You are on page 1of 11

TAM-BYTES

June 5, 2017
Vol. 20, No. 23

TAM Webinars

Preparing Title Opinions and Tackling Title Insurance Issues in


Tennessee, 60-minute webinar presented by Marcy S. Shelton, with
Reno & Cavanaugh in Nashville, on Tuesday, July 11, at 10 a.m.
(Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/title-071117
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

Gun Dealer and Owner Liability in Tennessee: Client Counsel Tips


and Techniques, 60-minute webinar presented by James E. Wagner
with Frantz McConnell & Seymour in Knoxville, on Tuesday, July 18,
at 10 a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/guns-071817
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

Foreclosure Process and Case Management Strategies for


Tennessee Attorneys, 60-minute webinar presented by Mark
McGrady with Farrar & Bates in Nashville, on Thursday, July 20, at 10
a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/foreclosure-072017
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

Key Elements of Wills in Tennessee, 60-minute webinar presented


by Julie Travis Moss, with The Blair Law Firm in Brentwood, on
Thursday, July 27, at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/wills-072717
or call us at (800) 727-5257.
Tennessee Series LLC: Client Counsel Best Practices for Liability
Separation, 60-minute webinar presented by Michael Goode, with
Stites & Harbison in Nashville, on Wednesday, August 2, at 10 a.m.
(Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/series-LLC-080217
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

Tennessee Probate Case Law and Legislative Update: What


Attorneys Need to Know, 60-minute webinar presented by Rebecca
Blair, with The Blair Law Firm in Brentwood, on Thursday, August 3,
at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/probate-080317
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

Parental Relocation in Tennessee: The Impact of the Aragon


Decision, 60-minute webinar presented by Kevin Shepherd, with
Shepherd and Associates PC in Maryville, on Wednesday, August 9, at
10 a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/relocation-080917
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

2017 Tennessee DUI Defense Update: Attorney Tips for the Best
Possible Outcome, 60-minute webinar presented by Joseph Fuson,
with Freeman & Fuson in Nashville, on Thursday, August 10, at 10 a.m.
(Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/dui-081017
or call us at (800) 727-5257.

On-Site Events
Personal Injury Law Conference for Tennessee Attorneys
*Expanded to 2 days this year*

WHEN: THURSDAY & FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21-22


WHERE: Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn 15 hours of CLE 12 hours of GENERAL and 3 hours of DUAL
SPEAKERS: Judge Thomas Frierson, Court of Appeals, Eastern District; Judge Ross
Hicks, Circuit Court, 19th Judicial District (Montgomery & Robertson counties);
Chancellor Ellen Hobbs Lyle, Davidson County Chancery Court/Business Court; Judge
Walter Kurtz, former Davidson County Circuit judge/former Tennessee senior judge;
Laura Baker, Law Offices of John Day, Brentwood; Brandon Bass, Law Offices of
John Day, Brentwood; J. Randolph Bibb, Lewis Thomason, Nashville; Jamie Durrett,
Batson Nolan, Clarksville; James Exum, Leitner, Williams, Dooley & Napolitan,
Chattanooga; Steve Gillman, Pryor, Priest, Harber, Floyd & Coffey, Knoxville; Michael
H. Johnson, Howard, Tate, Sowell, Wilson, Leathers, & Johnson, Nashville; Mary
Ellen Morris, Kinnard, Clayton & Beveridge, Nashville; Bryan Moseley, Moseley &
Moseley, Murfreesboro; William J. Rieder, Spears, Moore, Rebman & Williams,
Chattanooga; and Melanie Stewart, Heaton & Moore, Memphis.

