Haynes vs. Harris
01A01-9810-CV-00518

Ausbrooks vs. Ausbrooks
01A01-9803-CH-00114
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell

State vs. Richard M. & Edith L. Parrott
03C01-9709-CR-00408
Trial Court Judge: Edgar P. Calhoun

Seymour Hayes, III. vs. State
03C01-9902-CR-00066

State vs. Chris Eugene Etters
03C01-9801-CC-00034
Trial Court Judge: Phyllis H. Miller

State vs. Eddie Pittman
W2000-01582-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Roger A. Page
The defendant appeals his convictions for attempted second degree murder and felony possession of a weapon, arguing that he was denied his right to a unanimous jury verdict by the trial court's failure to require the prosecution to make an election of facts supporting the attempted murder. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that neither an election nor enhanced unanimity instruction was required. Thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Thomas Lewis
02C01-9707-CR-00254
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Ronald McCray
02C01-9809-CC-00292

State vs. Brian Faulkens
02C01-9809-CR-00283
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

State vs. Robert Crisp
02C01-9810-CC-00311
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood

Carden v. Roane Co.
03S01-9712-CH-00151
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Frank V. Williams, III,
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 was injured in July 1993 while driving a truck during the course and within the scope of his job. The occurrence of the accident is not questioned; neither does the defendant question that the plaintiff suffered a back injury as a result of the accident. The plaintiff continued his employment with intermittent medical treatment for his back complaints. On September 1, 1995, at his residence, he stooped to pick up an object and suffered another onset of pain. The complaint was filed November 2, 1995, alleging the occurrence of the traffic accident (as a result of which periodic payments of compensation were made to the plaintiff through November 15, 1995), and subsequent physical impairment. The thrust of the defense is directed to the incident of September 3, 1995, when the plaintiff allegedly suffered the non-job-related accident at home, from which his present impairment is derived. The Chancellor found a 4 percent impairment, holding that the incident at his residence was not an intervening cause, but was merely a manifestation of problems which began in 1993. The issue is whether the evidence preponderates against the finding of the Chancellor.1 1The appellant states that the Chancellor found that "the injury sustained by the plaintiff while working at home in 1995 was causally related to a work-related injury the plaintiff had suffered two years previously." As observed, the Chancellor referred to the September 1995 event as a non-intervening incident which was merely a natural progression of the plaintiff's back problems. 2

Jonathan Stephenson vs. State
03C01-9807-CR-00255
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

Bobby Allen Joyner vs. State
03C01-9807-CR-00260
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

Lee P. Fite, Individually and Derivatively on behalf of H & M Construction Co., Inc. v. Richard L. Fite, C. David Fite, Larry P. Becker, et al
02A01-9710-CH-00266
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Joe C. Morris

This case involves allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, fraud in the inducement of a contract, and violation of the Tennessee Securities Act. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants, his two brothers who are majority shareholders in the family corporation, the corporation, as an alter ego or veil of the majority shareholders, and an officer and director of the corporation, used fraudulent expense and contract-kickback schemes to lower the book value of the corporation’s stock when plaintiff executed an option to sell agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants. We reverse and remand.

Atty. Gen. vs. Elk View Land & Gravel
03A01-9808-CV-00247

Bethany Christian Services vs. Jackson
03A01-9810-JV-00345

State vs. Patrick Trawick
02C01-9802-CR-00054
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft

State vs. James Wingard
02C01-9809-CC-00293
Trial Court Judge: R. Lee Moore Jr.

State vs. Juan Jerome Bryant
01C01-9805-CR-00217

01C01-9806-CR-00245
01C01-9806-CR-00245

Harold L. Fitts vs. State
01C01-9807-CR-00297

State vs. Marsha Arnold
01C01-9809-CC-00382

State of Tennessee v. Leonard Edward Smith
03S01-9710-CC-00129
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

In this automatic appeal,1 the defendant, Leonard Edward Smith, raises numerous challenges to the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals which affirmed his sentence of death for the 1984 murder of Novella Webb. After carefully examining the entire record and the law, including the thorough opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals and the briefs of the defendant and the State, this Court entered an Order limiting review at oral argument to the following three issues:2 (1) Whether the trial court was correct in allowing the defendant to control the presentation of mitigating evidence and to waive closing argument against counsel’s advice; (2) Whether the admittance of victim impact testimony and argument at the sentencing hearing constituted reversible error; (3) Whether the sentence of death is arbitrary or disproportionate in violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-206(c)(1)(A)-(D) (1997 Repl.).

State vs. Leonard Smith
03S01-9710-CC-00129
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

State vs. Harry David Johnson
03C01-9712-CR-00526
Trial Court Judge: James Curwood Witt