Gordon Carroll and Ora Hall, v. John W. Belcher and Frankie Belcher
01A01-9802-CH-00106
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor C. K. Smith

This appeal involves an easement for ingress and egress. The defendants, John and Frankie Belcher (Belcher), appeal the decision of the trial court granting the plaintiffs, Gordon Carroll (Carroll) and Ora Hall (Hall), the right to widen an easement running over their property.

Pamela L. Schenk, v. Raymond F. Lane
01A01-9804-CV-00190
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bobby H. Capers

Defendant Raymond D. Lane appeals a jury verdict awarding $297,000.00 to Plaintiff Pamela L. Schenk for injuries sustained as a result of an automobile accident occurring between Lane and Schenk. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in all respects.

William H. Lance, Emma Lee Lance v. Larry H. Street, D/B/A Street Construction
01A01-9802-CV-00072
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace

Peggy Wilson v. United Parcel Service, Inc. Ohio, et al
02S01-9807-CV-00064
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John R. Mccarroll, Jr., Judge
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 trial court found that the plaintiff, Peggy Wilson, sustained an injury resulting in a 16 percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The court also ruled all medical bills and charges associated with the treatment of Dr. Rizk be paid by the defendants and that the plaintiff was entitled to temporary total benefits from September 25, 1997 to November 24, 1997, which had not been paid by the defendants. The defendants present issues attacking the judgment of the trial court on these three findings. We will first summarize the evidence. The plaintiff testified she was 51 years of age at the time of trial. She attended high school, but did not graduate and did not obtain a GED. Her employment history prior to working for United Parcel Service was manual, unskilled labor. She had worked for United Parcel Service as a package delivery driver for the past 22 years. Her employment requires her to lift packages weighing up to 7 pounds. The plaintiff testified that on July 23, 1997, when she lifted a 62-pound box, her left arm and hand went numb, causing her to lose grip. This jerked her back, causing pain in the back. She testified the pain in her back worsened and she notified her employer. She was told to go to Med Emergency where she saw Dr. Zanone. Dr. Zanone sent her to Dr. Varner, an orthopedic surgeon. She testified Dr. Varner ordered a nerve block which was done by Dr. Kraus. This helped her for a few days, but within one and one-half weeks the pain was as severe as ever. Dr. Varner sent her back to work on September 8, 1997, but the pain in her back was so severe she was not able to do the work. Her employer returned her to Dr. Varner who told her there was nothing else he could do for her. He advised her to go back to work or get another job. Since she was unable to do the work, she contacted the employer's insurance carrier who told her to see Dr. Kellett, a neurosurgeon. Dr. Kellett gave her liquid cortisone 2

State of Tennessee, Commissioner Doug Sizemore, Commerce and Insurance v. United Physicians Insurance, Risk Retention Group State ex rel Doug Sizemore vs. United Physicians Ins.
01A01-9706-CH-00253
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Walter W. Bussart
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Carol L. McCoy

This is an appeal from a memorandum and order of the chancellor affirming and adopting the Special Master's report pursuant to Rule 53 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. The issue is whether the lower court erred in this action. Our review is de novo upon the record accompanied by a presumption of correctness as to the findings of fact by the chancellor. Tenn.R.App.P.13(d).

State of Tennessee, ex rel., Doug Sizemore, Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance for the State of Tennessee, v. United Physicians Insurance Risk Retention Group - Concurring
01A01-9706-CH-00253
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch

I concur with the court’s opinion. Insurance companies have the right to assume that the risk they undertake will not later be enlarged by the courts. See Schultz v. Tennessee Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 218 Tenn. 465, 474, 404 S.W.2d 480, 484 (1966). Accordingly, the courts are not at liberty to rewrite policies of insurance to provide coverage where no coverage was intended. See Spears v. Commercial Ins. Co., 866 S.W.2d 544, 548(Tenn. Ct. App. 1993). Dr. Johnson did not contract for prior acts coverage when he purchased his UPI insurance policy. Accordingly, UPI never provided coverage for claims such as Blendora Ann Echols.

Gary June Caughron v. State of Tennessee
03C01-9707-CC-00301
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge John K. Byers

The petitioner, Gary June Caughron, appeals as of right from the Sevier County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief as to the guilt phase of his trial. He was convicted in 1990 for the first degree murder of Ann Robertson Jones and received the death penalty. He was also convicted of first degree burglary and assault with the intent to commit rape for which he received consecutive ten-year sentences. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. State v. Caughron, 855 S.W.2d 526 (Tenn. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 979, 114 S. Ct. 475 (1993).