HIGHLIGHTS: Ramifications of the Dedmon decision; researching automobile


insurance coverage; latest trends in suits against motor vehicle manufacturers;
admissibility of expert testimony is the expert competent and will the testimony
substantially assist the jury?; subrogation and lien issues Medicaid/Medicare liens,
hospital liens, and workers comp liens; effective motion practice for todays civil
practitioner; assessing the viability of a slip, trip, and fall case; effective use of social
media in litigation; medical discovery and special issues in uninsured/underinsured
motorist cases; advanced deposition strategies; review of recent personal injury cases;
accepting, declining, and terminating legal representation; and attorney ethics conflicts
of interest, attorney fees, and social media.

PRICING: $497 (full program) ($427 for any additional attendees from same firm);
$347 (one day only); and $247 (materials only)
*Take $50 off until August 11 (early bird discount)*

For more information, visit www.mleesmith.com/tn-personal-injury-law or call (800) 727-5257.

12th annual
Family Law Conference for Tennessee Practitioners
WHEN: THURSDAY & FRIDAY, OCTOBER 12-13 and
THURSDAY & FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30 & DECEMBER 1
WHERE: Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn 15 hours of CLE 12 hours of GENERAL and 3 hours of DUAL

OCTOBER FACULTY: David Anthony, Bone McAllester Norton, Nashville; Dawn


Coppock, Strawberry Plains attorney; Sandy Garrett, Chief Disciplinary Counsel, Board
of Professional Responsibility; Jason Hicks, Moore, Rader, Fitzpatrick & York,
Cookeville; C. Jay Ingrum, Phillips & Ingrum, Gallatin; Stanley A. Kweller, Jackson,
Kweller, McKinney, Hayes, Lewis & Garrett, Nashville; Sean J. Martin, Martin Heller
Potempa & Sheppard, Nashville; Chancellor Larry McMillan, chancery court, 19th
Judicial District (Montgomery and Robertson counties); Marlene Eskind Moses, MTR
Family Law, Nashville; Phillip R. Newman, Puryear, Newman & Morton, Nashville;
Judge Phillip Robinson, circuit court, Davidson County; Kevin Shepherd, Maryville
attorney; Greg Smith, Stites & Harbison, Nashville; Scott Womack, Lattimore Black
Morgan & Cain, Nashville; and Judge Thomas Wright, circuit court, 3rd Judicial District
(Greeene, Hamblen, Hancock & Hawkins counties)

DECEMBER FACULTY: Amy J. Amundsen, Rice, Amundsen & Caperton, Memphis;


David Anthony, Bone McAllester Norton, Nashville; Judge Mike Binkley, circuit court,
21st Judicial District (Hickman, Lewis, Perry, and Williamson counties); Chancellor
Jerri S. Bryant, chancery court, 10th Judicial District (Bradley, McMinn, Monroe, and
Polk counties); Judge Robert L. Childers, retired circuit court judge, Shelby County;
Dawn Coppock, Strawberry Plains attorney; Jason Hicks, Moore, Rader, Fitzpatrick &
York, Cookeville; C. Jay Ingrum, Phillips & Ingrum, Gallatin; Chancellor Larry
McMillan, chancery court, 19th Judicial District (Montgomery and Robertson counties);
Marlene Eskind Moses, MTR Family Law, Nashville; Phillip R. Newman, Puryear,
Newman & Morton, Nashville; Judge Phillip Robinson, circuit court, Davidson County;
Kevin Shepherd, Maryville attorney; Eileen Burkhalter Smith, Disciplinary Counsel,
Board of Professional Responsibility; and Greg Smith, Stites & Harbison, Nashville

HIGHLIGHTS: Protecting a clients separate assets; dividing/valuing marital


property; orders of protection/domestic violence issues; relative/stepparent/adult
adoptions; technology for the family law practitioner; modifying permanent
parenting plans; practical tips from judges across the state; hot topics in child
custody/property division; tax issues in divorce; civil and criminal contempt in
family matters; use of trusts in family law practice; discovery abuses and
remedies; dealing with children in a divorce case; tips for effective direct/cross-
examination; case law/legislative update; ethics and professionalism in family
law practice; and attorneys ethical use of social media

PRICING: $497 (full program) ($427 for any additional attendees from same firm);
$347 (one day only); and $247 (materials only)
$50 early bird discount until September 1 (October conference)
$50 early bird discount until October 20 (December conference)

For more information, visit www.mleesmith.com/family-law-conference or call (800) 727-5257.

