Understanding Lawyer Advertising and the Internet Ethics rules have not kept up with the daily challenges that the Internet presents to lawyer advertising. A new course from the TBA's TennBarU sheds light on familiar and not-so-familiar activities regarding Internet advertising and how the ethics rules should be or are being applied to those activities. http://www.tennbaru.com/    TODAY'S OPINIONS: Monday, December 05, 2005 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 - TN Supreme Court 00 - TN Worker's Comp Appeals 00 - TN Supreme Court - Rules 05 - TN Court of Appeals 03 - TN Court of Criminal Appeals 00 - TN Attorney General Opinions 00 - Judicial Ethics Opinions 00 - Formal Ethics Opinions - BPR 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 MELODY D. DICKSON v. ROGER LEE DICKSON Court: TCA Attorneys: Phillip C. Lawrence, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellant, Roger Lee Dickson. Marvin Berke and Megan C. England, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellee, Melody D. Dickson Judge: CHARLES D. SUSANO, JR. In this post-divorce case, Melody D. Dickson (“Mother”) filed a complaint against her former husband, Roger Lee Dickson (“Father”), seeking to modify an order of the trial court awarding her $876 per month in child support. Mother sought an increase in child support and an award of her attorney’s fees. In addition, Mother requested that Father be required to pay “the educational expenses of the minor children,” who she had recently enrolled at a private school. Following a bench trial, the court ordered that Father’s child support obligation be increased to $913.50 per month; ordered Father to pay the children’s private school tuition; and ordered Father to pay Mother’s attorney’s fees. Father appeals. As modified, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/dicksonm120505.pdf INTERNATIONAL PLAYING CARD AND LABEL COMPANY, INCORPORATED v. LOREN L. CHUMLEY, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, STATE OF TENNESSEE Court: TCA Attorneys: Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; and Jonathan N. Wike, Assistant Attorney General, for the Appellant, Loren L. Chumley, Commissioner of Revenue, State of Tennessee. Robert L. Arrington and B. Andrew Glenn, Kingsport, Tennessee, for the Appellee, International Playing Card and Label Company, Incorporated. Judge: D. MICHAEL SWINEY After an audit, the State of Tennessee Department of Revenue (“the State”) assessed International Playing Card and Label Company, Incorporated (“IPC&L”) back sales and use taxes on two machines that IPC&L had purchased and now uses in its printing business. IPC&L contested the assessment and filed suit. After a non-jury trial, the Trial Court entered its Final Judgment finding and holding, inter alia, that the machines at issue are “exempt from the imposition of sales and use tax pursuant to the provisions of Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-102(a)(14)(A)(2003).” The State appeals claiming that the two machines at issue do not satisfy the requirements of Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-6-102(a)(14)(A), that they are used for maintenance, and that for these reasons they are not exempt from sales and use tax. We affirm. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/intlplayingcard120505.pdf JOHN D. MCMAHAN v. KATHERINE C. MCMAHAN Court: TCA Attorneys: John P. Konvalinka, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellant, Katherine C. McMahan. Donald Capparella, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, John D. McMahan. Judge: CHARLES D. SUSANO This matter finds its genesis in a divorce action filed by John D. McMahan (“Husband”) against his wife, Katherine C. McMahan (“Wife”). The parties agreed to mediate their differences. At the time of the mediation, the parties ostensibly reached an agreement as to the division of their property and spousal support. Their agreement was reduced to longhand and, in that form, signed by both parties. Shortly after the mediation, Wife repudiated the writing, arguing that it was not a binding agreement because of (1) duress; (2) Wife’s lack of mental capacity to enter into a contract; and (3) the parties’ intention that the longhand document would be followed by a more formal document in which the parties would express their final agreement. Husband filed a motion to enforce the document in longhand form. The trial court granted Husband’s motion, holding that the writing was a valid and enforceable contract. Wife appeals. Husband seeks damages for a frivolous appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court, but decline to award damages for a frivolous appeal. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/mcmahanj120505.pdf IN RE: M. H. Court: TCA Attorneys: Jocelyn D. Mims, Franklin, Tennessee, for the appellant, R.A. C. Diane Crosier, Franklin, Tennessee, for the appellees, L.B. and K.B. Judge: PATRICIA J. COTTRELL The trial court terminated the parental rights of the incarcerated father of a seven year old boy. The father argues on appeal that he was deprived of due process because he was not notified of an earlier dependency and neglect proceeding and because he did not receive effective assistance of counsel during the termination proceeding. He also claims that the petitioners failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that it was in his son’s best interest that his parental rights be terminated. We affirm the trial court. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/mh120505.pdf WILLIAM J. REINHART, ET AL. v. ROBERT T. KNIGHT, ET AL. Court: TCA Attorneys: J. Stanley Rogers and Christina Henley Duncan, Manchester, Tennessee, for the Appellants, William J. Reinhart and Judith F. Reinhart. Bradley A. MacLean and Stephen H. Price, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, Bob Parks and John E. Harney, III. Judge: SHARON G. LEE This appeal presents the issue of whether a defendant who is liable for statutory treble damages for procurement of breach of contract is entitled to an offset in the amount paid by a co-defendant in satisfaction of a judgment for breach of the contract. This question involves an inquiry into the nature of a statutory treble damage award under T.C.A. § 47-50-109. Does an award of statutory treble damages include an element of compensatory damages, thereby overlapping an award for compensatory damages based on breach of the contract, or is a treble damages award entirely punitive in nature? The trial court held that Defendants Bob Parks and John E. Harney, III, who paid $556,429.44 plus post-judgment interest in satisfaction of a judgment for treble damages for procurement of breach of contract, were entitled to an offset in the amount paid by Defendants Robert and Glenda Knight in satisfaction of a judgment for breach of the contract. Plaintiffs appeal, arguing that they should be entitled to the entire amount of both judgments. We hold that the treble damage award is not entirely punitive, and because it includes an element of compensatory pecuniary damages incurred as a result of the breach of contract, there should be an offsetting credit in the amount paid in satisfaction of the judgment for breach of the contract. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2005/reinhartw120505.pdf MELISSA BARNETT v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court: TCCA Attorneys: Melissa Barnett, Memphis, Tennessee, Pro se. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Jennifer L. Bledsoe, Assistant Attorney General; and Stephen Crump, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: NORMA MCGEE OGLE The petitioner, Melissa Barnett, appeals the trial court’s order denying post-conviction relief. The state has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the trial court's judgment pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. The petition is barred by the statute of limitations and was properly dismissed. Accordingly, the state's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/barnettm120505.pdf STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROMELUS CARAWAY Court: TCCA Attorneys: Paul K. Guibao, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Romelus Caraway. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Brian C. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; and Steve Jones, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: DAVID G. HAYES The Appellant, Romelus Caraway, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of aggravated perjury. On appeal, Caraway argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. After review, we conclude that the proof fails to establish that Caraway’s perjurious testimony was material to the proceeding at which the testimony was presented. Because materiality is an essential element of the offense of aggravated perjury, we reduce Caraway’s conviction to reflect a conviction for the lesser included offense of simple perjury. http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/carawayOPN.pdf STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHARLES EDWARD GREER Court: TCCA Attorneys: Benjamin C. Mayo, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellant, Charles Edward Greer. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Brian C. Johnson, Assistant Attorney General; and Angela R. Scott, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: GARY R. WADE http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/greerc120505.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 instructions 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.tba2.org/op_flash.php UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT! But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba2.org/op_flash.php TBALink Home • Contact Us • PageFinder • What's New • Help © Copyright 2005 Tennessee Bar Association