State of Tennessee vs. Lester Lee Doyle
02C01-9612-CC-00461
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn

The defendant, Lester Lee Doyle, was convicted by a Benton County jury of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, second offense, and driving on a revoked license. The sole issue presented on appeal is whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. We affirm the conviction.

James C. Hise, Jr. and wife, Brenda L. Hise, State of Tennessee, Department of Transportationm Bruce Saltsman, Commissioner
02A01-9701-CV-00023
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kay S. Robilio

James C. Hise, Jr. and wife, Brenda L. Hise sued the State of Tennessee, the Department of Transportation and its commissioner for damages in an inverse condemnation action. The complaint alleges that, after conveying a portion of their property to the state, they learned that the project adversely impacted their commercial property. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on the basis of sovereign immunity. The motion was granted and the plaintiffs appealed.

Richard Hitchcock v. WaUSAu Insurance Companies, et al.
01S01-9612-CH-00250
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Robert S. Brandt,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the Second Injury Fund (the fund) contends (1) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the claimant is permanently and totally disabled, and (2) that it was error to approve a settlement between the employee and employer under the circumstances. The claimant contends the objection to the settlement comes too late. As discussed below, the panel has concluded both judgments should be vacated and the case remanded for further consideration. The employee or claimant, Hitchcock, is forty-two and a high school graduate. On October 14, 1993, he suffered a compensable back injury while employed as a warehouseman for the employer, Service America. He has since had three back operations. The operating surgeon has released him to return to work with lifting, twisting and bending restrictions and assigned a permanent impairment rating of twelve percent to the whole body. On September 5, 1995, the trial court approved a settlement between the claimant and his employer, whereby the claimant received permanent partial disability benefits based on forty-five percent to the body as a whole, paid in a lump sum. The fund did not participate in the settlement. The claimant's return to work has been complicated by two pre- existing conditions, blindness in one eye and limited side vision in the other, and a prior carpal tunnel release. A vocational expert testified the claimant is capable, in his disabled condition, of performing medium or light sedentary work. At the time of the trial, the claimant was in fact employed by Opryland as a cashier. After a trial in which the Second Injury Fund was the only defendant, the trial court found the claimant to be permanently and totally disabled and found the fund liable, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6- 28(a), for benefits at the claimant's compensation rate from the date the claimant reached maximum medical improvement from the injury until the claimant reaches age sixty-five. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(2). This tribunal is required to conduct an independent examination of the evidence to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies.

Wilburn v. Boyle
03S01-9611-CH-00111
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John S. Mclellan, 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 below appeals the trial court's dismissal of his complaint, holding that the plaintiff had not met his burden of proving that he had sustained a permanent vocational disability as a result of his work-related accident. We affirm the trial court's judgment. The plaintiff offered the testimony of himself, his brother, Bobby W ilburn; his parents, Robert and Ruth Wilburn; and Sondra Brown, the record keeper for Med- One, where plaintiff originally received medical treatment. He also submitted the deposition of plaintiff's treating physician, Dr. Jim Brasfield, and the medical report of an examining physician, Dr. Calvin Johnson, along with other documentary exhibits. The defendant offered the testimony of Brian Looney, who had been plaintiff's supervisor at Aquamine; two co-workers of the plaintiff at Aquamine, Gerald Holmes and Paul Pyle; and Robert Rinehart, the manager of Aquamine at the time of these events, as well as documentary evidence. Parties disputed whether the date of the accident was September 25 or 29, 1993, but it was eventually stipulated that adequate notice was given. Plaintiff, Mr. Looney and Mr. Pyle were assembling a pallet rack, when the plaintiff's hand was squashed between the pallet rack and the wall. Plaintiff testified that he jerked his hand out, but Mr. Pyle and Mr. Looney both testified that Mr. Looney immediately pulled the rack back, releasing the plaintiff's hand. Plaintiff further testified that he began to feel pain in his shoulder within ten to fifteen minutes after the incident and that he complained to his co-workers about it. However, all of the defendant's witnesses testified that he did not mention any shoulder pain to them until approximately three weeks after the accident. Plaintiff continued to work very long hours until October 1, 1993, as the defendant was moving from its location in Bristol, Virginia to a new office in Bristol, Tennessee. The accident occurred during the move. 2

State of Tennessee vs. John ParnellYaugher
03C01-9509-CC-00286
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge James B. Scott, Jr.