10th annual
Tennessee Real Estate Law Conference
WHEN: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20
WHERE: Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn 7.5 hours of CLE 6.5 hours of GENERAL and 1 hour of DUAL

SPEAKERS: Kim A. Brown, Sherrard Roe Voigt & Harbison, PLC, Nashville; Jason
Holleman, West Nashville Law Group, Nashville; Anita I. Lotz, Farris Bobango PLC,
Memphis; Michael Patton, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC,
Memphis; Elizabeth C. Sauer, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC,
Nashville; Brooks R. Smith, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Nashville; Wesley D.
Turner, Gullett Sanford Robinson & Martin PLLC, Nashville; Heather Howell Wright,
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Nashville

HIGHLIGHTS: Kim Brown touches on many of the aspects of a commercial real estate
transaction by looking at resources and samples of documents that help to address the
various aspects of the transaction; Brooks Smith looks at inspection and diligence issues,
representations and warranties, covenants, and other details to making sure the sale goes
smoothly; Michael Patton reviews what events are covered by title insurance, how to
make a claim, and why title insurance companies deny claims and also discusses
litigation, arbitration, and the bad faith penalty; Heather Wright gives an overview of
insurance provisions in commercial leases, including coverage of tenant-installed fixtures
and improvements, coverage for damages and destruction of property, and waivers of
subrogation; Elizabeth Sauer explains special considerations for commercial and
investment transactions, including entity formation, CAP rate, zoning concerns, and 1031
exchanges; Anita Lotz details the closing process for commercial real estate
transactionsopening the closing, reviewing the sale agreement, reviewing the closing
package, and preparing and approving the documents and gives examples of closing
checklists; Jason Holleman reviews ethical concerns in boundary law, including attorney
fees, confidentiality, communication with unrepresented parties, and conflicts of interest;
and Wes Turner updates attorneys on the latest appellate court cases and legislation in
the real estate law area.

PRICING: $377 (full program) ($297 for any additional attendees from same firm);
and $197 (materials only)
*Take $50 off until September 8 (early bird discount)*

For more information, visit www.mleesmith.com/trel or call (800) 727-5257.

IN THIS WEEKS TAM-Bytes

Supreme Court holds defendant had no appeal as of right under TRAP


3(b) from trial courts denial of his TRCrP 41(g) motion for return of
property, i.e., guns and other related items from defendants home,
seized during criminal investigation;
Court of Appeals reverses grant of summary judgment to defendant
hospital on ground that plaintiffs could not establish that they
witnessed or perceived injury-producing event for purposes of
negligent infliction of emotional distress claim based on defendants
failure to provide care to plaintiffs child;
Court of Appeals reiterates that, pursuant to In re Bernard T., putative
fathers parental rights may not be terminated on ground of failure to
establish paternity or exercise parentage under TCA 36-1-
113(g)(9)(A);
Court of Appeals says that in only one ground for termination of
parental rights, i.e., termination as result of abandonment by failure to
provide suitable home, must Department of Childrens Services
demonstrate its reasonable effort to reunify parent and child; and
Court of Criminal Appeals says persuasive precedent from other
jurisdictions is not sufficient basis for applying binding appellate
precedent exception to exclusionary rule.

SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: When defendants TRCrP 41(g) motion for


return of his seized property was denied by trial court, defendant had no
appeal as of right under TRAP 3(b) from trial courts denial of his motion;
when defendant does not file motion to suppress and waives any non-
jurisdictional defects in proceedings by entry of guilty plea, TRAP 3(b) does
not afford defendant appeal as of right from trial courts denial of TRCrP
41(g) motion; State v. Mayberry, 12 TAM 8-18 (Tenn.Cr.App. 1987), which
interpreted TRCrP 41(g) as open-ended vehicle for return of seized property,
is overruled; Advisory Commission on Rules of Practice and Procedure is
encouraged to consider whether TRCrP 41(g) should be amended to provide
procedure for defendants or aggrieved third parties to seek return of property
seized, either lawfully or unlawfully, during criminal investigation. State v.
Rowland, 6/2/17, Jackson, Lee, unanimous, 8 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/rowlandray.opn_.pdf

COURT OF APPEALS

TORTS: Trial court erred in granting partial summary judgment to defendant


hospital on ground that plaintiffs could not establish that they witnessed or
perceived injury-producing event for purposes of their negligent infliction of
emotional distress (NIED) claim; alleged failure of defendant to provide care
to plaintiffs child despite repeated assurances from hospital that it would
occur, constitutes injury-producing event that was witnessed by plaintiffs; to
adopt sudden occurrence rule, as urged by defendant, would be to impose new
limitation on Tennessee NIED jurisprudence that has never before been
recognized; adopting blanket rule disallowing NIED claims involving medical
negligence, as defendant suggests, conflicts with prior Tennessee case law
wherein medical negligence served as predicate tort for NIED claims.
Henderson v. Vanderbilt University, 5/31/17, Nashville, Stafford, dissent by
Gibson, 36 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/henderson_timothy_waymond_opn.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/henderson.rodney.diss_.opn_.pdf

EMPLOYMENT: In suit against employer alleging that general manager


sexually harassed employee during her employment at employers restaurant,
evidence did not preponderate against trial courts finding that employee
failed to prove that sexual conduct between her and general manager was
unwanted, and hence, employee was unable to show harassment; evidence
did not preponderate against trial courts alternative ruling that employer
established affirmative defense that it exercised reasonable care to prevent
and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior and that employee
unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective
opportunities provided by employer or to avoid harm otherwise. Barnett v.
B.F. Nashville Inc., 5/30/17, Nashville, Susano, 23 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/barnett.tysheka.opn_.pdf

EMPLOYMENT: When judgment in employment discrimination case


involving two plaintiffs was reversed on appeal as to one plaintiff and
affirmed as to other plaintiff and when trial court, on remand, determined
that specific attorney fees chargeable to each plaintiff could not be
determined, trial court did not abuse discretion in reducing previous award
of attorney fees and costs by 50%. Goree v. United Parcel Service Inc.,
6/2/17, Jackson, Armstrong, 8 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/goreemitch2opn.pdf

COMMERCIAL LAW: When plaintiffs refinanced mortgage on their


house and property and obtained new loan from mortgage company,
mortgage company transferred servicing of mortgage to defendant, and
defendant foreclosed and sold property according to express terms of
mortgage note and deed of trust after plaintiffs had been in default for
multiple years and after multiple failed attempts to seek loan modification,
trial court properly granted defendant summary judgment on plaintiffs
claims for breach of contract and covenant of good faith and fair dealing,
promissory estoppel, and intentional misrepresentation; plaintiffs assert
defendants agents made oral representation to plaintiffs encouraging them
to begin loan modification process, to cease payments during review, and to
submit numerous documents which led them to believe defendant would
postpone foreclosure and review their loan modification to completion for
possible acceptance or denial, but any alleged oral contract or modification
is presumptively barred by both statute of frauds and express terms of note.
Jackson v. CitiMortgage Inc., 5/31/17, Jackson, McClarty, 18 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jacksonljopn.pdf

FAMILY LAW: Evidence did not preponderate against trial courts


designation of mother as childs primary residential parent based on trial
courts completion of proper best interest analysis pursuant to TCA 36-6-
106(a); determination of what is in childs best interest does not call for rote
examination of each and every factor and then determination of whether sum
of factors tips in favor of or against parent best interest analysis could turn on
single factor. Paschedag v. Paschedag, 5/31/17, Nashville, Gibson, 8 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/paschedag.danial.opn_.pdf

