HENRY L. CAGE v. YASUDA FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, et
al.
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
Ronald L. Harper and Alicia Y.Cox, Memphis, Tennessee, for the
appellants, Yasuda Fire &Marine Insurance Company and Sharp
Manufacturing of America
Richard Click, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, Henry Cage
Judge: MCCOY
First Paragraph:
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special
Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tennessee Code
Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting findings of
fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employer contends
that the trial court erred by finding that the employee's lung
condition was causally related to his employment, by ignoring evidence
that the employee omitted his pre-existing condition on his employment
application and failed to give proper notice of his work related
injury, and by finding that the employee was permanently and totally
disabled and holding that the employer was liable for both the
employee's pre-existing sarcoidosis and aggravated asthmatic
condition. For the reasons set out below, the Panel has concluded that
the judgment of the trial court is affirmed, with costs assessed
against the employer.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2005/cageh61605.pdf
JOE H. KELLY v. FRITO LAY, ET AL.
Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel
Attorneys:
Stephen F. Libby, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Joe Kelly.
Carl Knoerr Wyatt and David C. Riley, Memphis, Tennessee, for the
Appellees, Frito Lay, Inc. and RSKO Claims Services, Inc.
Judge: BRASFIELD
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 to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of
law. In this appeal, Joe Kelly, the employee, insists that the trial
court erred in finding that he sustained no permanent disability from
his work-related injury. The Panel has concluded that the judgment of
the trial court should be reversed. Further, the Panel finds that Mr.
Kelly has sustained a vocational impairment of 16% to the body as a
whole due to his injury and that Mr. Kelly should receive future
medical expenses in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section
50-6-204.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2005/kellyj61605.pdf
CHERYL SMITH GRAVES v. RICHARD C. GRAVES, SR.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Judith Fain, Johnson City, Tennessee, for the appellant, Cheryl Smith
Graves.
Richard C. Graves, Sr., Bybee, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Judge: SUSANO
First Paragraph:
The sole issue on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in
holding that Cheryl Smith Graves ("Wife") is not entitled to
post-judgment interest on alimony due her under her judgment of
divorce from Richard C.Graves, Sr. ("Husband"), which judgment was
entered December 3, 2001, nunc pro tunc August 24, 2001. The trial
court premised its judgment on its finding that "[Wife] ha[d] been
obstructive in the conclusion of this matter." We hold that Wife is
entitled to interest on all alimony payments to the extent that those
payments were not timely made. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of
the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/gravesc61605.pdf
VERNON MCBRIDE, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-EXECUTOR OF THE LAST WILL
AND TESTAMENT OF VERNON MCBRIDE, SR. AND AS ATTORNEY IN FACT FOR
BEULAH KATE MCBRIDE, AND VERNON MCBRIDE, III, CO-EXECUTOR OF THE LAST
WILL AND TESTAMENT OF VERNON MCBRIDE, SR. v. BARBARA KATE SUMROW
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
J. Thomas Caldwell, Ripley, Tennessee, for plaintiffs/appellants
Vernon McBride, Jr., and Vernon McBride, III
Douglas W.Wilkerson and W.Lewis Jenkins, Jr., Dyersburg, Tennessee,
for defendant/appellee Kate Sumrow
Judge: KIRBY
First Paragraph:
This is a will construction case. The decedent died testate in May
2002. In his will, he left certain properties in trust for the benefit
of his spouse during her lifetime. The will detailed how the
properties were to be distributed in the event his spouse predeceased
him. The will did not state how the remainder interest in the
properties was to be distributed in the event his spouse survived him.
