Understanding the New Limited Liability Company Act
June 29 - Tennessee Bar Center, Nashville (rescheduled from May 18)

An all new Limited Liability Company Act is moving its way through the
Tennessee General Assembly. The new act will make sweeping changes to
Tennessee's current LLC laws.  Attend an in-depth seminar conducted by
the TBA committee that drafted the new act to learn how it will affect
LLC practice here in Tennessee.

Today's Opinions: May 9, 2005
Volume 11 — Number 087
Following this index are summaries of each case, including its name, first paragraph, author's name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion.
00 New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court
01 New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court Workers' Compensation Panel
01 New Document(s) or Proposed Rule(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court
04 New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals
04 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

TBA members can get the full-text versions of these opinions three ways detailed below. All methods require a TBA username and password. If you have forgotten your password or need to obtain a password, you can look it up on-line at http://www.tba.org/getpassword.mgi.

Here's how you can obtain full-text version. We recommend you download the Opinions to your computer and then open them from there. • Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This should give you the option to download the original document. If not, you may need to right-click on the URL to get the option to save the file to your computer. • 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.

Howard H. Vogel
Knoxville, Tennessee
Editor-in-Chief, TBALink


EMMA LYNN NUCHOLS v. METHODIST MEDICAL CENTER OF OAK RIDGE

Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel

Attorneys:                          

Broderick L. Young, Knoxville, Tennessee, for appellant, Methodist
Medical Center of Oak Ridge.

Roger L. Ridenour and J. Timothy Bobo, Clinton Tennessee, for
appellee, Emma Lynn Nuchols.

Judge: THAYER

First Paragraph:

This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance
with Tenn. Code Ann. 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 awarded the employee 50 percent disability to the body as a
whole based upon a 20 percent impairment. The employer contends the
award was excessive because the trial court failed to allocate
impairment to a preexisting spondylolisthesis. Judgment is modified to
find impairment to be 11 percent from last injury and recovery is
limited to two and one-half times impairment rating.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2005/nucholse50905.pdf

State of Tennessee Justice Information Tracking System State List for
Permission to Appeal

Court:TSC - Rules

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_Rules/2005/certList050905.pdf

LENDEL L. CONLEY v. JO ANN CONLEY

Court:TCA

Attorneys:                          

Mitchell A. Byrd, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Jo Ann
Conley

Stephen T. Greer, Dunlap, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Lendel L.
Conley

Judge: LEE

First Paragraph:

In this divorce case, the wife raises the issues of whether the trial
court erred in ruling it had jurisdiction based on the husband's
domicile in Bledsoe County, Tennessee; whether the trial judge erred
in refusing to recuse himself from the trial of the case; and whether
the court erred by failing to equitably divide the marital estate. The
husband argues on appeal that the trial court should have classified
certain assets that it held to be marital property as his separate
property. We modify the division of marital property to increase the
amount awarded to the wife, and affirm the court's judgment in all
other respects.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/conleyl50905.pdf

JEANETTE JENKINS, ET AL. v. BILLY GENE ROBERTSON

Court:TCA

Attorneys:                          

Cynthia Richardson Wyrick, Sevierville, Tennessee, for the Appellant,
Billy Gene Robertson.

Scott D. Hall, Sevierville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, Jeanette
Jenkins and Eilene McInturff.

Judge: SWINEY

First Paragraph:

BillyGene Robertson ("Defendant") listed property for lease with
Jeanette Jenkins, the listing agent, and Eilene McInturff, the broker,
("Plaintiffs") of Realty World-Barnes Real Estate. Defendant signed a
contract agreeing to pay a 10% commission to the broker. Plaintiffs
located a party who leased Defendant's property. Defendant made some
commission payments to Plaintiffs, but then stopped making payments
claiming, in part, that the time period for making commission payments
under the contract was unclear. Ms. McInturff, as the broker,
attempted to assign her rights under the contract to Ms. Jenkins and
Ms. Jenkins sued Defendant for the commissions. Defendant objected
that Ms. Jenkins did not have standing because she was not the broker.
The Trial Court allowed joinder of Ms. McInturff, and the case
proceeded to trial. After trial, the Trial Court entered an order
holding, inter alia, that Defendant owed Plaintiffs commissions over
the life of the lease and also that Plaintiffs were entitled to a
judgment against Defendant in the amount of $37,688.35, which included
the award made on Plaintiffs' claim for commissions owed to the date
of the judgment, an award of attorney's fees, and an award of
discretionary costs. Defendant appeals. We affirm.


http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/jenkinsj50905.pdf

CHARLES W. RANDOLPH, II v. EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY

Court:TCA

Attorneys:                          

Timothy A. Housholder, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellant Charles
W. Randolph, II.

Richard M. Currie, Jr., Kingsport, Tennessee, for the Appellee Eastman
Chemical Company.

