Hamilton Herald Masthead


Front Page - Friday, June 29, 2018

Tennessee Appellate Court Opinions

State of Tennessee v. Quintis McCaleb

Case number: E2017-01381-CCA-R9-CD

Authoring judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

Originating judge: Judge Barry A. Steelman

Date filed: Friday, June 1, 2018

The State, pursuant to Rule 9 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, appeals the trial court’s grant of Defendant’s motion to suppress inculpatory statements made during his post-polygraph interview. The trial court found that the statements were voluntary but determined that they were inadmissible under Tennessee Rule of Evidence 403 because Defendant would be required to reference the polygraph examination to provide context for Defendant’s statements made during the post-polygraph interview. Concluding that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the statements, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Lorna Gibson v. Charles Bikas

Case number: E2018-00911-COA-T10B-CV

Authoring judge: Judge Brandon O. Gibson

Originating judge: Judge Pamela A. Fleenor

Date filed: Monday, June 4, 2018

Appellant sought disqualification of the trial court judge pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B. Finding no error, we affirm.

Desiree Daniels Disterdick v. John Disterdick

Case number: E2017-00743-COA-R3-CV

Authoring judge: Judge Thomas R. Frierson, II

Originating judge: Judge L. Marie Williams

Date filed: Monday, June 18, 2018

In this divorce action presenting issues concerning the classification and distribution of the parties’ assets, the trial court determined that an oil and gas investment purchased during the marriage was the wife’s separate property, as was her engagement ring. The trial court fashioned an equitable distribution of the parties’ marital property and debts and denied the wife’s claim for alimony. In doing so, the trial court excluded any consideration of assets formerly owned by the parties that were held by a trust at the time of trial. The husband has appealed. Discerning no error, we affirm.

In Re: Amynn K.

Case number: E2017-01866-COA-R3-PT

Authoring judge: Judge Thomas R. Frierson, II

Originating judge: Judge Robert D. Philyaw

Date filed: Wednesday, June 20, 2018

This is a termination of parental rights case involving the parental rights of the father, William K. (Father), to his minor child, Amynn K. (the Child), who was four years of age at the time of trial. The Child was born in 2013 to Father and Amanda S. (Mother). In April 2013, the Hamilton County Juvenile Court (trial court) granted temporary legal custody of the Child to the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services (DCS). The Child was immediately placed in foster care, where he has remained since that date. Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order on June 24, 2013, adjudicating the Child dependent and neglected due to Mother’s abandonment of the Child at the hospital following his birth. On Aug. 23, 2016, DCS filed a petition to terminate the parental rights of Mother and Father. Following a bench trial, the trial court terminated Father’s parental rights to the Child upon determining by clear and convincing evidence that Father had abandoned the Child through conduct exhibiting wanton disregard for the welfare of the Child prior to Father’s incarceration, failed to substantially comply with the requirements of the permanency plans and failed to manifest an ability and willingness to personally assume custody of and financial responsibility for the Child. The court also found clear and convincing evidence that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the best interest of the Child. Father has appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

Angela Michelle Newberry v. Jeremy Mack Newberry

Case number: E2017-00340-COA-R3-CV

Authoring judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.

Originating judge: Judge W. Neil Thomas, III

Date filed: Wednesday, June 20, 2018

In this post-divorce case, Angela Michelle Newberry appeals the trial court’s modification of the permanent parenting plan. She challenges the trial court’s decision to change the designation of primary residential parent from her to her former spouse, Jeremy Mack Newberry. She also attacks the court’s decree reducing her co-parenting time. We hold that father failed to meet his burden of establishing a material change in circumstances affecting the children’s well-being, as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 36- 6-101(a)(2)(B) (2017). Consequently, we reverse the trial court’s judgment and reinstate the parenting plan as originally agreed to by the parties and ordered by the court in the final divorce judgment.