TAM-BYTES

September 25, 2017

Vol. 20, No. 39

TAM Webinars

Obtaining and Using Cell Phone Records in Tennessee, 60-minute

webinar presented by Russell Taber, with Riley, Warnock & Jacobson in
Nashville, on Thursday, November 2, at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/cell-110217
or call (800) 727-5257

Deposition Best Practices for Successful Attorneys: How to Prepare,

Take, and Defend, 60-minute webinar presented by Todd Presnell, with
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings in Nashville, on Tuesday, November 7, at
10 a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/depositions-110717
or call (800) 727-5257

Winning Your Civil Rights Violation Argument: Excessive Force, False

Arrest, & Malicious Prosecution, 90-minute webinar presented by Bryan
Moseley, with Moseley & Moseley in Murfreesboro, on Thursday,
November 9, at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/civil-rights-110917

Mastering E-Discovery and Legal Data Management: Tech Tips for

Non-Tech Attorneys, 60-minute webinar presented by Paul Zimmerman,
with Christian & Small in Birmingham, on Tuesday, November 14, at 10
a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/tech-111417
or call (800) 727-5257

Suing Tennessee Cities and Counties: Ins and Outs of the

Governmental Tort Liability Act, 60-minute webinar presented by Emily
Taylor, with Watson, Roach, Batson, Rowell & Lauderback in Knoxville, on
Wednesday, November 15, at 10 a.m. (Central), 11 a.m. (Eastern).
For more information, visit: www.mleesmith.com/gtla-111517
or call (800) 727-5257
 On-Site Events

Tennessee Workers Comp Conference

WHEN: WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY & FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8-10
WHERE: Nashville Hilton Airport
CLE: Earn 15 hours of CLE 14 hours of GENERAL and 1 hour of DUAL

SPEAKERS: WORKERS COMP JUDGES: Judge Marshall Davidson; Judge

Pamela Johnson; and Chief Judge Ken Switzer. TENNESSEE BUREAU OF
WORKERS COMPENSATION: Troy Haley. WORKERS COMP/EMPLOYMENT
LAW ATTORNEYS: Mary Dee Allen, Wimberly Lawson Wright Daves & Jones PLLC;
Fred Baker, Wimberly Lawson Wright Daves & Jones PLLC; Leslie Bishop, Lewis,
Thomason, King, Krieg, & Waldrop, P.C.; Kitty Boyte, Constangy, Brooks, Smith &
Prophete, LLP; Catherine Dugan, Peterson White; Frank Gallina, Parker, Lawrence,
Cantrell & Smith; Howard M. Kastrinsky, King & Ballow; Rockforde (Rocky) D. King,
Egerton, McAfee, Armistead & Davis, P.C.; Charles (Chuck) J. Mataya, Bradley Arant
Boult Cummings LLP; Marshall McClarnon, Ponce Law; Lynn C. Peterson, Lewis,
Thomason, King, Krieg & Waldrop, P.C.; Mallory Schneider Ricci, Constangy, Brooks,
Smith & Prophete, LLP; Steven L. Shields, Jackson, Shields, Yeiser & Holt; Steven N.
Snyder, Jr., McAngus Goudelock & Courie; and Kenneth D. Veit, Leitner, Williams,
Dooley & Napolitan PLLC. OTHERS: Wendy Fisher, Safety Compliance Manager with
Tennessee OSHA; Dr. Jeffrey Hazlewood, Board Certified in Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation, subspecialty Board Certification in Pain Medicine; and Dawn Trojan-
Randle, Claim Specialist at Brentwood Services.

HIGHLIGHTS: Insight from judges on the Court of Workers Compensation Claims

and the Workers Compensation Appeals Board; a panel discussion with attorneys and
physicians on the medical and legal determinations of causation in a workers comp case;
challenges faced by employers when dealing with social media in the workplace; tips on
how to avoid the imposition of penalties; a doctors perspective on the opioid epidemic;
interplay between workers comp, the ADA, and the FMLA; termination and retaliation
issues; attorney track also includes a session on whats new with Medicare set-asides,
ethical issues arising during mediation, medical issues in a workers comp claim, the
settlement process; hot topics from the plaintiffs perspective, and a panel discussion
featuring defense and plaintiffs attorneys; and review of the latest cases from the
Workers Compensation Appeals Panels, Workers Compensation Appeals Board, and
Court of Workers Compensation Claims.

