SUPREME COURT OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

County

Authoring Judge

Originating Judge

Date Filter

Case Number

Case Name

Keyword Search

Sort by

Order

01S01-9705-CH-00110 01S01-9705-CH-00110 Trial Court Judge: Robert S. Brandt		Supreme Court	10/19/98
01S01-9711-CH-00248 01S01-9711-CH-00248	Williamson	Supreme Court	10/19/98
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Supreme Court	10/15/98
State vs. Blanton 01S01-9605-CC-00093 Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace		Supreme Court	10/15/98
City of Fulton vs. Hickman-Fulton 01S01-9710-FD-00215	Weakley	Supreme Court	10/12/98
Crittenden vs. State 01S01-9712-CR-00267	Davidson	Supreme Court	10/12/98
State vs. Callahan 03S01-9711-CC-00136 Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck		Supreme Court	10/12/98
State vs. Dewayne Butler, Fredrick D. Butler, and Eric D. Alexander 02S01-9711-CR-00094 Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey	Shelby	Supreme Court	10/12/98
State vs. Dewayne Butler, Fredrick D. Butler, and Eric D. Alexander 02S01-9711-CR-00094	Shelby	Supreme Court	10/12/98
The City of White House vs. Whitley 01S01-9711-CH-00259	Sumner	Supreme Court	10/12/98
The City of White House vs. Whitley 01S01-9711-CH-00259	Robertson	Supreme Court	10/12/98
State of Tennessee v. Chrysta Gail Pike 03S01-9712-CR-00147 Authoring Judge: Justice Frank W. Drowota, III Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Lebowitz In this capital case, the defendant, Christa Gail Pike, was convicted of premeditated first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder. Following a sentencing hearing on the conviction for first degree murder, the jury found two aggravating circumstances: (1) “[t]he murder was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel in that it involved torture or serious physical abuse beyond that necessary to produce death;” and (2) “[t]he murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution of the defendant or another.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(5) and (6) (1997 Repl.). Finding that the two aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury sentenced the defendant to death by electrocution. With respect to the defendant’s conviction of conspiracy to commit first degree murder, the trial judge imposed a consecutive twenty-five-year sentence.	Knox	Supreme Court	10/05/98
Barbara White as the Administratrix of the Estate of Earl R. White, deceased v. William H. Lawrence, M.D. 02S01-9701-CV-00007 Authoring Judge: Per Curiam Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn The Court has considered the Petition for Rehearing filed by the defendant/appellee, and it is the decision of a majority of this Court that the petition is without merit. The Petition for Rehearing is denied.		Supreme Court	10/05/98
Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. v. John P. Roberts 02S01-9712-CH-00109 Authoring Judge: Justice Frank W. Drowota, III Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Neal Small In this legal malpractice action, the defendant, John P. Roberts, appeals from the Court of Appeals’ reversal of summary judgment entered by the trial court in his favor based on the expiration of the statute of limitations. The issue for our determination is whether the present action is barred by the one-year statute of limitations applicable to legal malpractice actions, Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104.1 After carefully examining the record before us and considering the relevant authorities, we conclude that the instant suit is time-barred. Accordingly, for the reasons explained hereafter, the decision of the Court of Appeals to reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendant is reversed.	Shelby	Supreme Court	10/05/98
John Kohl & Company P.C. v. Dearborn & Ewing, a Tennessee General Partnership, and Dan E. Huffstutter 01S01-9711-CV-00255 Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Brothers In this legal malpractice action, the plaintiffs, John Kohl & Company P.C., John B. Kohl, III and Helen H. Kohl, Individually, and John B. Kohl, III, Trustee, as Trustee of the John Kohl & Company, P.C. Profit Sharing Plan, (collectively referred to as the “plaintiffs”), appeal from the Court of Appeals’ decision affirming the trial court’s finding that the statute of limitations barred the plaintiffs’ recovery for negligently provided legal advice pertaining to certain business matters. The plaintiffs have also appealed from the denial of legal fees associated with prosecuting this action against the defendant, Dearborn and Ewing, and one of its associates, Dan Huffstutter. The issues before us are: (1) whether certain of the plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the one-year statute of limitations applicable to legal malpractice actions, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104, and (2) whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover legal fees associated with prosecuting this action. For the reasons explained hereafter, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.	Davidson	Supreme Court	10/05/98
State vs. Dennis Keith and Timothy Collins 02S01-9604-CC-00035		Supreme Court	09/28/98
Ruff vs. State 03S01-9711-CC-00140	Blount	Supreme Court	09/28/98
State vs. Dennis Keith and Timothy Collins 02S01-9604-CC-00035	Madison	Supreme Court	09/28/98
State vs. Clarence C. Nesbit 02S01-9705-CR-00043 Trial Court Judge: Arthur T. Bennett	Shelby	Supreme Court	09/28/98
State vs. Clarence C. Nesbit 02S01-9705-CR-00043	Shelby	Supreme Court	09/28/98
State vs. Quintero and Hall 01S01-9703-CC-00068 Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace	Humphreys	Supreme Court	09/21/98
Alexander, et. al. vs. Inman 01S01-9705-CH-00103	Davidson	Supreme Court	09/21/98
Frances Blanchard vs. Arlene Kellum, D.D.S. 02S01-9709-CV-00083		Supreme Court	09/21/98
State vs. Williams 03S01-9706-CR-00060	Hamilton	Supreme Court	09/21/98
03S01-9706-CR-00068 03S01-9706-CR-00068		Supreme Court	09/21/98