Michael Sanderson v. University of Tennessee - Concurring
01A01-9607-CH-00289
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert S. Brandt

In this case, a student at the University of Tennessee was charged with plagiarism. After a hearing, an administrative law judge found that the  student had not committed plagiarism. The University Chancellor reversed the ALJ’s decision, issuing a final order finding the student guilty of plagiarism. The student appealed this decision to the chancery court, pursuant to the Tennessee Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, which affirmed the finding of plagiarism. We affirm the decision of the chancery court.

Ames vs. Phillips Builders
01A01-9701-CV-00043
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes

Lemasters vs. Ross
01A01-9702-CV-00070
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson

Frazier vs. George
01A01-9703-CV-00110
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins

In re: Estate of Alla Mae Locke Simmons, Deceased
01A01-9608-PB-00366
Trial Court Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.

Easterly vs. Harmon
01A01-9609-CH-00446
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart

Burnett vs. Hamby
01A01-9610-CH-00452
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III

Geraldo vs. Vanderbilt University
01A01-9610-CH-00467
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Young vs. Young
01A01-9610-CH-00473

City of Athens vs. Callaway
03A01-9707-CV-00256

Walter Biddle vs. Norfolk Southern Corp. et al
02A01-9605-CV-00122
Trial Court Judge: D'Army Bailey

In re: Jeffrey Morgan
02A01-9608-CH-00206
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos

State vs. David Volz
01C01-9604-CC-00171

State vs. David Moss
02C01-9610-CC-00365

Pratt vs. Smart
03A01-9701-CV-00024

03A01-9704-CH-00133
03A01-9704-CH-00133

Charles Fossett vs. State of TN
02A01-9703-BC-00061

State vs. Utley
01S01-9604-CR-00120

03S01-9512-CC-00133
03S01-9512-CC-00133

State vs. Charles A. Pinkham, Jr.
02S01-9611-CR-00096

Hutton vs. Johnson
01S01-9705-CH-00101
Trial Court Judge: James L. Weatherford

State vs. Jerry Cooper
01C01-9604-CC-00150
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee

State vs. Jerry Cooper
01C01-9604-CC-00150
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee

Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co. v. Lexington Ins. Co.
M2002-01752-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
On November 16, 1997, a fire destroyed a Chili's Restaurant ("Chili's") in Nashville, Tennessee. At the time of the fire, the premises were owned and operated by RMR Investments and Gower Center, Ltd. ("RMR/Gower") and leased to Chili's. Under a 20-year lease agreement, Chili's agreed to insure the improvements against loss or damage by fire and other casualties and to insure against property damage and public liability arising out of occurrences on the premises. RMR/Gower was to be named as a loss payee or additional insured under the insurance policies obtained by Chili's. According to the lease, in the event the premises and/or the improvements were destroyed by fire or other casualty, Chili's had the option to terminate the lease, and all insurance proceeds were to be paid to RMR/Gower, except for the portion payable to Chili's for loss of personal property. Pursuant to the lease agreement, Chili's obtained insurance coverage through Lexington Insurance Company ("Lexington"). The certificate of insurance dated December 5, 1997 listed RMR/Gower as certificate holder and named RMR/Gower as additional insured. After the fire, Chili's elected to terminate the lease agreement due to the condition of the premises. Lexington paid the proceeds for the loss of the building to RMR/Gower, less amounts paid to Chili's for loss of personal property. RMR/Gower submitted an additional claim for damages it incurred for the loss of rental income and other charges it would have otherwise collected from Chili's. This claim was denied by Lexington. RMR/Gower then submitted a claim to its insurer Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company ("Charter Oak") for the loss of rental income, which Charter Oak paid. After Lexington refused to reimburse Charter Oak for the amounts it paid RMR/Gower for the loss of rental income, Charter Oak filed suit against Lexington for breach of contract under the theory of third party beneficiary. Parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. On June 26, 2002, the trial court granted Lexington's summary judgment motion and denied Charter Oak's motion. Notice of this appeal soon followed. For the reasons set forth below, the order of the trial court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.

Wolf vs. The University of TN.
01A01-9611-CH-00514
Trial Court Judge: William M. Dender