Editorial
Front Page - Friday, February 4, 2011
Case Digests: Tennesse Court of Appeals Syllabus
In Re Conservatorship of Karubah Carnahan.
Hamilton County – In this conservatorship case, a daughter filed a petition asking the court to appoint her as the conservator of her father, who had experienced cognitive decline after a stroke and required full-time care in an inpatient facility. The father’s spouse protested the appointment of the daughter as the conservator and requested that a neutral third party be appointed instead. After a hearing, the trial court determined that the daughter was the appropriate person to serve as conservator. The spouse appeals. We affirm.
Judith Anne Shaw v. Jason Patrick Shaw.
Hamilton County – In this divorce case, we granted the request of Jason Patrick Shaw (“Father”) for a Tenn. R. App. P. 10 extraordinary appeal on three issues: (1) whether the trial court erred when it refused to grant his request for access to his older daughter’s counseling records with a licensed clinical social worker; (2) whether the trial court properly prohibited Father from taking this daughter’s deposition, and (3) whether the trial court erred when it refused Father visitation with any of the parties’ three children. As to the first issue, we remand this case to the trial court for a determination of whether furnishing the social worker’s records would be against the daughter’s best interest, as discussed more fully in this Opinion. We vacate the trial court’s refusal to allow Father to depose the daughter. Finally, we vacate the trial court’s refusal to allow Father any meaningful visitation and remand for the trial court to determine an appropriate supervised visitation schedule.
Floyd E. Bell v. Eller Media Company, A Tennessee Corporation.
Shelby County – Pursuant to a lease agreement, defendant was allowed to place a billboard on plaintiff’s building. After the billboard allegedly caused damage to plaintiff’s building, plaintiff notified defendant. Defendant then sent a letter to plaintiff terminating the lease, but plaintiff claims defendant later agreed to remove the billboard and make repairs to his building. When such repair and complete removal were not made, plaintiff filed suit alleging breach of contract and promissory estoppel. Defendant moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted, and we affirm.
Dan Kenneth Kelly v. Sonya Frances Kelly.
Robertson County – In this post-divorce dispute, the trial court denied the petitions of both parents to modify the parenting time but granted the mother’s petition to modify child support. We affirm the trial court’s decision with respect to parenting time but reverse and remand for a proper determination regarding modification of child support.
Clayton Ward v. Illinois Central Railroad Company.
Shelby County – Plaintiff, a railroad employee, filed this lawsuit pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, alleging that his left ankle injury was caused by his working conditions. The railroad filed a motion for summary judgment based upon the three-year statute of limitations. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment but subsequently granted the railroad’s motion for permission to seek an interlocutory appeal. We granted the railroad’s application for an interlocutory appeal and now affirm the trial court’s decision to deny the motion for summary judgment.
Shelby County Health Care Corporation, d/b/a Regional Medical Center v. John Baumgartner, Elizabeth Baumgartner, a/k/a Daray Baumgartner, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, and Hartford Accident and Indemnity.
Shelby County – This appeal involves the impairment of a hospital lien. The individual defendant was treated at the plaintiff hospital for injuries sustained in an automobile accident caused by a third party tortfeasor. The patient incurred substantial medical expenses. The hospital filed a hospital lien for the amount of the patient’s medical expenses. Subsequently, the patient received insurance proceeds from his own insurance company under his uninsured motorist coverage, and another payment from the tortfeasor’s insurance company. Nothing was paid to the plaintiff hospital. The hospital filed this lawsuit against both insurance companies for impairment of its hospital lien. The parties filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted in part the hospital’s motion for summary judgment. Against the patient’s own insurance company, the hospital was awarded one-third of the monies the patient received. Against the tortfeasor’s insurance company, the hospital was awarded an amount equal to the policy coverage limit. The hospital now appeals, arguing that it was entitled to recover from both insurance companies jointly the reasonable cost of the hospital services rendered to the
patient. The insurance companies also appeal, arguing that there was no impairment of the lien and that, if there was impairment, the hospital’s recovery should have been limited to one-third of the payments made to the patient. We affirm in part and reverse in part, finding that the hospital’s lien was valid and was impaired, but that the hospital can recover only for the damages caused by the impairment of its lien.
Erda M. Gonzalez v. Neftali Gonzalez.
Montgomery County – Mr. Gonzalez filed a petition to alter his final divorce decree, alleging that the decree violates federal law by allowing the wife to receive more than 50 percent of his military retirement. The trial court denied relief. Mr. Gonzalez appealed. We affirm, holding that federal law does not limit Tennessee trial courts to awarding a maximum of 50 percent of a former service member’s retirement to the ex-spouse.
|
|