Opinion FlashMay 8, 2003
Volume 9 Number 084
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.This Issue (IN THIS ORDER):
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, you can look it up on-line at http://www.tba.org/getpassword.mgi . If you are a TBA member, but do not have a username and password, you can receive one online at http://www.tba.org/signup.mgi. Here's how you can obtain full-text version.
Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This option will allow you to download the original document.
Howard H. Vogel
JOHN DOE, et al. v. BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE, et al. Court:TSC Attorneys: Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore, Solicitor General; Michael W. Catalano, Associate Solicitor General, for the petitioner, Board of Professional Responsibility of the State of Tennessee. Ronald D. Krelstein, Germantown, Tennessee, for the respondent, Richard Roe, et al. Judge: BARKER First Paragraph: Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 23, we accepted certification of questions of law from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. We are asked by the federal district court to construe Rule 9, section 25 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Tennessee. Specifically, we are asked to determine whether Richard Roe, a layperson (i.e., a non-attorney), may be charged with contempt for disclosing that he filed a complaint with the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility against an attorney in violation of the confidentiality provision embodied in Rule 9, section 25, and if so, by whom and before what tribunal? For the reasons given herein, we answer that the confidentiality requirement of Rule 9, section 25 applies to non lawyers and lawyers alike. The appropriate sanction for a violation of Rule 9, section 25 is an action of contempt. Contempt proceedings may be initiated by the attorney against whom the complaint has been filed, the complainant, the Board of Professional Responsibility, or this Court. Finally, we hold that such a petition for contempt should be filed in this Court, whereupon assignment shall issue to a special master to conduct an evidentiary hearing. The record and findings of fact of the special master shall then be sent to this Court whereupon a determination of guilt and punishment, if any, will follow. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/doe.wpd
SAMMY MILLER v. TENNESSEE BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLES Court:TCA Attorneys: Patrick T. McNally, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Sammy Miller. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore, Solicitor General; Pamela S. Lorch, Assistant Attorney General, for the appellee, Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole. Judge: CANTRELL First Paragraph: The Board of Paroles declined to parole a prisoner in the custody of the Department of Correction. He claimed that the Parole Board violated the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws by following a different procedure to reach its decision than was in effect at the time of his crime. The trial court dismissed the prisoner's complaint for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. We affirm the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/millers.wpd
CLIFFORD W. RUSSELL, et al. v. SUSAN I. RUSSELL (CORRECTED OPINION) Court:TCA Attorneys: Carrol D. Kilgore, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Susan I. Russell. Luther Wright, Jr. and Keli Jean Stewart, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Clifford W. Russell and John Hall Russell. Judge: CAIN First Paragraph: This appeal involves a will contest coupled with a suit to construe the same will. The trial court granted summary judgment to the proponent on the will contest and summary judgment to the contestants on the will construction issues. We hold that the issues cannot be resolved on summary judgment and reverse the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/russellcorrex.wpd
PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
JOIN THE TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION!
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi
Home Contact Us PageFinder What's New Help
© Copyright 2003 Tennessee Bar Association