PRICING: $547 (full program) ($477 for any additional attendees from same firm
or subscribers to Tennessee Workers Comp Reporter or the Tennessee Employment
Law Letter); $347 (Thursday only); and $247 (materials only)

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

 Law Conference for Tennessee Practitioners
WHEN: THURSDAY & FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 16 & 17
WHERE: Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn 15 hours of CLE 12 hours of GENERAL and 3 hours of DUAL

SPEAKERS: Judge John W. McClarty, Court of Appeals, Eastern Section; Chancellor

Ellen Hobbs Lyle, Chancery Court/Business Court, Davidson County; Chancellor
Russell T. Perkins, Chancery Court, Davidson County; Judge Thomas S. Wright,
Circuit Court, Third Judicial District (Greene, Hamblen, Hancock, and Hawkins
counties); Brandon Bass, Law Offices of John Day, PC; Griffin S. Dunham, Dunham
Hildebrand PLLC; Christopher S. Dunn, Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP; Donald
J. Farinato, Hodges, Doughty & Carson PLLC; Sandy Garrett, Chief Disciplinary
Counsel, Board of Professional Responsibility; Michael H. Johnson, Howard, Tate,
Sowell, Wilson, Leathers & Johnson PLLC; Brenton H. Lankford, Stites & Harbison
PLLC; Rachel Schaffer Lawson, Schaffer Law Firm PLLC; Mark E. McGrady, Farrar
& Bates LLP; Melanie M. Stewart, Heaton and Moore PC; and Joseph L. Watson,
Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP

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/$397 for full program for lawyers 65 and over and lawyers in practice for two
years or less); $447 (full program less ethics); $297 (One day only); $147 (ethics
only); and $247 (materials only)

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

Family Law Conference for Tennessee Practitioners

WHEN: 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

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

Anthony, Bone McAllester Norton, Nashville; Judge Mike Binkley, circuit court, 21st
 Judicial District; Chancellor Jerri S. Bryant, chancery court, 10th Judicial District; 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; 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)

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

Probate & Estate Planning Conference for Tennessee Attorneys

WHEN: THURSDAY & FRIDAY, DECEMBER 7 & 8
WHERE: Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn 15 hours of CLE 12 hours of GENERAL and 3 hours of DUAL

SPEAKERS: Rebecca Blair, The Blair Law Firm, Brentwood; Alan L. Cates, Husch
Blackwell LLP, Chattanooga; Harlan Dodson, Dodson, Parker, Behm & Capparella
P.C., Nashville; Donald J. Farinato, Hodges, Doughty & Carson, PLLC, Knoxville;
Elizabeth B. Hickman, Goodman Callahan & Blackstone, PLLC, Nashville; Glen Kyle,
Monica Franklin & Associates, LLC, Knoxville; Patrick B. Mason, Mason Zoccola Law
Firm, PLLC, Memphis; Steve McDaniel, Williams McDaniel, Memphis; Sara E.
McManus, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Chattanooga; Hunter
R. Mobley, Howard Mobley Hayes & Gontarek, PLLC, Nashville; Jeff Mobley, Howard
Mobley Hayes & Gontarek, PLLC, Nashville; Julie Travis Moss, The Blair Law Firm,
Brentwood; and Michelle Poss, Law Office of A. Michelle Poss, Nashville

HIGHLIGHTS: Use of various trusts as estate planning tools; tips for drafting wills in
2018; trust drafting tips with samples; duties and liabilities of personal representatives;
implementing and handling conservatorships and guardianships; what to look for in
reviewing existing estate plans; dealing with tax issues when administering an estate;
using charitable trusts effectively; tips for drafting estate planning documents;
establishing a special needs trust; planning for a clients long-term care; understanding
issues that arise in small estates; probate litigation case law and legislative update; ethical
issues facing trust and estate planning attorneys; and ethical issues that arise when
choosing a client.

PRICING: $497 (full program) $70 off for any additional attendees from same
firm); $347 (One day only); and $247 (materials only)
*$50 early bird discount until November 3

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

IN THIS WEEKS TAM-Bytes

Supreme Court, in case in which trial judge made phone call to

university department concerning potential expert witnesss
qualifications, rules judges denial of motion to recuse was appropriate;
Supreme Court holds, in issue of first impression, that state
Election Code grants county election commissions implicit
authority to resolve challenge to judicial candidates qualifications
to hold office in Tennessee, including whether or not candidate
meets residency requirement;
In healthcare liability action against hospital and physicians following
death of newborn hours after delivery, Court of Appeals holds trial
court erred in issuing jury instruction on sudden emergency doctrine
when defendant physicians had time, while minimal, for reflection
and thought before deciding on best course of action; and
Court of Appeals says parental alienation may rise to level of material
change in circumstance sufficient to warrant modification of
permanent parenting plan.

