Kramer Rayson LLP Achieves Tier One Rankings in U.S. News – Best Lawyers 2023 Best Law Firms Rankings for Knoxville (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP Attorney Named Best Lawyers 2023 (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson Selected for Greater Knoxville Area’s Top Workplace Award for 2022 (Press Release)
Attorneys from Kramer Rayson Named Top Attorneys by CityView (Press Release)
Fishman Joins Firm (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP Achieves Tier One Rankings in U.S. News (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP Attorneys Named Ones to Watch 2021 (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP Attorney Named Best Lawyers (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP Attorneys Named Best Lawyers 2021 (Press Release)
Bartlett Named American Bar Foundation Fellows (Press Release)
Kramer Rayson LLP 16th Annual Employment Law Conference (Photos.
Note: The following decisions represent only a few of the cases the firm has been involved in during the previous sixty-five years.
Heyward v. CDM Smith, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103314 (E.D. Tenn. August 5, 2015). Attorneys Edward Phillips and Will Carver received summary dismissal for their government contractor client in an age and race discrimination case.
City of Townsend v. Anthony Damico, 2014 Tenn. App. LEXIS 302 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 27, 2014). Attorneys Will Carver and Camille Sanders successfully prosecuted a municipal citation involving issues of waterway access and ownership rights.
Clark v. G4S Government Solutions, Inc. d/b/a WSI Oak k Ridge, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37832 (E.D. Tenn. March 21, 2014). Attorneys Edward Phillips and Will Carver received summary dismissal for their client in a race discrimination case.
Richardson v. Dotson d/b/a Taylor’s Lakeside Campground, Grainger County Circuit Court #8860-III, 2013 (Attorney Robert A. Crawford won a defense verdict in a $2 Million negligence case.)
Chill v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., No. E2012-01675-COA-R3-VC, 2013 Tenn. App. LEXIS 493 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 31, 2013). (Court of Appeals reaffirmed the long-standing rule that contractual limitations periods in insurance policies are generally valid and enforceable). Attorneys: John T. Johnson, Jr. and Brandon L. Morrow
Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. V. Reed, No. E2012-01392-COA-RS-CV, 419 S.W.3d 262; 2013 Tenn. App. LEXIS 382, (Tenn. Ct. App. June 10, 2013). (Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurer on the grounds that economic losses sustained by the injured parties as a result of poor financial advice did not constitute property damage as defined by the policy.) Attorneys: John T. Johnson, Jr. and Brandon L. Morrow
Scheib v. Retirement Program Plan for Employees of Certain Employers at the U.S. Department of Energy Facilities at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2012 U.S. App. 488 Fed. Appx. 122 (6th Cir. 2012) (Court of appeals held that the plan provision requiring the plan to permit an “eligible rollover distribution” did not require the plan in a lump sum to rollover distribution.) Attorney: John C. Burgin, Jr.
Am. Modern Select Ins. Co. v. Humphrey, No.: 3:11-CV-129, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20800 (E.E. Tenn. Feb. 17, 2012), (Court helt there was a single occurrence under a homeowner’s policy, despite the fact that there were numerous wounds sustained by plaintiff and several dogs were involved in the attack.) Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Schroyer v. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126522 (E.D. Tenn 2011) (Attorneys Edward G. Phillips and William J. Carver successfully received summary dismissal of plaintiff’s retaliatory discharge claims.)
Escher v. BWXT Y-12, LLC, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 19734, 2919 Fed. App. 0634N (6th Cir. 2010) (Summary judgment affirmed dismissing USERRA retaliation claim.)
Fugate c. Tennessee Farmers Ins. Co., No. E2009-1060-COA-RS-CV, 2009 Tenn. App. LEXIS 805 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 2, 2009). (Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Chancellor finding coverage under a homeowner’s policy, because the Chancellor improperly considered his personal knowledge of the insured’s witnesses.) Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Mynatt v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 6002, 2008 Fed. App. 153N (6th Cir. Tenn. 2009) (Summary judgment affirmed dismissing race discrimination, termination in reduction in force, racial harassment and racial failure to promote claims.)
Arnwine v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44978 (E.D. Tenn. 2007).
Client terminated employee when DOE terminated his security clearance. Plaintiff brought suit alleging termination was because of his race and in retaliation for prior lawsuit. Court granted summary judgment to client holding that the revocation of plaintiff’s security clearance rendered him unqualified for the job. The court rejected plaintiff’s argument that he was treated worse than employees whose clearances had been suspended. Plaintiff’s retaliation claim failed because EEOC claim was filed three years prior to termination and was too far removed from decision to terminate due to revoked security clearance.
Davidson v. Wackenhut Services, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30757 (E.D. Tenn. 2007).
Client terminated security police officer when DOE “administratively terminated” employee’s security clearance. Employee claimed client’s termination was because of her race and prior complaints. Court granted summary judgment to client holding that the revocation of plaintiff’s security clearance rendered her unqualified for the job. The court rejected plaintiff’s argument that she was treated worse than employees whose clearances had been suspended as there is no valid comparison between a terminated security clearance (of any kind) and a suspended clearance. Plaintiff’s retaliation claim also failed because proximity alone is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of retaliation.
