The trial court found that Employee, a utility technician, suffered a work-related injury to his left hand and awarded thirty percent vocational disability. Employer has appealed, contending the trial court erred in awarding benefits for an injury to Employee=s left hand rather than to his left index finger. This appeal has been referred to the Special Workers= Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51.

The Defendant, Dennis Lee Arnold, was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of two counts of aggravated sexual battery, Class B felonies, and solicitation of a minor, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-504, 39-13-522, 39-12-102 (2014). The trial court sentenced the Defendant to consecutive terms of eleven years for the aggravated sexual battery convictions at 100% service and five years for the solicitation conviction, for an effective twenty-seven-year sentence.

This is an estate case involving the division of two properties used as collateral to secure a commercial note. When the decedent?s beneficiaries sought to partition the properties, her former husband objected, asserting that he assumed sole ownership of the properties by fulfilling the note with proceeds from the decedent?s life insurance policies. Following a hearing, the trial court found that the beneficiaries were entitled to a 70 percent share of the properties. The former husband appeals. We affirm the decision of the trial court as modified.

This appeal involves a dispute between a prisoner and the Tennessee Department of Correction regarding the Department’s classification of the prisoner as a member of a security threat group. The trial court dismissed the prisoner’s petition for writ of certiorari because it was not timely filed, and therefore, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the petition. We affirm.

Purchaser of insurance agency sued Seller, alleging breach of contract and misrepresentation. Seller filed a counterclaim seeking amount due on Purchaser?s promissory note. The trial court found Purchaser failed to prove either breach of contract or misrepresentation, and it awarded Seller the balance due on the promissory note. Purchaser appealed, and we affirm the trial court?s judgment in all respects.

This case involves a mother’s request for a change in the primary residential parent designation for her children. Following a one-day hearing, the trial court found that the mother failed to prove a material change in circumstance as necessary to change the primary residential parent designation. On appeal, the mother argues that the court’s order did not comply with Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 52.01 and that the proof showed a material change in circumstance. After reviewing the record, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

In 2007, Tim E. Shaw contacted FSGBank, N.A. (FSG) regarding the refinancing of multiple loans. FSG initiated the processing of his request for refinancing; in the meantime, it extended to him a new loan for $60,000 to enable him to purchase another piece of property for investment purposes. The new loan was secured by a trust deed on property he owned at 430 Highland Avenue in Cleveland, Tennessee. In 2010, after an apparent default by Mr. Shaw on the $60,000 loan, FSG sought foreclosure proceedings on the Highland Avenue property and advertised a trustee sale. As a result, Mr.

In this interlocutory appeal, the defendants appeal the trial court?s denial of their motion to dismiss a product liability lawsuit on the ground of forum non conveniens. Discerning no abuse of discretion by the trial court, we affirm.

This is a post-divorce case. Travis G. McCosh (Father) appeals the trial court’s judgment increasing his child support payment retroactively to the date that Jennifer Burns McCosh (Mother) filed a counterclaim seeking (1) to modify the parties’ permanent parenting plan and (2) the recalculation of child support pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines. Father also appeals the trial court’s award of $500 in attorney’s fees to Mother.

J.S.H. (Mother) appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, L.J., Jr. (the Child).1 Mother contends that the trial court erred in its finding – said to be made by clear and convincing evidence – that she abandoned the Child by willfully (1) failing to pay support and (2) failing to visit the Child in the four months immediately preceding the filing of the termination petition. She also challenges the trial court?s holding that she failed to provide the Child a suitable home.