Opinions

State vs. Bufford Barrett
02C01-9901-CC-00023
Trial Court Judge: Thomas T. Woodall

Curtis Watkins v. State of Tennessee
02C01-9808-CR-00236
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

The Petitioner, Curtis W atkins, appeals the order of the Shelby County Criminal Court denying his petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner pled guilty to aggravated rape in 1981 and received a sentence of twenty (20) years. In 1992, he filed the present petition alleging that, (1) his guilty plea was involuntary because he was not ad vised of his right again st self-incrimination, and (2) that he received ine ffective assistance of counsel.1 The trial court denied the petition after an evidentiary hearing. After a thorough re view of the record before this Court, we affirm the trial court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.

Kenneth Kerr v. Municipal Corp.
03S01-9803-CV-00032
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Rex Henry Ogle,
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. Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial court in a workers' compensation case. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). The trial judge entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and fixed his recovery at 25 percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The defendant says the evidence preponderates against the judgment. We agree with the defendant and reverse the judgment and dismiss this case. On July 11, 1994, the plaintiff was involved in an automobile accident while in the course of his employment with the defendant. The plaintiff was treated by Dr. Archer W. Bishop, Jr., an orthopedic surgeon, whose report was submitted as medical evidence in the case. Dr. Bishop's report, in essence, shows that the plaintiff had some degenerative disc disease and that he had some temporary symptoms as a result of the accident but no permanent effects therefrom. Dr. Bishop found the plaintiff had a five percent medical impairment as a result of the degenerative disc disease but no impairment as a result of the accident. The plaintiff testified concerning pain and difficulties which he was having. This is called greatly into question by Dr. Bishop's findings concerning pain: He states that he is having severe pain in his back. He even described pain in his hair, in his neck and in his skin. He seems to have complaints that outweigh his findings. Because of the complaints of pain, Dr. Bishop had an MRI done on the plaintiff. This showed no support for the plaintiff's complaints of pain. The plaintiff sought the opinion of Dr. Wade H. Penny, III, an orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Penny's report is not enlightening. It is somewhat vague as to the 2

Carl Loving v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.
03S01-9805-CH-00050
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Billy J. White,
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 suffered a back injury in a job-related accident on November 4, 1996. The contested issue was the extent of permanent disability, which the Chancellor found was 65 percent to the whole body. The defendant disagrees, appeals, and presents the issues of excessiveness and the allowance of discretionary costs for review, which is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The plaintiff, age 48, has been married 26 years, is a high school graduate, and has worked as a car salesman most of his adult life. But on November 4, 1996, he was otherwise employed at a job which required heavy lifting. While lifting a barrel filled with liquid weighing about 6 pounds, he injured his lower back, which eventually required surgery. He was released to return to work and "just sat around answering the telephone" for two weeks before he was terminated as unable to do the required work. He testified that he has looked for work elsewhere, but that "it's hard to get a job when you can't hardly do anything." He was initially seen by Dr. Steven Sanders, a neurological surgeon, on November 11, 1996. An MRI revealed a herniated disc. Conservative treatment proved ineffective, and Dr. Sanders performed a diskectomy on November 3, 1996. Based on the AMA Guidelines, he opined that the plaintiff had a ten percent impairment, and imposed permanent lifting restrictions. 2

State vs. Paris A. Weaver
03C01-9902-CR-00052
Trial Court Judge: Stephen M. Bevil

State vs. William R. Begley, III
03C01-9810-CR-00359
Trial Court Judge: Phyllis H. Miller

Diane Watters vs. William Watters
02A01-9810-CH-00306
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.

Robert Trust vs. Paul Revere
02A01-9901-CH-00021
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans

Diane Watters vs. William Watters
02A01-9810-CH-00306

Kaitlyn McCool, b/n/g Angela McCool vs. Proffitts, Inc.
03A01-9901-CV-00012

Eugene Brooks vs. T.R. Lambert
02A01-9903-CH-00066
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton

Vantage Technology, LLC
03A01-9810-CH-00333

Preston Wilson vs. CNA Ins.
02A01-9806-CV-00147
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers

Marie Cagle vs. Shannon Cass
W2001-00760-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court which dismissed an appeal from an order of the general sessions court. The basis for the trial court's order was that the general sessions court had no jurisdiction to grant an appeal to the defendant in the general sessions' action, as the ten (10) day period to appeal from general sessions court to circuit court pursuant to section 27-5-108 of the Tennessee Code Annotated had elapsed.

State vs. Jerrell Livingston
02C01-9903-CC-00084
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III

State vs. Kenneth Pickens
02C01-9901-CR-00010
Trial Court Judge: Arthur T. Bennett

State vs. Troy Godwin
02C01-9811-CC-00364
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.

State vs. Blainey D. Zachary
01C01-9810-CR-00442
Trial Court Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.

State vs. Charles Eric Goodwin
03C01-9808-CR-00275
Trial Court Judge: Douglas A. Meyer

State vs. John W. Wilcox
03C01-9808-CR-00314
Trial Court Judge: Carroll L. Ross

State vs. Jimmy Thornton
03C01-9811-CC-00384
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II

Goodwin vs. Hendersonville Police Dept.
01S01-9804-CH-00077
Trial Court Judge: Tom E. Gray

Carolyn Erwin vs. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge
03A01-9811-CV-00379

Cheryl Green vs. Hamblen Co. Dept. of Education, et al
03A01-9903-CV-00084

Ronald Bradford Waller vs. Melinda Ryan & WM. H. Cox, III
03A01-9903-CH-00100