Alan M. Prewitt

This case was a declaratory judgment action under Tennessee law seeking judicial construction of Chapter 343 of the Private Acts of 1961, filed in the Chancery Court at Nashville against the City of Memphis and other defendants. The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed and dismissed the case on its own initiative. The core reasoning was that suits against municipal corporations are inherently local actions that must be brought in the county of the city's location, and neither consent nor waiver can confer jurisdiction over the subject matter or the defendant when the action is filed in the wrong county, rendering any resulting orders void.

procedure

This case was a workers' compensation dispute in which plaintiff Turner sought benefits for a back injury sustained while installing a window for defendant Owens. The trial court determined that Turner was an employee rather than an independent contractor and that Owens had employed at least five persons for pay, rendering him subject to the workers' compensation statute. It awarded Turner compensation for a 15% permanent partial disability, including hospital bills and weekly payments at the statutory minimum. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the right to control the manner of work and to terminate the relationship at will established employee status, and that payroll records and testimony confirmed the employment of more than five persons in 1960.

labor & employment

In Thomas v. State, the defendant was convicted of second-degree murder after fatally shooting the victim multiple times during an argument at a dice game in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and was sentenced to up to fifteen years in prison. The defendant appealed, arguing that the facts did not support the conviction. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the evidence of a deliberate killing established malice sufficient for second-degree murder and that the jury was entitled to accept the state's account of the events, which placed the burden on the defendant to prove any mitigating circumstances that might reduce the offense to manslaughter or justify the homicide.

criminal law

The case involved Black youths convicted under Tennessee Code Annotated Section 39-1204 for willfully disturbing a religious assembly after they entered a church youth rally at a public amphitheater in Memphis, dispersed throughout the audience by stepping over seated people, and caused commotion that delayed the service. One defendant's appeal was dismissed for untimely filing of the bill of exceptions, but the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the convictions of the others after reviewing the uncontroverted evidence of a planned disruption. The court interpreted the statute to prohibit any willful disturbance of religious worship regardless of the precise method, found ample proof that the acts interrupted the meeting, and rejected claims that the convictions violated rights to access public facilities because the proceeding was a criminal case rather than a civil rights action. The reasoning emphasized the statute's purpose to protect religious gatherings and that the defendants' coordinated actions exceeded mere presence by attracting attention and halting proceedings.

criminal lawcivil rightsreligious liberty

This case involved 62 employees of Special Products Company of Tennessee who went on strike in January 1960; their jobs were filled by replacements during the strike, and upon ending the strike in July 1960 they sought reemployment and unemployment benefits. The employer protested the claims, arguing the workers should be disqualified for benefits under provisions for voluntary quitting without good cause or misconduct connected with work. The Commissioner and Board of Review approved the benefits, and the Chancellor upheld that decision. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed, holding that the labor dispute disqualification under T.C.A. § 50-1324 ended once the strike terminated and the employees unconditionally offered to return, and that they could not be further disqualified for voluntary quit or misconduct as that would improperly adjudicate the merits of the underlying dispute. The court relied on precedent establishing that eligibility for benefits begins immediately after an active labor dispute ceases, without regard to fault in the strike.

labor & employment

This case was a disbarment proceeding brought by the Tennessee Bar Association and Chattanooga Bar Association against Raulston Schoolfield, a former Criminal Court Judge of Hamilton County. The trial court permanently disbarred Schoolfield, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals and now by the Supreme Court. The court relied on the record of Schoolfield's impeachment by the State Senate, which convicted him on charges including accepting a gift of a Pontiac automobile solicited from known law violators and lawyers with cases pending before him, using his judicial office to promote political candidates and direct racketeers, and using profane and obscene language that brought his office into public contempt. The core reasoning was that these findings established misconduct involving moral turpitude, rendering Schoolfield unfit to hold a law license, which is a revocable privilege granted by the court; the fact that the conduct occurred while he was a judge did not shield him from professional discipline.

criminal lawprocedure