Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

Appellate Court Opinions

Format: 08/28/2015
Format: 08/28/2015
Cockrill vs. Judge James Everett, et. al.
01A01-9703-CV-00113
Davidson County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
Forlines vs. Forlines
01A01-9703-GS-00121
Sumner County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
The Judds, Indvidually, etc., et. al. vs. Pritchard
01A01-9701-CV-00030
Davidson County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
02A01-9608-CH-00176
Shelby County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
Billy Johnson, et al vs. State of TN
02A01-9609-BC-00224
Court of Appeals 09/24/97
Popular Homes Inc., Canada Trace, Inc., Tom Long and Kathy Long,et al., v. Clayborn Ball Temple Church A.M.E. and Reverend E. Albert Brown
02A01-9702-CV-00044

Plaintiffs’ complaint against defendants, Clayborn Ball Temple AME Church and Reverend E. Albert Brown, Jr., is titled “Complaint for Breach of Contract for Sale of Real and Personal Property.” The complaint alleges that defendant Brown acting as the agent and with authority from defendant church entered into a contract with plaintiff providing for conveyance of real property and certain personal property to the church. Prior to the consummation of the transaction, Reverend Brown, for the church, assumed the duties of managing the property and collecting rent, but failed to abide by the contract and pay the mortgage indebtedness and taxes due on the properties. The contract was breached by default in the payment of the mortgage obligations and taxes and further that payment was not made for the property as required by the contract. The complaint avers that as a result of the defendants’ actions, the property was foreclosed, and plaintiffs were liable for deficiencies and other expenses that should have been paid by defendants.

Shelby County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
Doris Bridges vs. Margaret Culpepper, et al
02A01-9704-CH-00074
Shelby County Court of Appeals 09/24/97
03C01-9611-CR-00417
Sullivan County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/24/97
Andrea Nichols v. Square D Company
01S01-9611-CH-00226
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel for the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court's award of 65% permanent partial disability to the p laintiff's left ha nd is exces sive. The p anel conc ludes that it is and reduces it to 5%. While working in an assembly line job in August 1994,, the plaintiff developed a repetitive motion injury to her left hand. She is right handed. The initial conservative medic al treatm ent con sisted of restrictin g the rep etitive us e of the plaintiff 's left ha nd. She tried on e job, but said she could n't do it, then w as given a jo b she cou ld perform with only one hand. She said s he couldn't do that, either. The employer informed the plaintiff that no more jobs were available for her that day, but mad e an appo intment fo r her to see an orthoped ic surgeon . The first av ailable appointm ent was f airly far in the futu re, so the em ployer told the p laintiff that it w ould attempt to accommodate her restriction until the appointment. The plaintiff responded by quitting her job . She ne ver retu rned to work for the e mployer . And s he has n ot soug ht any oth er emp loyment. Dr. Howard Miller performed outpatient surgery on the plaintiff in January 1995 and released her to light duty work shortly thereafter. He released her to return to her former job at the end of February. The doctor reported in June 1995 that the plaintiff had full motion in her wrist a nd digits and that she w as largely asympto matic. Dr. M iller did not give the plaintiff any permanent restrictions and did not give her any permanent impairm ent. The plaintiff's attorney sent her to see another doctor, Earl Jeffres, in September 1995. He assessed a 22% permanent partial impairment to the plaintiff's left hand. He acknowledged that the plaintiff's complaints of pain exceeded his objective findings. The plaintiff's complaints of pain in her left hand and the probability that she should av oid repetitive u se of it does limit her emp loyability. But she is ce rtainly employable. She completed two years of business school and worked as assistant mana ger at a r estaura nt for a n umbe r of years . Given the treating physician's finding of no permanent impairment, the other physician's finding of 22% impairment to the non -dominant hand , and the plaintiff's acknowledged refusal to even attempt to find any other work, the panel concludes that the award of 65% to the left hand is excessive and reduces it to 5%. Costs are taxed to the - 2 -
Giles County Workers Compensation Panel 09/24/97
State vs. William Todd
02C01-9608-CC-00288
Benton County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
State vs. Johnny Moffitt
02C01-9609-CC-00304
Henderson County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
Wesley Cary vs. Robert Bourne, M.D., et al
02A01-9511-CV-00263
Benton County Court of Appeals 09/23/97
Melba & Dewey Robbins vs. Memphis Little Theatre Players Assoc.,
02A01-9601-CV-00018
Shelby County Court of Appeals 09/23/97
State vs. Bobby Jeffries
02C01-9607-CR-00216
Shelby County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
State vs. Dock Battles
02C01-9611-CR-00423
Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
03C01-9701-CR-00015
Hamilton County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
Sherrard vs. Dickson
03A01-9701-CV-00007
Knox County Court of Appeals 09/23/97
State v. Miller
03C01-9606-CR-00241
Hamilton County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
State vs. Alpheious Neely
W1999-01215-CCA-R3-CD
Defendant appeals as of right his conviction of one count of burglary of a building, a Class D felony. On appeal he contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and that the trial judge erred in ruling that his eleven (11) prior burglary and theft convictions were admissible for the purposes of impeachment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Shelby County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/23/97
State vs. Ronnie Dulworth
M2000-01681-CCA-R3-CD
The defendant appeals from his conviction for assault, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence and the manner of service of his sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Overton County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/20/97
State vs. Vincent Bolden
W1999-01481-CCA-R3-CD
This appeal arises out of the defendant's conviction for selling a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a public or private school. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. After careful review of the record, we conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the defendant's conviction and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Henry County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/20/97
State of Tennessee vs. Ronald Paul
01C01-9511-CC-00358
Robertson County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/19/97
State vs. Terry Antonio Lawrence
01C01-9603-CR-00122
Davidson County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/19/97
Ross Jones vs. State
01C01-9604-CR-00155
Davidson County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/19/97
John L. Goodwin vs. State
01C01-9608-CR-00337
Sumner County Court of Criminal Appeals 09/19/97