Robert S. Lipman v. First National Bank of Boston, and Alexander H. McNeil, J. Virginia McNeil, R. & J. Knoxville - Concurring
01A01-9803-CH-00139
Authoring Judge: Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle

The trial court granted the motion of defendant First National Bank of Boston (“First National”) for summary judgment, which the plaintiff (“Lipman”] appeals, insisting that there are genuine issues of material fact.

Glenda Wright Benning v. James Russell Benning
01A01-9805-CV-00238
Authoring Judge: Judge Don T. McMurray
Trial Court Judge: Judge Marietta Shipley

In this divorce case, Glenda Benning (wife) challenges the trial court's award of permanent alimony to James Benning (husband). After the file filed for divorce and the parties separated, the hisband moved into the same apartment with one Jaylene Deen. On appeal, the wife argues that the tril court erred in finding that the statutory presumption fond at  T.C .A . § 36 - 5 - 10 1 ( a ) ( 3 ) had been rebutted by the evidence presented by the husband. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

James Prince, D/B/A/ Big Jim, Inc., v. Charles Campbell, Individually and D/B/A Limosines by K.C.
01A01-9806-CV-00276
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Russell

This appeal involves a motion to set aside a judgment. Defendant/cross-plaintiff,Charles Campbell (Campbell), appeals the judgment of the trial court awarding money damages to The day of trial, Prince filed a motion to amend the complaint to reduce the amount requested as damages from $97,000 to $77,000. There is no record as to the trial court’s action plaintiff/cross-defendant, James Prince (Prince). This case arose from a contract entered into between the parties in April 1995 in which Campbell agreed to transfer a limousine from his business to Prince in exchange for the opportunity to run Prince’s “World Famous Stagecoach Lounge.” Prince filed suit against Campbell for breach of contract and fraud in August 1995 alleging that Campbell failed to make lease payments on the property and refused to transfer the limousine agreed upon in the contract. Campbell’s answer denied the material allegations and asserted a counterclaim for conversion, fraud, and breach of contract.

State of Tennessee, Department of Childrens Services v. Tamra Leann Viar and John Fitzgeral Gross, In the Matter of Katlyn Nicole Viar
01A01-9806-JV-00275
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Judge John B. Melton, III

We have reviewed the Petition to Rehear filed on behalf of the Attorney General and conclude that the Petition should be denied for the following reasons.

Rayford Martin vs. State of Tennessee
03C01-9707-CR-00286
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard Baumgartner

This is an appeal as of right from the trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief from convictions based upon guilty pleas. The Defendant entered guilty pleas, with sentencing left to the discretion of the trial judge, to two counts of aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated rape, and four counts of armed robbery. At the sentencing hearing conducted on April 3, 1989, he received a total effective sentence of 150 years. This Court affirmed his sentences on direct appeal.1 The Defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief in December of 1991; and following appointment of counsel, he filed a supplemental petition in June of 1997. The trial court conducted a hearing and denied the petition in July of 1997. The Defendant now appeals the trial court’s ruling. We affirm, but we grant D efendant relie f in the form of a delayed appeal.

Melissa (Buckley) Hatchell, v. Jerry Buckley
02A01-9801-CV-0008
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. J. Alissandratos

These parties were divorced in Arkansas on April 17, 1996. A Property Settlement Agreement was incorporated in the judgment which awarded custody of two children to Mother.

Chris Hill Construction Company, v. State of Tennessee
02A01-9803-BC-
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge William H. Inman

Larry Aubrey Henson v. Elizabeth Ellen Sorrell
02A01-9805-JV-00135
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman

The child of these parties, who were never married to each other, was born March 11, 1996. The paternity issue was determined in June, 1996 by the Juvenile Court, which also directed the payment of child support. The appellant questioned his liability for support because the child was conceived without his consent. He did not prevail.

Linda Chaney v. Robert Dickinson
03A01-9803-JV-00107
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Suzanne Bailey

Robert Lee Dickinson, Jr., appeals the ruling of the Juvenile Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee at Chattanooga, insisting that the Juvenile Court erred in its determination of Mr. Dickinson’s Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 60.02 motion for relief from child support payments based upon evidence that he is not the father of the child he has been supporting. The Juvenile Court ruled that Mr. Dickinson’s motion was barred by res judicata; therefore, Mr. Dickinson is still obligated to pay current and past due child support payments.