The decedent was survived by his spouse. The co-executors filed a
declaratory judgment action to interpret the will. The trial court
ruled that the decedent died partially intestate, with the remainder
interest in the specific properties passing through the laws of
intestate succession. The co-executors of the trust appealed, arguing
that the there was an error in the drafting of the will and that the
decedent would have wanted the properties to be distributed in the
same manner, regardless of whether his spouse predeceased him. We
affirm, finding that, under these circumstances, the will cannot be
reformed and the property must pass through the laws of intestate
succession.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/mcbridev61605.pdf
DALE ANTHONY SCOTT, ET AL. v. MARION YARBRO, ET AL.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
J. Michael Ivey, Parsons, TN, for Appellants Lloyd R. Tatum,
Henderson, TN, for Appellees
Tommy E. Doyle, Linden, TN, for Appellee Henry Yarbro
Judge: HIGHERS
First Paragraph:
This appeal involves the ownership of a parcel of real property held
by tenants-in-common. After reviewing the trial court's order and the
record, we have determined that the trial court's order does not
constitute a final judgment. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction, and the case is remanded to the trial court for
further proceedings.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/scottd61605.pdf
FRANKIE ROBIN SLIGER v. DARRELL DWAYNE SLIGER
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
James H. Hickman, III, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Darrell Dwayne Sliger.
John A. Hoag, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Frankie Robin
Sliger.
Judge: SUSANO
First Paragraph:
Frankie Robin Sliger obtained her first order of protection against
the defendant - her then-husband, Darrell Dwayne Sliger - on September
23, 1997. Six years later, and following the entry and extension of a
series of such orders, the defendant was convicted in the instant case
of 21 violations of the present order of protection. The trial court
sentenced him to serve 10 days in jail for each violation; it also
reinstated an additional 310 days of incarceration for 31 earlier
violations. Enforcement of the additional 310 days of incarceration
had been stayed so long as the defendant continued "good behavior."
The defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court (1) abused its
discretion in denying his request for a continuance; (2) erred in
failing to grant him a jury trial; and (3) erred in failing to hold
that his conduct resulted in only two rather than 21 violations.
Weaffirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/sligerf61605.pdf
TYRONE D. CONLEY v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Tyrone D. Conley, Mountain City, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; David H. Findley,
Assistant Attorney General; and Joe C. Crumley, Jr., District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: OGLE
First Paragraph:
The petitioner, Tyrone D. Conley, pled guilty in the Washington County
Criminal Court to second degree murder, and he was sentenced to twenty
years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction.
Subsequently, the petitioner filed a "Constitutional Challenge to
Vacate Invalid Sentence." The trial court dismissed the petition,
finding that if the document was a petition for post-conviction
relief, it was time-barred. Further, the trial court determined that
if the document was a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the
petitioner did not allege that his judgment was void. On appeal, the
petitioner contests the trial court's dismissal of his petition. Upon
our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/conleyt61605.pdf
GREGORY CHRISTOPHER FLEENOR v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Keith A. Hopson, Kingsport, Tennessee, for the appellant, Gregory
Christopher Fleenor.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; William G. Lamberth,
II, Assistant Attorney General; and H. Greeley Wells, Jr., District
Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: OGLE
First Paragraph:
The petitioner, Gregory Christopher Fleenor, pled guilty in the
Sullivan County Criminal Court to first degree felony murder and
especially aggravated robbery, and the trial court sentenced him to
concurrent sentences of life and fifteen years respectively.
Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction
relief, alleging (1) that he received the ineffective assistance of
trial counsel and (2) that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and
voluntarily entered. After an evidentiaryhearing, the post-conviction
court dismissed the petition, and the petitioner now appeals. Upon
review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment
of the post-conviction court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/fleenorg61605.pdf
Authority Under the Tennessee Health Care Decisions Act
Date: June 13, 2005
Opinion Number: 05-093
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2005/op93.pdf
Zero Tolerance Policy -- Possession of Illegal Drugs on School Property
Date: June 13, 2005
Opinion Number: 05-094
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2005/op94.pdf
Real Property Foreclosure Notices
Date: June 14, 2005
Opinion Number: 05-095
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2005/op95.pdf
|
