Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

Appellate Court Opinions

Format: 04/18/2015
Format: 04/18/2015
01S01-9601-CC-00022
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9412-FD-00155
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9510-CC-00173
Supreme Court 06/24/96
03C01-9506-CR-00181
Hamilton County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/24/96
Gene v. Aaby,
03S02-9507-CH-00073
Supreme Court 06/24/96
State of Tennessee v. Maurice Lydell Purdy
W2000-00460-CCA-R3-CD
Obion County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/23/96
03C01-9503-CR-00061
Cocke County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/21/96
O1C01-9503-CC-00100
Marshall County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/21/96
01C01-9502-CC-00033
Coffee County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9505-CC-00143
Putnam County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9506-CC-00198
Dickson County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9507-CC-00232
Williamson County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9507-CC-00239
Williamson County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9508-CC-00253
Coffee County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
01C01-9508-CC-00267
Wayne County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Melvin Burkett vs. State
01C01-9605-CC-00202
Humphreys County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267
02C01-9611-CC-00409
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
1996. In The Present Appeal, The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger Dale Hill,
02C01-9612-CC-00452
Lauderdale County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267
02C01-9612-CC-00463
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Appeal, The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-
02C01-9612-CC-00464
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267
02C01-9612-CC-00465
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Habeas Corpus Proceeding. See Haggard v. State, 475 S.W.2D 186, 187 (Tenn. Crim.
02C01-9612-CC-00467
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Robert Rayford vs. State
02C01-9701-CC-00011
Lauderdale County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Habeas Corpus Proceeding. See Haggard v. State, 475 S.W.2D 186, 187 (Tenn. Crim.
02C01-9702-CC-00055
Lake County Court of Criminal Appeals 06/20/96
Ronald H. Anselm v. K-Va-T Food Stores, Inc., Fireman's Fund Insurance Company and Sue Ann Head, Director, Division of Workers' Compensation, Tennessee
03S01-9508-CV-00087
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff alleged that he sustained an injury to his neck, arms and shoulders during the course of his employment by the K-VA-T Food Stores while performing repetitive actions involving the stocking of food shelves from April 1 to May 19, 1992. He further alleged that these repetitive actions aggravated a prior neck injury. The defendant denied the occurrence of an accidental injury. The plaintiff began working for K-VA-T as a cashier in September, 199. He was 5 years old, and had earned his livelihood driving a truck for most of his adult life. In l987 he was treated for shoulder pain for which, in December 1987, he settled a workers' compensation claim. He suf fered recurring pain in 199 while driving a truck and sought workers' compensation benefits which were awarded in December, 1992. The purported repetitive actions entailed by his most recent job occurred, as heretofore stated, during a six-weeks period in April and May, 1992. The trial judge found that the injuries complained of did not occur during the plaintiff's employment by K-VA-T, and dismissed the complaint. Our review is de novo on the record accompanied by a presumption that the findings of fact of the trial judge are correct unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). Dr. Stephen Wiessfeld was the only medical expert called to testify. He said that based on the history related to him, the plaintiff sustained an aggravation to a pre- existing arthritic condition, but conceded that his opinion was dependent upon an accurate history of repetitive arm and shoulder movements. He found no anatomical changes, but relied upon the representations of his patient. Further evidence revealed that the claimed repetitive actions were not as onerous as claimed, which impelled the trial judge to find that the medical testimony was untrustworthy, and unreliable. The burden to establish each element of a workers' compensation claim is upon the employee claiming benefits. Oster v. Yates, 845 S.W.2d 815 (Tenn. 1992). One
Knox County Workers Compensation Panel 06/20/96