Adams v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., __ F.Appx. ___ (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 2006).
Client transitioned to completely new employer, 375 employees who worked in information technology services organization. Half of the employees sued claiming they were due severance pay and that client had breached ERISA fiduciary duty in statements made to employees as part of the transition to new employer. Sixth Circuit held employees were not due severance pay. Court also held statements about compensation and benefits at new employer were not fiduciary statements and, in addition, employees had no evidence they were harmed by any statements whether misleading or not. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and John C. Burgin Jr.
Edwards v. Department of Energy and Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., ___ F.Appx. ___ (6th Cir. Aug. 11, 2006), affirming 371 F.Supp.2d 859 (W.D. Ky. 2005) (see below).
On appeal from district court decision discussed below. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of all claims against all defendants based on the statute of limitations defense. The court held that the passage of the 1996 USEC Privatization Act and the several communications to the transitioned employees about the transfer of pension assets put plaintiffs on notice that they had a potential cause of action under the USEC Privatization Act more than 4 years before they filed the complaint. Attorney: John C. Burgin Jr.
Andrews v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68027 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).
Employee sued client alleging a hostile work environment and other race discrimination claims. Court granted summary judgment on racial harassment claim on ground that isolated incident where supervisor had allegedly used word “boy” in referring to employee was not sufficient to be hostile work environment and that employer took prompt action when employee complained. Court rejected remaining disparate treatment claims on ground that general supervisor’s request for a medical review of employee was legitimate concern based on employee becoming easily upset when questioned about his performance difficulties. Court also held employer did not discriminate in requiring employee to have commercial drivers license while operating commercial vehicles inside the Y-12 National Security Complex. Finally, court held Title VII claims were time-barred because employee failed to file a timely EEOC charge and could not “piggy back” off other plaintiffs who did timely file because employee’s claims were unrelated.
Duff v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60747 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).
Employee brought race discrimination claim about his non-selection for one of two Fire Captain positions at Y-12 National Security Complex. Employee was interviewed but scored lowest on the interview scores. Employer award job to employees with highest interview score. Employee asserted client should have given greater weight to his longer service as safety officer. Court upheld promotion decision holding use of interview scores was not discriminatory and employee could not substitute his selection criteria for those of the employer. The court also held that employee’s claims against client were barred by judicial estoppel because he failed to disclose his pending EEOC charge while in his bankruptcy proceeding.
Linson v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44654 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).
After employee went on disability leave, employee sued former employers, alleging variety of race discrimination claims. Court dismissed all claims holding that a lawsuit employee filed in 1998 barred certain claims as there was no tolling for the claims asserted in that action. Employee also asserted he was made to work in beryllium areas but court held there was no proof that employee was made to work in a beryllium area after advising his supervisor that he had chronic beryllium disease and that employee had failed to show any work assignment was made on the basis of his race.
Stevens v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54683 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).
Client was sued by former employee who alleged various claims of racial discrimination. Court held the racial harassment claim failed because employee could not identify any specific incident of harassment over seven year period. Court further rejected employee’s claim that he was subjected to disparate discipline on ground that coaching and counseling of employee about late returns from lunch was not adverse employment action and employee could not identify white employee who was treated better under similar circumstances.
Miller v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79293 (E.D. Tenn. 2006).
Client terminated employee when an investigation revealed that employee had excessively used a work computer for personal use and was charging this time to specific projects. Employee sued alleging race discrimination; that he was only black person terminated for excessive personal use of a computer. Court granted client summary judgment, rejecting employee’s argument that his hours of using the computer were comparable to the hours white employees (who were not terminated) had spent using a work computer for personal matters.
Campbell v. Wackenhut Services, Inc., No. 3:03-cv-407 (E.D. Tenn. 2005).
Client terminated security police officer assigned to protect the Y-12 National Security Complex because officer was discovered asleep on the job and provided false information during resulting investigation. Officer denied being asleep and later filed a lawsuit accusing client of retaliating against him because officer had taken medical leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Client defended lawsuit by proving that FMLA leave had no role in the decision to terminate. After four day trial, jury found the client had not discriminated against the officer. Attorneys: John C. Burgin Jr. and Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr.
Edwards v. Department of Energy and Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 371 F.Supp.2d 859 (W.D. Ky. 2005), affirmed, ___ F.Appx. ___ (6th Cir. Aug. 11, 2006).
Group of individuals who had worked at Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Kentucky and who retired from client, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., sued Energy Systems, Department of Energy and United States Enrichment Corporation. They contended their transfer from Energy Systems pension plan to pension plan maintained by United States Enrichment Corporation violated fiduciary duties under Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and the USEC Privatization Act, 42 U.S.C.§ 2297h, and, alternatively, that ERISA and the USEC Privatization Act required Energy Systems to have transferred excess defined pension plan assets to USEC when it was officially privatized. Energy Systems moved to dismiss all claims as being without merit under ERISA and USEC Privatization Act. Court dismissed all of the retirees’ claims holding they were barred by the statute of limitations. Attorney: John C. Burgin Jr.