FAMILY LAW: In termination of parental rights case, trial judge erred in


terminating fathers parental rights to one of his three children on ground of
failure to establish paternity or exercise parentage under TCA 36-1-
113(g)(9)(A) when, pursuant to In re Bernard T., putative biological fathers,
who are on par with legal parent or guardian, are not liable to having their
parental rights terminated on this ground. In re Candice H., 5/31/17,
Nashville, Swiney, 20 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/inrecandiceh695.opn_.pdf

FAMILY LAW: Evidence supported termination of putative fathers parental


rights to child on ground of failure to manifest ability and willingness to assume
legal and physical custody of child when father was re-incarcerated due to his
own conduct of failing to report or do what was necessary to stay out of jail in
order to care for child; as general rule, Department of Childrens Services (DCS)
is not required to prove that it exerted reasonable efforts as precondition to
terminating parents parental rights, and in only one ground for termination, i.e.,
termination as result of abandonment by failure to provide suitable home, which
expressly references DCSs reasonable efforts, must DCS demonstrate its
reasonable effort to reunify parent and child; parents mere status as inmate does
not clearly and convincingly establish that placing child in parents legal and
physical custody would pose risk of substantial harm to physical or psychological
welfare of child. In re E.C., 6/6/17, Knoxville, Stafford, 23 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/in_re__e.c._0.pdf

FAMILY LAW: In case in which father, who resides in Texas, filed motion
seeking to vacate trial courts previous child support orders in Tennessee,
alleging that Tennessee court had no personal jurisdiction over him, and
State of Tennessee (State), acting on behalf of mother, asserted that father
had consented to courts exercise of personal jurisdiction by previously
seeking administrative review of child support award, trial court erred in
determining that its exercise of personal jurisdiction over father was proper;
letter or other document sent to State by father that was not intended to be
filed with trial court would not constitute filing of pleading sufficient to
waive issue of personal jurisdiction; because father did not enter general
appearance in case and did not file responsive document having the effect
of waiving any contest to personal jurisdiction, trial courts reliance on
TCA 36-5-2201(2) as basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over father
was in error; trial court erred in relying on TCA 36-5-2201(8) as basis for
exercising personal jurisdiction over father when only contact that father had
with Tennessee was his single two-hour visit to Tennessee to locate children
in 1999 or 2000, and this one visit, standing alone, was insufficient to
establish minimum contacts with Tennessee; fact that father might have paid
child support to mother that she received in Tennessee or fact that father
may have been served with process in Texas are both irrelevant to issue of
personal jurisdiction over father in Tennessee. State ex rel. Spurlock v.
Torres, 5/30/17, Jackson, Frierson, 17 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/spurlockbettyopn.pdf

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

EVIDENCE: In aggravated assault case, trial court properly allowed police


officer to testify regarding his opinion that victim was the most terrified
crime victim he had ever seen when evidence was relevant to show that
victim was afraid of defendant and that she feared he would return and harm
her after first incident at apartment complex; officers testimony regarding
victims degree of fear during interim between defendants two appearances
at her apartment complex was relevant. State v. Waters, 5/31/17, Nashville,
Thomas, 18 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/waters.pdf

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: In case in which defendant was arrested on


two separate occasions for criminal trespass, searches of defendants person
incident to those arrests produced 10.1 grams and 4 grams of marijuana,
respectively, and defendant was subsequently indicted on two counts of
felony possession of marijuana, trial judge properly granted defendants
motion to suppress marijuana when officer lacked probable cause to support
arrest and no good-faith exception to exclusionary rule existed; persuasive
precedent from other jurisdictions is not sufficient basis for applying
binding appellate precedent exception to exclusionary rule. State v.
McElrath, 5/31/17, Jackson, Dyer, 7 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/mcelrathj_opinion.pdf
PUBLIC CHAPTER