The Defendant, John Parnell Yaugher, appeals as of right pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Defendant was convicted following a jury trial in Anderson County of the offense of rape of a child. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the allegations in the indictment to charge an offense. Also, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction and specifically argues that his confession was uncorroborated, that there was no proof of penetration, and that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was sane at the time of the offense. Furth er, the Defendant argu es that the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress his statement to investigators and by charging in the jury instructions the lesser grade offense of aggravated sexual battery. Finding no
error, and that the indictment and the evidence are sufficient, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Amberjack Ltd., Inc., D/B/A Nonconnah Corporate Center, v. Fred Thompson, Individually, and D/B/A Thompson Quality Management, Inc., et al.
02A01-9512-CV-00281
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Swearengen

This lawsuit involves the breach of a lease agreement. The corporate lessee vacated the premises and stopped paying rent; consequently, the lessor filed suit. The trial court found the lessee in breach of the lease, but found the lease agreement unconscionable, held that the lessor failed to mitigate its damages, and held that the president of the corporate lessee could not be held personally liable. We affirm the trial court’s finding of a breach, but reverse its remaining findings and award the lessor damages for the entire term of the lease.

State of Tennessee vs. Hollis G. Williams
02C01-9602-CR-00048
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe B. Jones
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The appellant, Hollis G. Williams (defendant), was convicted of first-degree felony murder by a jury of his peers. The State of Tennessee sought the extreme penalty of death. However, the jury set his punishment at life without the possibility of parole. The defendant presents three issues for review. He contends (a) the evidence is insufficient, as a matter of law, to support his conviction for a murder committed during an attempt to commit robbery, (b) the trial court committed error of prejudicial dimensions by ruling his two convictions for attempt to commit robbery could be used to impeach him if he opted to testify in support of his defense, and (c) the trial court committed error of prejudicial dimensions by permitting the state to introduce victim impact testimony during the sentencing hearing. After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, it is the opinion of this Court the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Betty D. Levandowski
03S01-9611-CR-000116
Authoring Judge: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

In this appeal,1 we must determine whether a false response from an individual to an inquiry made by a law enforcement officer constitutes a false report within the meaning of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-502(a)(1) (1991). After careful review, we hold that § 39-16-502(a)(1) applies to statements volunteered or initiated by an individual but does not apply to statements made in response to inquiries by law enforcement officers. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Merlin Eugene Shuck
03S01-9607-CC-00071
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper

The defendant, Merlin Eugene Shuck, was convicted of one count of solicitation to commit first degree murder and two counts of solicitation to commit especially aggravated kidnaping. The defense theory at trial was entrapment, and in support of that defense, Shuck sought to introduce expert testimony from a neuropsychologist that he had suffered a cognitive decline and significant
deterioration of his cognitive abilities which rendered him more susceptible to inducement than the average person. The trial judge refused to admit the testimony finding that it would invade the province of the jury. Concluding that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding the testimony, the Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the convictions and ordered a new trial. Thereafter, we granted the State permission to appeal to consider whether expert psychological testimony about a defendant’s susceptibility to inducment is admissible under Tennessee law to establish entrapment.

Outdoor Source, Inc., v. Outdoor Entertainment, Inc.
01-A-01-9702-CH-00053
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd

This court entered an order on 13 August 1997 in the above styled case. Defendant/appellee, Outdoor Entertainment, Inc. (“OEI”), filed a petition for rehearing on 25 August 1997. It is the opinion of this court that the petition should be denied.

James O. Wright, Jr., v. Kathy Wright (Stovall)
01A01-9701-CV-00040
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Muriel Robinson

This is a child custody case. The parties had entered into a Marital Dissolution Agreement in which they had joint custody of the minor child. After the father’s remarriage, both the mother and father filed petitions seeking custody. The father now appeals the trial court’s order awarding sole custody of the parties’ child to the mother. We affirm.