Judge: SWINEY

First Paragraph:

Charles W.Randolph, II, ("Plaintiff") is an engineer employed
byTesTex, Inc. ("TesTex"). Eastman Chemical Company ("Eastman" or
"Defendant") entered into a contract with TesTex for TesTex to conduct
non-destructive electromagnetic testing on heat exchangers located at
Eastman's Kingsport facility. The testing was to occur during a plant
shutdown which lasts for twenty days and which occurs every two years.
Plaintiff was on Eastman's premises to conduct the electromagnetic
testing when he was injured while boarding an elevator. Plaintiff
filed a negligence lawsuit against Eastman. Eastman asserted that it
was Plaintiff's statutory employer pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. S
50-6-113 and, therefore, Plaintiff was prohibited from filing a
negligence claim because of the exclusive remedy rule contained in the
workers' compensation law. After a trial, the Trial Court agreed with
Eastman and held that Plaintiff's negligence claim was barred. We
affirm.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/randolphc50905.pdf

FRANKIE ANN ROLEN, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of
JEWELL V. INGRAM AND PATSY LOU YOUNG, Individually and as
Administratrix of the Estate of JEWELL V. INGRAM, v. WOOD PRESBYTERIAN
HOME, INC.

Court:TCA

Attorneys:                          

Loren E. Plemmons, Lenoir City, Tennessee, and Donald Capparella,
Nashville, Tennessee, for appellants.

Linda J. Hamilton Mowles, Knoxville, Tennessee, for appellee.

Judge: FRANKS

First Paragraph:

This action involves claims brought regarding the decedent
JewellIngram against WoodPresbyterian Home, Inc., alleging that Ingram
was injured while in defendant's care, and also that her treatment by
defendant ultimately contributed to her death. Plaintiff proposed a
jury form which asks that the jury determine whether defendant was
guilty of negligence which caused Ingram's death, but also asked the
jury to find whether defendant was guilty of negligence which caused
injury to Ingram. The jury form submitted by the Trial Judge, however,
asked whether defendant was at fault for the death of Ingram, and
directed that if the answer to that question was no, the jury should
return a verdict for defendant. The jury answered the question in the
negative, and announced a defendant's verdict. Plaintiff has appealed.
We affirm the Trial Court's Judgment for defendant as to the wrongful
death claim, but remand for a new trial on the issue of damages for
injuries sustained prior to decedent's death.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/rolenf50905.pdf

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DONALD BLEVINS

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:                          

Michelle M. Benjamin, Winchester, Tennessee, for the appellant, Donald
Blevins.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Michael Markham,
Assistant Attorney General; and Larry Bryant, Assistant District
Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: WADE

First Paragraph:

The defendant, Donald Blevins, was convicted for contributing to the
delinquency of a minor. The trial court imposed a sentence of 11
months and 29 days. On appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial
court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the defenses of
necessity and duress. The conviction and sentence are affirmed; the
case is remanded for entry of an amended judgment to correct a
clerical error.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/blevinsd50905.pdf

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. STEVEN JOHN CHROMIK, III

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:                          

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Angele M.Gregory,
Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. (Torry) Johnson, III, District
Attorney General; and Kimberly Fields Cooper, Assistant District
Attorney General, for the appellant, State of Tennessee.

John R.Hellinger and Erik R.Herbert, Nashville, Tennessee, for the
appellee, Steven John Chromik, III.

Judge: TIPTON

First Paragraph:

In this interlocutory appeal arising from the Davidson County Criminal
Court's order suppressing certain statements and writings made by the
defendant, Steven John Chromik, III, the state claims that the trial
court erred in finding the defendant's statements and writings
constituted inadmissible hearsay. The defendant contends that the
trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the statements and
writings because of violation of his rights under the United States
and Tennessee constitutions. Weaffirm the trial court's judgment
concerning the defendant's constitutional claims but reverse its
suppression of the defendant's statements on evidentiary grounds, and
we remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this
opinion.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/chromiks50905.pdf

JIMMY JENNETT, JR., A/K/A MICHAEL BREWER v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:                          

Gerald L. Melton, District Public Defender, for the appellant, Jimmy
Jennett, Jr.

Paul G.Summers, Attorney General &Reporter; David E. Coenen, Assistant
Attorney General; and William C. Whitesell, Jr., District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: WADE

First Paragraph:

The petitioner, JimmyJennett, Jr., appeals the trial court's dismissal
of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. In this appeal, he asserts
that the trial court erred by dismissing the petition because he is
"restrained of his liberty" by virtue of a 1977 Tennessee conviction
that was used to increase his sentence for a 1985 Mississippi
conviction. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/jennettj50905.pdf

JAMES C. WARD v. HOWARD CARLTON, WARDEN, and the STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:                          

James Ward, Mountain City, Tennessee, pro se.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michelle Chapman
McIntire, Assistant Attorney General; Joe C. Crumley, Jr., District
Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: TIPTON

First Paragraph:

The petitioner, James C. Ward, appeals from the trial court's order
denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. The state has filed a
motion requesting that this court affirm the trial court's denial of
relief pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal
Appeals. The petitioner has failed to establish his claim of a void
judgment. Accordingly, the state's motion is granted and the judgment
of the trial court is affirmed.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/wardJ50905.pdf

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 THE TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION!
While Opinion Flash is a free service of the Tennessee Bar Association, you must be a member of the Tennessee Bar Association in order to access the full text of the opinions or enjoy the many other features of TBALink.

To join the TBA go to: http://www.tba.org/join_bar.mgi

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! Sign up for text or HTML version.

Visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi

UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi

TBALink HomeContact UsPageFinderWhat's NewHelp

© Copyright 2005 Tennessee Bar Association