Fred Whitley, Jr. v. Metropolitan Nashville Board of Education
Appellant, a tenured teacher employed by Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools, was involved in an altercation with students at an alternative high school. Subsequently, Appellee Metropolitan Nashville Board of Education (the “Board”) terminated Appellant’s employment. After exhausting his administrative remedies, Appellant filed an action with the trial court arguing that the Board exceeded its authority under the Teachers’ Tenure Act. The trial court vacated the Board’s decision on the ground that the Board violated the Open Meetings Act. We affirm the trial court’s decision on different grounds, i.e., that the Board committed a clear error of law when it conducted a third hearing concerning the termination of Appellant’s employment. We also conclude that Appellant is entitled to reinstatement and back pay. There is nothing further for the Board to do; accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order of remand. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Stephanie D. Et Al.
A father appeals an order transferring jurisdiction over his minor children to West Virginia. Because the father did not file his notice of appeal with the clerk of the appellate court within thirty days after entry of the final order as required by Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a), we dismiss the appeal. |
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Madison Holdings, LLC ET AL. v. The Cato Corporation
In litigation commenced by landlord to recover unpaid rent, the tenant asserted a |
Madison | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Darius Henderson
In this appeal from a resentencing hearing, the Defendant, Darius Henderson, challenges |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michael Bailey v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Michael Bailey, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s summary |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Martiness Henderson v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Martiness Henderson, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, in which he alleged that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Having reviewed the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Eric Todd Sparks v. Rachel Collins Sparks
Eric Todd Sparks (“Husband”) and Rachel Collins Sparks (“Wife”) were divorced by order of the Chancery Court for Bradley County (the “trial court”) on December 2, 2021. In addition to $693 in monthly child support, the trial court ordered Husband to pay Wife $750 per month in alimony in futuro. The trial court also ordered that once the parties’ minor child, who was nine years old at the time of trial, reached the age of majority, Husband’s alimony in futuro obligation would automatically increase to $1,250 per month. Husband timely appealed to this Court. We affirm the trial court’s decision to award Wife alimony in futuro, but, considering Husband’s ability to pay and Wife’s need, we vacate the trial court’s ruling as to the monthly amount and remand for further proceedings. We also conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering the automatic increase in Husband’s alimony obligation upon the Child reaching the age of majority and vacate that portion of the trial court’s order. Consequently, the trial court’s ruling is vacated in part and affirmed in part. We decline to award Wife her attorney’s fees incurred on appeal. |
Bradley | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Destyni S. Et Al.
In this case involving termination of the mother’s parental rights to her two children, the Lawrence County Chancery Court (“trial court”) determined that seven statutory grounds for termination had been proven by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court further determined that clear and convincing evidence demonstrated that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest. The mother has appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm. |
Lawrence | Court of Appeals | |
Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, Inc. v. Linda Linkous Et Al.
The trial court held that an insurance company properly denied an insured’s claim for property loss arising out of a fire. The trial court found that the denial was supported by two grounds: (1) that the property was not “occupied” as defined by the policy at the time of the fire and, therefore, the policy did not cover the loss, and (2) that the policy was voided by the insured’s misrepresentations relating to the loss. We affirm the trial court’s decision. |
Fentress | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Daryl Deangelo Rollins
Defendant, Daryl Deangelo Rollins, pled guilty to one count of reckless vehicular homicide |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Courtney R. Logan v. Vincent Vantell, Warden
The Petitioner, Courtney R. Logan, appeals the Hardeman County Circuit Court’s |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jessica R. Adkins v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Jessica R. Adkins, appeals the denial of her post-conviction petition, |
Court of Criminal Appeals | ||
Roger Reed v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Roger Reed, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of postconviction |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Erik Courtney Lehto, Alias
A Knox County jury convicted the defendant, Erik Courtney Lehto, of two counts of rape |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Fedtrust Federal Credit Union v. Lynnsay Brooks
This appeal concerns a circuit court's disrnissal of an appeal by a Defendant from |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
John Clark Ritenour v. Sara D. Bennett
This is an appeal from a final order entered on March 9, 2023. The Notice of Appeal was |
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee Ex Rel. Joshua M. Harman Qui Tam v. Trinity Industries, Inc., Et Al.
A qui tam relator brought a Tennessee False Claims Act suit on behalf of himself and the State of Tennessee against a manufacturer of guardrail end terminals. The manufacturer moved to dismiss, and the trial court granted the motion on a wide variety of bases. The qui tam relator appeals. We conclude that a number of the rationales relied upon by the trial court were in error; nevertheless, the trial court properly dismissed the action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under the Tennessee False Claims Act. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Philip Hyer v. Juanita Miller
After flooding washed away a bridge and part of a driveway which a homeowner used to |
Carter | Court of Appeals | |
John F. Curran v. Angela M. Melson
Appellant and Appellee were involved in a romantic relationship during which time |
Hardin | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Frank Delmar Raines, Jr.
Frank Delmar Raines, Jr., Defendant, was indicted for rape, aggravated kidnapping, and |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Demorris Sanchez McKenzie v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, DeMorris Sanchez McKenzie, sought relief from his convictions and effective |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Robert McPhail Hunt Jr.
This appeal arises out of a settlement agreement between the parties that resolved the |
Hamblen | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Andre JuJuan Lee Green
The State appeals the trial court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence recovered during the search of the car in which the defendant was a passenger. The State asserts that the trial court erred because the scent of marijuana provided probable cause for the search regardless of the possibility that legal hemp was the source of the odor. After review, we conclude the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to suppress. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s order granting the defendant’s motion for suppression, reinstate the indictments against the defendant, and remand to the trial court for further proceedings. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. DeAnthony D. Hart
The Defendant, DeAnthony D. Hart, challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence |
Henderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tondre Durpress Ragland
A Haywood County jury convicted the defendant, Tondre Durpress Ragland, of attempted second-degree murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, and aggravated assault, for which he received an effective sentence of twenty years in confinement. On appeal, the defendant contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for aggravated assault. The defendant also argues the trial court erred in imposing partial consecutive sentences. Following our review, we affirm the defendant’s convictions. However, we reverse the imposition of consecutive sentences and remand to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing for consideration of the consecutive sentencing factors outlined in State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn. 1995). |
Haywood | Court of Criminal Appeals |