Nancy Renee McReynolds (Delbridge) v. Robert Irving McReynolds
01A01-9702-CH-00064
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tyrus H. Cobb

NancyReneeMcReynolds Delbridge (Mother) appeals the trial court’s order denying
her counterpetition to modify the joint custody arrangement previously agreed to by the
parties and set forth in their final divorce decree. For the reasons stated hereinafter, we
affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Deborah Murray, Administrator Ad Litem of the estate of Terrance Murray and as Next of Kin of Terrance Murray, v. Jeremy A. Bryant, LilliaMn Bryant-Miller, Kathy Herbst, Charllie Herbst and Metro Govt of Nashville, et al.
01A01-9704-CV-00146
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Judge Barbara N. Haynes

This is an action for damages against the Metropolitan Government and other Defendants, alleging that they are liable for the death of Plaintiff’s son, Terrance Murray, who was shot and killed by a fellow student while attending J. T. Moore Middle School in Nashville, Tennessee, on April 21, 1994.

Whitney Stegall v. Dottie Lou Pryor, Benton M. Mason Jr., Hugh Burton Mason, et al. - Concurring
01A01-9704-PB-00147
Authoring Judge: Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Tom E. Gray

V. R. Mason died testate on October 29, 1995. The executor, Richard F. LaRoche, Jr., propounded the will for probate; in the ease of language it provided for the payment of debts and taxes and created a trust for a family cemetery, with the remainder to pass under the laws of intestate succession.

Jordan Bair, Minor B/N/F and Parent, Mark Baird, v. John Doe
01A01-9610-CV-00471
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leonard W. Martin

This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(a) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee.1

Billy Frank Henley and Joe H. Marlow v. Dale Dotson and wife Elsie Dotson
01A01-9611-CH-00523
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Gerald L. Ewell, Sr.

This matter appears appropriate for consideration pursuant to Rule 10(b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals of Tennessee.1 The plaintiffs in this case, Billy Frank Henley (“Henley”) and Joe H. Marlow (“Marlow”), own tracts of farm land in Coffee County, Tennessee. Henley acquired his land in 1992 from his brother, Clarence Henley, and his sister-in-law, Nona Mae Henley. Clarence and Nona Mae Henley had acquired the property from his parents in 1974. His parents had owned the property since 1957. Marlow acquired one tract of land at issue in 1973 and another tract of land at issue in 1975. The plaintiffs claim that a road separates their land from that of the defendants, Dale and Elsie Dotson (“Dotson”).

Diana Morris v. State of Tennessee
01A01-9612-BC-00569
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Commissioner W. R. Baker

This action was filed October 15, 1992 before the Tennessee Claims Commission. The plaintiff sought two-fold relief: (1) benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Law, TENN. CODE ANN. § 50-6-101 et seq., and (2) damages for the tort of alleged retaliatory discharge for filing a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, as allegedly authorized by TENN. CODE ANN. § 9-8-301 et seq. The claims were bifurcated.

Olen Eddie Hutchison vs. State of Tennessee
03C01-9601-CC-00033
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt

The petitioner, Olen Eddie Hutchison, appeals as of right from the Campbell County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief. He was convicted in 1991 for the first degree murder of Hugh Huddleston and received the death penalty. He was also convicted of conspiracy to take a life and solicitation to commit first degreemurder for which he received a total sentence of twenty-two years. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Hutchison, 898 S.W.2d 161 (Tenn. 1994), cert. denied, U.S. , 116 S. Ct. 137 (1995). We affirm the denial of postconviction
relief.

John C. Tomlinson vs. State of Tennessee
03C01-9610-CR-00389
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

The appellant, John C. Tomlinson, appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. In April 1983, the appellant was convicted in the Davidson County Criminal Court of aggravated kidnaping and two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon. For these convictions, he was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment. In December 1983, the appellant was convicted in the Wilson County Criminal Court of aggravated rape and armed robbery resulting in sentences totaling 35 years. The appellant is currently confined at the Northeast Correctional Center where he is serving an effective sentence of 65 years for the convictions from both counties. The appellant now appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Specifically, the appellant contends that the trial court’s summary dismissal denied him his right to due process of the law.