SUPREME COURT

CIVIL PROCEDURE: When trial judge made phone call to university

department director concerning potential expert witnesss qualifications,
judges denial of motion to recuse was appropriate; when trial judge did not
seek this information for purpose of discrediting party or witness but to
determine whether such expert potentially would be able to provide information
helpful to resolving issues in case and also because trial judge was considering
naming court-appointed expert but was unsure of type of expert to appoint, any
knowledge that can be said to have been obtained by trial judge did not qualify
as personal knowledge pursuant to Canon 2.11 of Rules of Judicial Conduct
and does not require recusal on that basis; communication between trial judge
and university department director qualified as ex parte communication
pursuant to Canon 2.9 of Rules of Judicial Conduct, but trial courts conduct
throughout these proceedings would not give person of ordinary prudence
reason to question her impartiality, and hence, trial judges actions did not
necessitate recusal. Holsclaw v. Ivy Hall Nursing Home Inc., 9/19/17,
Knoxville, per curiam, dissent by Page, 14 pages
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jholsclawopn.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/holsclawjeaniedis.opn_.pdf

GOVERNMENT: Tennessee Election Code grants county election

commissions implicit authority to resolve challenge to judicial candidates
qualifications to hold office in Tennessee, including whether or not
candidate meets residency requirement; under Election Code, Tennessee
Coordinator of Elections and election commission had implicit authority to
conduct quasi-judicial hearing in order to effectively carry out their joint
duty to place only qualified candidates on ballot; county election
commissions decision to certify defendant as qualified candidate on ballot
was final administrative decision subject to judicial review by common law
writ of certiorari. McFarland v. Pemberton, 9/20/17, Knoxville, Kirby,
dissents by Clark & Lee, 66 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/mcfarland.williams.cor_.opn_.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/mcfarlandw.disl_.opn_.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/mcfarland.william.dissentck.opn_.pdf

WORKERS COMP APPEALS BOARD

CIVIL PROCEDURE: With regard to assistance trial judge provided pro

se employee at expedited hearing trial judge conducted entirety of
employees direct and redirect examination, eliciting evidence required for
her to meet her burden of proof at expedited hearing judges risk creating
perception they are not neutral when they take it upon themselves to conduct
direct examination of witness and assist party in satisfying elements of prima
facie case or meeting his or her burden of proof. Jones v. Dollar General,
9/22/17, Hensley, 13 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1531&context=utk_workerscomp
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1874&context=utk_workerscomp
COURT OF APPEALS

TORTS: In healthcare liability suit in which plaintiff claimed that had

defendant physicians acted in medically reasonable manner when fetal
monitor indicated bradycardia, they would have proceeded with emergency
cesarean section and avoided catastrophic skull and scalp injuries that
caused babys death, and jury found in favor of defendants, testimony of
Drs. Goodwin and Hobbs approximately 30 seconds prior to defendant Dr.
Herrells arrival, in discussion with defendant Dr. Foulk, Hobbs and
Goodwin recommended that they proceed with cesarean section was not
offered to establish appropriate standard of care and causation elements
required in medical malpractice suits, and hence, trial court abused
discretion in excluding testimony if it was relevant and admissible;
testimony was relevant but it was inadmissible hearsay because specific
statements were offered to prove truth of matter asserted; exclusion of
testimony, even if admissible, was harmless when plaintiff was permitted to
establish that discussion occurred between Foulk, Goodwin, and Hobbs prior
to Herrells arrival and that another discussion occurred between defendant
physicians before attempted delivery by forceps; trial court erred in issuing
jury instruction on sudden emergency doctrine when defendant physicians
had time, while minimal, for reflection and thought before deciding on best
course of action; this error more probably than not affected outcome of this
case when Herrell classified this case as emergency of all emergencies and
Foulk claimed that plaintiff became sudden emergency at first sign of
bradycardia. Vandyke v. Foulk, 9/18/17, Knoxville, McClarty, 15 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/brittany_nicole_vandyke_v._brooke_e._foulk_m.d._et_al..pdf