Todd Frederick Brooks v. Linda Faye Carter
02A01-9709-CV-00225
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams

Defendant Todd Frederick Brooks (Father) appeals, and Plaintiff Linda Faye Carter (Mother) cross-appeals, the final divorce decree entered by the trial court which awarded the parties joint custody of their three minor children, designated the Father as the primary custodial parent, ordered the Father to pay child support to the Mother, and distributed the parties’ property. We affirm the trial court’s distribution of the marital property, with one modification, but we reverse the court’s custody decision and we remand for the court to recalculate the Father’s child support obligation pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines.
 

Antonio Sweatt v. Billy Compton, et al.
02A01-9710-CV-00252
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Lee Moore Jr.

This is a medical malpractice case brought by an inmate at a state correctional facility. The
plaintiff brought the lawsuit against various prison officials and the prison doctor alleging federal
constitutional violations as well as medical malpractice. The trial court granted the defendants’
motion for summary judgment. We reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the
plaintiff’s claims under the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and remand for further
discovery. We affirm the grant of summary judgment on the remainder of the claims.

State of Tennessee vs. Timmy Beavers
01C01-9709-CC-00394
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Charles Lee

Following the denial of his mo tion to suppress evidence, the Defendant, Timmy Beavers, entered a best-interest plea to second degree murder, reserving the right to appeal the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress certain evidence. An agreed upon sentence of thirty (30) years was entered by the trial court.

Scottie Allen Yant v. Arrow Exterminators, Inc.
01A01-9801-CV-00004
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

The manager of an exterminating company brought criminal charges against the owner of a competing company for the alleged theft of a piece of equipment. The general sessions court determined that probable cause existed, but the grand jury declined to indict. The defendant in the criminal case subsequently filed suit for malicious prosecution. The trial court granted summary judgment to the civil defendant. We affirm.

Randall Craig Cobb, v. Sharon Ruben Cobb
01A01-9803-CV-00127
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Muriel Robinson

In this case Appellant challenges the action of the trial court in denying his application for relief under Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, holding him to be in criminal contempt of court and denying his application for modification of alimony.
 

Carl G. Berning v. State of Tennessee, Department of Corrections
01A01-9804-CH-00180
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

The Tennessee Civil Service Commission upheld the termination of a veteran supervisory employee for sexual harassment, conduct unbecoming a state employee, and failure to maintain a satisfactory and harmonious working relationship with fellow employees. The Chancery Court of Davidson County affirmed the Commission’s order. On appeal the employee asserts that he was denied progressive discipline prior to termination, and that he was denied due process of law. On the strength of the proof, he also claims that his conduct does not fit the definition of “conduct unbecoming” or support a conclusion that he failed to maintain a harmonious working relationship, and that his conduct was constitutionally protected. We affirm the trial court.

Charles Walton Wright v. State of Tennessee
01S01-9709-CR-00196
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

We granted this appeal to determine whether the appellant’s due process rights were violated when the lower courts dismissed his post conviction petition as timebarred by the three-year statute of limitations since the asserted violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963), did not arise until after expiration of the three-year statute of limitations.

Estate of Foster Hume, III, Deceased, The University of the South v. Meredith Klank
01S01-9709-PB-00182
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Frank G. Clement, Jr.

We granted this appeal to determine whether the probate rule of ademption by extinction applies to the specific bequest of a house, where the house is sold at foreclosure before the testator’s death and sales proceeds representing the testator’s interest are identifiable after his death.

State of Tennessee v. William Henry Barney
01S01-9802-CR-00033
Authoring Judge: Justice Aldolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

The defendant, William Henry Barney, was convicted of eleven counts of rape of a child and seven counts of aggravated sexual battery. He is currently serving a total effective sentence of eighty years. Upon the Court of Criminal Appeals’s affirmance of these judgments, the defendant filed an application for permission to appeal to this Court. We granted the application in order to determine whether the language of the indictment was  sufficient under State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn. 1997), and to determine whether the multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy. We conclude that the indictment is sufficient under Hill. In addition, we conclude that, under the facts and circumstances of this case, multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery are justified and do not violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy.