R.D. and subsequent to the divorce of M.B.
and P.B., the relationship between R.D. and P.B. ripened into marriage
with P.B. becoming P.D. In the case at bar, R.D. and P.D. sued to
establish R.D. as the biological father of L.C.B. and to terminate the
parental rights of M.B. An answer and counterclaim was filed by M.B.
denying the allegations of the complaint and seeking to terminate the
parental rights of R.D. Holding that the claim of R.D. was barred by
laches, the trial court dismissed the complaint. We hold that the
complaint of R.D. is not barred by laches but affirm the action of the
trial court
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/lcb.wpd
DANNY RAY MEEKS v. CHARLES TRAUGHBER, ET AL.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Danny R. Meeks, pro se.
Paul G. Summer, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael E.. Moore,
Solicitor General; Mark A. Hudson, Senior Counsel, for appellees,
Charles Traughber, et. al.
Judge: INMAN
First Paragraph:
The appellant claims, inter alia, that the Board of Parole, as
constituted in 2002 not only denied him parole, but unconstitutionally
ordered no further review for fifteen (15) years. The policy of Board
was later changed. We affirm, as modified.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/meeksdannyr.wpd
IN RE: R. D. F. and D. L. F.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Clark Lee Shaw, Nashville, Tennessee, for appellant, Neil Flit.
Frank M. Fly and Aaron S. Guin, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, attorneys for
appellee, Sherryl Fallon.
Judge: INMAN
First Paragraph:
The attorney for the petitioner was held in contempt for failing to
appear as ordered and failing to advise the Juvenile Court of a
Chancery action. We hold the evidence does not support a finding of
criminal contempt.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/rdfdlf.wpd
TAMMY SEARLE (f/k/a/TAMMY MORETTI) v. JUVENILE COURT FOR WILLIAMSON
COUNTY
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
John E. Herbison, Nashville, Tennessee, attorney for appellant, Tammy
Searle, f/k/a Tammy Moretti.
Lisa M. Carson, Franklin, Tennessee, attorney for appellee, Juvenile
Court for Williamson County.
Judge: INMAN
First Paragraph:
The petitioner was convicted of criminal contempt of the Juvenile
Court of Williamson County, and sentenced to 590 days for 59
comtempts. She fled the State and apparently is a resident of
California. A direct appeal was rejected because of her fugitive
status. She now seeks a Writ of Habeas Corpus, on the theory that the
conviction and sentence are void. She remains a fugitive and the
court dismisses her petition on appeal.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/searletammy.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSICA TROTTER-LAWSON and ANDREW SHERIFF
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Brent B. Stein, Memphis, Tennessee for the appellant, Jessica
Trotter-Lawson, and Garland Erguden, Assistant Public Defender,
Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Andrew Sheriff.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Rachel E. Willis,
Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney
General, and Chris Scruggs, Assistant District Attorney General, for
the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: SMITH
First Paragraph:
The appellants, Jessica Trotter-Lawson and Andrew Sheriff, pled guilty
to theft of property over sixty thousand dollars. As a result of the
plea agreement, each appellant received an eight-year sentence. Both
appellants applied to the trial court for alternative sentencing.
After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied alternative
sentencing and ordered the appellants to serve the entire sentence in
incarceration. Both appellants filed timely notices of appeal,
challenging the trial court's denial of alternative sentencing. After
a review, we determine that a sentence of split confinement would best
serve the interests of the public and the appellants. Accordingly,
the judgments of the trial court are reversed and remanded for entry
of sentences of split confinement reflecting a period of twelve months
of incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction with the
remainder of the eight-year sentence to be served on supervised
probation.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/lawsonjessicat.wpd
|