COMMERCIAL LAW: When Simpsons signed membership contract with

National Fitness in 10/12, contract provided for 10-day period following
clubs opening in which members could cancel their membership, club
opened on 1/15/14, Simpsons visited club on 1/25/14 and quickly became
dissatisfied with club, Ms. Simpson spoke with National Fitnesss president
(Sloan) on 2/14/14 about canceling Simpsons membership, Sloan proposed
that Simpsons give club a couple of weeks at which point he would work
with them on their membership contract, Simpsons agreed and continued to
visit club, and on 3/10/14, Ms. Simpson contacted Sloan and requested that
membership be canceled, but National Fitness refused to accept cancellation,
trial court properly determined that Simpsons effectively exercised their right
to cancel and that they were entitled to refund of any monies paid; under
circumstances of case, a couple of weeks does not mean rigid 14 days, and
this conclusion is bolstered by fact that Ms. Simpson and Sloan both testified
that when couple of weeks was up, parties would engage in further
communication to discuss status of Simpsons membership; trial court erred
in determining that National Fitness violated Tennessee Consumer Protection
Act (TCPA) as oral modification was not deceptive as it neither caused
Simpsons to believe something that was false nor mislead them but instead
gave Simpsons additional time to cancel as they claimed. Simpson v.
National Fitness Center Inc., 9/18/17, Knoxville, Swiney, 19 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/shay_simpson_et_al._v._national_fitness_center_inc._et_al..pdf

FAMILY LAW: Parental alienation may rise to level of material change in

circumstance sufficient to warrant modification of permanent parenting plan;
in case in which trial court made finding of severe parental alienation by
father, trial court properly transferred exclusive custody of children to
mother with suspension of contact with father; when trial court ordered
mother and children to participate in Family Bridges Workshop
intervention intended to facilitate reunification of alienated parents with
alienated children and ordered father to pay majority of associated costs,
because Family Bridges may be viewed as alternative to traditional mental
health therapy, expense is more appropriately classified as mental health
treatment rather than extraordinary educational expense; trial court did not
abuse discretion, in interest of protecting childrens safety, by reporting
childrens psychiatric hospitalizations to National Instant Criminal
Background Check system upon recommendation of court-appointed expert
in forensic psychology who had evaluated children; because father was not
provided with sufficient notice of criminal contempt charges (for failing to
follow certain provisions of 2015 permanent parenting plan), trial courts
order finding father in contempt and sentencing him to eight days in jail is
vacated. McClain v. McClain, 9/21/17, Knoxville, Frierson, 67 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/ferryl_theresita_mcclain_v._richard_perry_mcclain_0.pdf

FAMILY LAW: Trial court erred in dismissing petitioners petition for

adoption and termination of parental rights based upon TCA 36-1-119,
which provides that adoption proceeding must be completed or dismissed
within one year of filing of petition unless petitioner shows good cause why
such final order should not be entered, when petitioners have shown good
cause why petition should not be dismissed petitioners were not dilatory in
prosecuting petition, and although adoption proceeding was not completed
within one year of filing of petition, this failure was through no fault of
petitioners. In re Halley M., 9/19/17, Nashville, Swiney, 6 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/inrehalleym._opn.pdf
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: In case in which defendant was convicted of

two counts of premeditated first degree murder (of Mr. and Mrs. James) and
was sentenced to death, trial court properly determined that defendant
waived his right to representation by attorney when record supports noble
effort made by trial court to convince defendant of folly of his insistence on
self-representation, but defendant rebuffed every attempt by trial court to
encourage him to accept representation; death penalties imposed on
defendant for his murders of Mr. and Mrs. James were not disproportionate
to penalty imposed for similar crimes when defendant bound 81-year-old
Mr. James and beat him, fracturing multiple ribs in process, defendant
strangled, stabbed, and cut Mr. James across neck multiple times, defendant
then bound 68-year old Mrs. James, pushed her, threw her on floor, taunted
and threatened her, and cut her across neck multiple times, defendant stole
credit cards and cash from Mrs. James purse and removed jewelry from her
house and body, and when asked why he had killed Mrs. James, defendant
said it was because she had seen his face. State v. Jones, 9/18/17,
Jackson, Easter, 35 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jones_henry_lee_opn.pdf

CRIMINAL LAW: Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of first

degree murder in perpetration of attempted robbery when defendant and his
co-defendant drove around Memphis searching for victim to rob in order to
get money for more weed, two men discussed robbery, and defendant
called people on his cell phone asking about potential licks, defendant
stopped car near victim, who was attempting to quickly walk away, co-
defendant, who was armed with defendants gun, defendant exited vehicle,
and co-defendant shot and killed victim. State v. Patterson, 9/18/17,
Jackson, Wedemeyer, 14 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/patterson_mario_opn.pdf