CRIMINAL LAW: If person is charged with financial exploitation that


involves taking or loss of property over $5,000, prosecutor may file petition
with court to freeze funds, assets, or property of defendant for purposes of
restitution to victim. 2017 PC 466, effective 7/1/17, 5 pages.
http://publications.tnsosfiles.com/acts/110/pub/pc0466.pdf

TRIAL COURTS

CIVIL PROCEDURE: With one exception, defendant, through production


of large spreadsheet, made 67,000 invoices susceptible to filtering and to
queries, and combination of production of all 67,000 documents and
interactive spreadsheet for data, complies with TRCP 34.02(3) that If a
request does not specify the form or forms for producing electronically
stored information, a responding party must produce the information in a
form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form or forms that
are reasonably usable; to enable plaintiff to know which documents out of
67,000 defendant believes are responsive to different criterion stated in
Requests for Production 11, 13, 14, and 15, it is ordered that for each of
these requests, by 6/9/17, defendant shall provide to plaintiff explanation,
step by step, of columns it goes to on spreadsheet and filters it uses to arrive
at criterion for each request. Covenant Dove LLC v. Pharmerica Corp.,
5/8/17, Davidson Chancery, Lyle, 10 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/docs/covenant_dove_llc_v._pharmericacorp._16-541-bc_-_5-8-17_order.pdf

COURT OF WORKERS COMP CLAIMS

WORKERS COMPENSATION: Employee is likely to prevail at hearing


on merits in proving her entitlement to panel of physicians when employee
testified that she had no problems with her left arm, back, shoulder, and neck
before she began relying heavily on use of her left arm following workplace
injury to her right arm and although doctor declared employees condition
degenerative, it is not clear whether increased use of her left side following
injury to her right hand caused otherwise benign condition to become
symptomatic; employee is unlikely to succeed at hearing on merits in
proving her entitlement to temporary disability benefits when employee
received accommodation from her employer to work within her restrictions
for her compensable injury and there is no medical proof at this time
definitively linking her neck, back and left arm injuries to her work for
employer. Evans v. JRN Inc., 3/15/17, Nashville, Baker, 8 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1758&context=utk_workerscomp

WORKERS COMPENSATION: When employee, administrative or


clerical assistant for Campbell County, alleged that when she returned to
work on 8/23/16 from sick leave due to stress and harassment from County
Clerk, County Clerk began to verbally harass her and poked her in nose and
grabbed her arm when she attempted to call police, employee did not come
forward with evidence supporting essential element of medical causation
with regard to her alleged mental injury when, although medical records
mention incident at work, they contain no reference to physical injuries and
no medical provider concluded that 8/23/16 work incident caused sudden or
unusual stressful event that contributed more than 50% to need for
employees treatment and when although nurse practitioner stated that work
stressors are known to be factor in some exacerbations of Crohn disease, she
did not say that 8/23/16 work incident caused exacerbation in employees
Crohns disease. Green v. Campbell County Government, 3/16/17,
Knoxville, Lowe, 7 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1759&context=utk_workerscomp

WORKERS COMPENSATION: Although employee suffered injury


while working for employer without workers compensation insurance, he is
not eligible for benefits from Bureau of Workers Compensation Uninsured
Employers Fund because employee testified he was living in Kentucky when
injured; under Uninsured Employers Fund Benefits Provision Act, only
Tennessee residents are eligible for benefits. Reed v. Garrison, 3/14/17,
Nashville, Baker, 7 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1757&context=utk_workerscomp

If you would like a copy of the full text of any of these opinions, simply
click on the link provided or, if no link is provided, you may respond to
this e-mail or call us at (615) 661-0248 in order to request a copy. You
may also view and download the full text of any state appellate court
decision by accessing the states web site by clicking here:
http://www.tncourts.gov