COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. Moss
01A01-9708-JV-00424
Trial Court Judge: Andrew J. Shookhoff

Wilson vs. Mcwherter
01A01-9706-CV-00266

Hooker vs. Thompson
01A01-9709-CH-00533
Trial Court Judge: Henry F. Todd

Emma Clark vs. Randy Perry
02A01-9704-CH-00080
Trial Court Judge: George R. Ellis

Bryant vs. Bryant
M1999-00065-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton

Harry Luther vs. Billy Compton, et al
02A01-9710-CV-00253
Trial Court Judge: Jr.

Cynthia Phillips vs. Francis Perot
02A01-9704-CV-00094
Trial Court Judge: J. Steven Stafford

Cynthia Phillips vs. Francis Perot
02A01-9704-CV-00094

Lorrie Murphy vs. Jessica Chadwell
02A01-9705-CV-00105
Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio

Arp vs. Arp
03A01-9808-CV-00273

First American National Bank vs. Alexander & Betty Smith
02A01-9710-CH-00273

02A01-9709-CV-00206
02A01-9709-CV-00206
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.

Robert Morris v. Columbia Construction
M2002-00503-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones
In this suit for retaliatory discharge, Appellant asserts that his filing of a worker's compensation claim was a substantial factor in his employer's decision to terminate him. The trial court granted summary judgment to the employer. We affirm.

Less, Getz & Lipman vs. Rainbow Entertainment
02A01-9706-CV-00124
Trial Court Judge: Janice M. Holder

Elizabeth Bates vs. Robert Bates
02A01-9708-CH-00185

Potter's Home Center, Inc., D/B/A Potter's Home Center, v. Lauren Dale Tucker, and Wilburn R. Viles, Sr., and wife Mildred E. Viles, and the Guaranty Title Company, and First American National Bank
03A01-9710-CH-00467
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge William E. Lantrip

Potter’s Home Center appeals the trial court’s summary judgment which dismissed its suit to enforce a materialman’s lien against Defendants/Appellees Wilburn R. Viles, Sr., and Mildred E. Viles. We affirm the trial court’s judgment based on our conclusion that Potter’s failed to comply with the applicable notice requirements of the mechanics’ and materialmen’s lien statutes.

City of Murfreesboro v. Mariann M. Worthington, City of Murfreesboro v. Thomas W. Worthington and wife, Mariann M. Worthington
01A01-9703-CV-00124
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard

Upon consideration of the petition for rehearing of Plaintiff/Appellant City of Murfreesboro, the petition is denied.

Rickye D. Anderson v. L. Lois Anderson
01A01-9704-CH-00186
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers

Appellant has filed a petition to rehear which, after due consideration is respectfully denied.

Van Adrian Barker v. Patsy Lou (Randolph) Sledd Barker - Concurring
01A01-9704-CH-00192
Authoring Judge: Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge Tom E. Gray

In this divorce case, the husband Van Adrian Barker has appealed from the judgment of the Trial Court declaring the parties to be divorced under TCA § 36-4-129, and dividing the marital estate. The appellant presents only the following issue:

I.    Whether the Chancellor erred in finding that the husband did not substantially contribute to the appreciation of the rental property owned by the wife, thereby denying the husband a share in that appreciation.

Van Adrian Barker v. Patsy Lou (Randolph) Sledd Barker - Concurring
01A01-9704-CH-00192
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.

I concur with the court’s opinion for two reasons. First, the expenses associated with the upkeep of the Gail Drive house were more than off-set by the rental income from the house. Second, the increase in the value of the house was due, not to Mr. Barker’s contributions to the maintenance of the house which were de minimis, but to the appreciation in the value of real property in general.

In the matter of: Joel Kristen Sipe, State of Tennessee, Dept. of Childrens Services v. Bruce Sipe and Laurel Sipe
01A01-9704-JV-00185
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Andrew J. Shookhoff

This is a termination of parental rights case. The minor child in question is Joel Kristen Sipe, born September 7, 1995 to Laurel Sipe (“Mother”) and Bruce Sipe (“Father”). The trial court terminated the parental rights of both parents as to this child after finding on clear and convincing evidence that grounds existed to do so. Both parents have appealed. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm.

Sidney Tillman Hoover, v. Daniel Edmondson Hoover
01A01-9706-CV-00245
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge H. Denmark Bell

This is a divorce case. Defendant-appellant Daniel Hoover appeals the trial court’s division of marital property and asserts that the land containing the parties marital home was improperly classified as wife’s separate property. Plaintiff-appellee Sidney Hoover asserts that the trial court erred in failing to award her one-half of Husband’s retirement account.

Bobby Blackmon, v. Steven F. Glaser
01A01-9606-CV-00269
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas Goodall

The plaintiff, Bobby Blackmon, has appealed from a judgment reading as follows: The Motion to Set Pretrial Management Conference is overruled. This order shall be considered as a final judgment disposing of any claim, right or liability of any party as contemplated by T.R.A.P. Rule 3(a). IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of March, 1996.

The Town of Collierville, Tennessee, Schilling, Inc., Jane Porter Feild, and Joel H. Porter, v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
02A01-9706-CV-00134
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge John R. McCarroll, Jr.

Defendant Norfolk Southern Railway Company appeals the trial court’s orders of
possession entered in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee Town of Collierville in two eminent domain
cases. In entering its orders of possession, the trial court ruled that, as a matter of law, the
Town of Collierville had the right to condemn easements across Norfolk Southern’s railroad
track for the purpose of constructing two grade crossings and that Norfolk Southern was
not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the right-to-take issue. For the reasons hereinafter
stated, we reverse the trial court’s orders of possession and remand for further
proceedings.