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: When post-conviction court found that trial

counsel failed to file motion for new trial but that petitioner was entitled to
appeal from his conviction, post-conviction court deemed trial counsels
failure to act ineffective assistance of counsel that could not simply [be]
resolved by the grant of delayed appeal primarily because of Court of
Criminal Appeals determination that thirteenth juror issue was waived on
appeal, and post-conviction court noted that trial court dismissed motion for
new trial due to lack of jurisdiction and that trial counsels failure to file
timely motion for new trial effectively denied [petitioner] the opportunity
to have the trial judge act as thirteenth juror, and, as result, post-conviction
court granted petitioner new trial, post-conviction court should have granted
delayed appeal utilizing method set forth in TCA 40-30-113(a)(3), which
authorizes filing of motion for new trial; on remand, post-conviction court
shall grant delayed appeal, petitioner shall have 30 days to file motion for
new trial, and trial court should make initial determination whether there is
adequate record for successor judge to review and make all proper
assessments of evidence presented at petitioners trial; if trial court
determines that record is adequate and witness credibility is not overriding
issue, judge should rule on any motion for new trial filed by petitioner; if
trial court determines that witness credibility was overriding issue during
original trial, and issue of original trial judges role as thirteenth juror
remains issue, then trial court, as successor judge, must determine if original
trial judge exercised his role as thirteenth juror. Torres v. State, 9/19/17,
Nashville, Easter, 9 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/torres_gabriel_c..pdf

SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Tax Injunction Act (TIA) prohibits federal courts

from hearing claims by taxpayers challenging their obligation to pay state
taxes so long as state provides adequate access to judicial review in state
courts; because plaintiff is asking federal court to free it from tax liability by
striking down Tennessee tax law and Tennessees provision for state court
review meets TIAs standard, plaintiffs claims are barred by TIA. Islamic
Center of Nashville v. State of Tennessee, 9/20/17, Moore, 14 pages, Pub.
http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/17a0220p-06.pdf

TRIAL COURTS

EVIDENCE: Motion to quash subpoena duces tecum issued by defendant to

plaintiffs accounting and tax consultants is denied; accountant privilege
does not apply because plaintiff failed to demonstrate that information
sought in subpoena duces tecum was communicated to accountants for
purpose other than preparing information designed to be disclosed, and/or
information is in possession of plaintiff, and/or information was used to
support publicly filed documents with IRS. Covenant Dove LLC v.
Pharmerica Corp., 6/27/17, Davidson Chancery, Lyle, 5 pages.
https://www.tncourts.gov/node/4870447

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Oral motion of attorney that defendant Jacobs be

treated with civility is granted; to ensure that and to eliminate unprofessional
conduct which occurred previously, trial court shall preside at deposition by
telephone; authority for court presiding at deposition is that under Tennessee
law, court has broad discretion in which to regulate discovery process.
Nissan North America Inc. v. West Covina Nissan LLC, 7/3/17, Davidson
Chancery, Lyle, 8 pages.
https://www.tncourts.gov/node/4870449

COURT OF WORKERS COMP CLAIMS

WORKERS COMPENSATION: When employee, assistant manager

employed by finance company, was returning to office from being on
smoke break with co-worker, employee opened door and entered office
with co-worker entering behind her, after walking approximately three feet
into office, employee turned around when she thought she heard co-worker
say something, in process of turning, she fell to floor, injuring her right knee,
and employer asserted that employees injury did not arise out of
employment because injury was idiopathic in nature, employee is not likely
to prevail at hearing on merits in establishing that condition or hazard
incident to her employment caused her injury. Hughes v. Security Finance,
7/18/17, Knoxville, Lowe, 6 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1856&context=utk_workerscomp

WORKERS COMPENSATION: When employee began working for

Chitwood in 5/16 as laborer installing hardwood flooring, he worked full
time at times and places that Chitwood set, employees affidavit states that
Chitwood was subcontractor for McGrath Brothers Flooring, and employee
testified that, on 6/20/16, while using table saw, blade made contact with
knot in wood, jerked and severely cut his left hand, employee was
Chitwoods employee rather than subcontractor when employee performed
work at hourly wage for 40-hour work week, which precluded other
employment, and Chitwood provided tools, set work hours, and controlled
all aspects of work site; employee provided notice to Bureau of Workers
Compensation of injury and of Chitwoods failure to secure payment of
compensation 72 days after date of injury, but TCA 50-6-801(d)(4) requires
notice in no event more than 60 days after date of injury, and hence,
employee is not eligible for application for payment from Uninsured
Employers Fund. Bland v. Chitwood, 7/24/17, Nashville, Switzer, 8 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1860&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:
www.tncourts.gov