State of Tennessee vs. Telly M. Slayon
02C01-9601-CR-00013
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge John P. Colton, Jr.

On February 10, 1995, Appellant Telly Slayton was found guilty by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of murder in the perpetration of robbery in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated Section 39-13-202(2) (Supp. 1996). The trial court ordered a sentence of life imprisonment. On appeal, Appellant raises three issues for review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient as a matter of law to sustain the conviction ; (2) whether the trial court erred in overruling Appellant’s motion to suppress his statement given to police officers; and (3) whether the trial court erred in admitting, over Appellant’s objection, a photograph of the victim taken while the victim was alive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

John Wayne Slate, Sr.,. v. State of Tennessee Board of Paroles, et al.
01A01-9704-CH-00155
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

The captioned plaintiff, a prisoner in custody of the Department of Correction awaiting execution has appealed from a decision of the Board of Paroles denying his request for parole. His death sentence has been stayed by a federal court which ordered a retrial of the issue of punishment. This retrial has not yet taken place.

Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. D/B/A South Central Bell Telephone Co., v. Tennessee Regulatory Authority, et al.
01A01-9601-BC-00008
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.

This consolidated appeal of three separate proceedings involves the efforts of BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. to take advantage of the 1995 legislation easing the traditional regulatory burdens on telecommunications service providers. After making significant adjustments in BellSouth’s reported operating results, the Tennessee Public Service Commission determined that BellSouth’s current earned rate of return exceeded its authorized rate of return and that BellSouth was receiving $56.285 million in excess revenues. The Commission directed BellSouth to reduce its rates by $56.285 million and set the initial rates in the company’s price regulation plan accordingly. On this appeal, BellSouth and another intervening party take issue with the procedures employed by the Commission to consider and act upon BellSouth’s application for a price regulation plan. We have determined that these proceedings were not preempted by the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. We have also determined that the General Assembly did not give the Commission authority to adjust BellSouth’s reported operating results and that the Commission should have convened a contested case hearing when BellSouth took issue with the Commission’s decision to adjust its reported operating results. Accordingly, we vacate the Commission’s January 23, 1996 order and all earlier related orders.

Ralph Moore Creswell v. Billie Creswell Duff
01A01-9702-CH-00059
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Henry D. Bell

This complaint was filed July 17, 1978, by a Conservator seeking an accounting from a Trustee - Executrix.
 

George M. Bond v. Com-Ther, Inc.
01A01-9704-CV-00149
Authoring Judge: Senior Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Judge Don R. Ash

The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a “Contract Services Agreement” in 1994 which provided, as pertinent to this case, that either party might terminate it at any time by giving 30 days notice to the other. On May 19, 1995, the defendant informed the plaintiff by letter that “ . . . we are discontinuing our relationship with you for Physical Therapy services, effective May 19, 1995. Normal procedure warrants a 30 day notice, however, in light of numerous complaints regarding your services, we feel it is necessary to cease services immediately.” This suit was filed in the General Sessions Court to recover compensation for 30 days. The plaintiff insists that because he was entitled to 30 days notice of termination of the contract, he is entitled to recover compensation during this period in accordance with his earnings history.

Lions Head Homeowners' Association, et. al. v. Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals, Metropolitan Government of Nashville, Davidson County, TN and the Martin Companies, Inc.
01A01-9611-CH-00505
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

This appeal stems from a decision of the Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals to grant a conditional use permit for a medical office building and parking garage adjacent to St. Thomas Hospital. The homeowners’ association of a neighboring condominium development and other parties who opposed the project filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court for Davidson County. The trial court heard the case without a jury and upheld the Board’s decision to grant the conditional use permit. On this appeal, the project’s opponents take issue with the procedures followed by the Board in granting the conditional use permit and also assert that the project does not comply with the Zoning Ordinances for the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County. We affirm.