Leadbetter v. Gilley, 385 F.3d 683 (6th Cir. 2004).
Associate General Counsel brought suit against former University of Tennessee President alleging reverse sex and race discrimination. The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment holding that plaintiff was not similarly situated to the successful female candidate for General Counsel who was manifestly better qualified and he failed to establish pretext. Plaintiff also failed to show that he was similarly situated to the black male who was awarded two diversity and equity positions, or that he would have applied for those positions which paid less than his current position. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips.
Ball and Heiser v. Union Carbide Corp., 376 F.3d 554 (6th Cir. 2004).
Two putative class actions were filed by individuals who alleged they were exposed to radiation and other substances brought suit against all government contractors who had performed work since World War II at the Department of Energy nuclear facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Some alleged violations of civil rights laws while others sued for personal injury. The trial court found, 212 F.R.D. 380 (E.D. Tenn. 2002), and the Sixth Circuit affirmed, that the claims were not timely filed since publicity surrounding the emissions and releases had been widespread for years. The Sixth Circuit further upheld the trial court’s denial of class action status because the claims were highly individualized. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson and Thomas M. Hale.
Rowan and Washington v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 360 F.3d 544 (6th Cir. 2004).
Two employees were laid off in a reduction in force at the Y-12 National Security Complex because of steep Department of Energy budget cuts. Employees sued for age discrimination and claimed that several remarks (about reducing the “average age”) were made as a result of Congressionally created “Chiles Commission” which had concluded that a high percentage of skilled workers at nuclear weapons facilities could retire soon. The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the employer holding that the references to reducing the average age were motivated by a perfectly legitimate concern about retaining skilled workers in the face of the upcoming retirements. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips.
Souders v. Boeing Oak Ridge Co., No. 3:03-cv-362 (E.D. Tenn. June 15, 2004).
Female employee sued client for gender discrimination and hostile work environment claimed to arise because of anonymous incidents directed at her and for company’s alleged failure to train her on a certain production equipment. District Court held the anonymous incidents and training issues did not create hostile work environment. Court further held employee failed to establish adverse action or discrimination relating to alleged failure to train. Attorneys: John C. Burgin, Jr. and E. H. Rayson.
Turpin v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. and BWXY Y-12, LLC, Case No. 02-101 (ARB Jan. 29, 2004).
After employee used a radiation detection instrument knowing its calibration had expired, one client disciplined employee and later, when employee made repeated mistakes on simple tasks while on disciplinary probation, placed employee on disability leave. Second client subsequently placed employee on long-term disability leave. Employee filed complaint with Department of Labor claiming to be a nuclear whistleblower. After hearing, ALJ ruled in favor of client holding that disability decision was “a reasonable option and a less draconian one than termination which would have been fully justified considering complainant’s continuing substandard performance.” On appeal, ARB affirmed. Attorneys: John C. Burgin, Jr. and Edward G. Phillips.
Aloisi v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 321 F.3d 551 (6th Cir. 2003).
A union employee sued client to obtain long-term disability benefits after she had been denied benefit in a medical arbitration proceeding. Court of appeals held that action had to be treated as a challenge to the medical arbitration award. As such, the complaint was untimely because it was not filed within 90-day statute of limitations for challenging an arbitration award. Court rejected argument that the limitations period under ERISA should apply holding that the right to benefits was derived from the collective bargaining agreement. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and John C. Burgin, Jr.
Stooksbury v. Rohm & Haas Tennessee, Inc., 71 Fed. Appx. 444 (6th Cir. 2003).
In companion case to Browning decision, below, 36 former employees of chemical plant manufacturer sued for age discrimination when they were not rehired based upon the client’s new hiring criteria. Court of appeals upheld summary judgment for client because plaintiffs had failed to establish pattern and practice of age discrimination based on client’s adoption or implementation of the hiring criteria. Court further held former employees failed to show client discriminated against them when it refused to re-hire them because they did not meet hiring criteria. Attorneys: John B. Rayson, E. H. Rayson and John C. Burgin, Jr.
Cannon v. Levi Strauss & Co., 29 Fed. Appx. 331 (6th Cir. 2002).
Employee who sewed jeans at manufacturing plant alleged her termination violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. She claimed client regarded her as having a disability because she had carpal tunnel syndrome. Employee contended client representative told her she could not do “factory work.” Employee had made contradictory statements in her deposition and in her sworn EEOC charge (that she was a “high risk” for carpal tunnel if she continued in her sewing job). Court of appeals upheld summary judgment for employer because employee could not create genuine issue of fact by filing affidavit which contradicted her prior sworn statement to EEOC. Court further held that being unable to perform sewing jobs did not substantially limit plaintiff in a major life activity. Attorneys: John C. Burgin, Jr. and E. H. Rayson.
United States ex. rel. Rakow v. Pro Builders Corp., 37 Fed. Appx. 930 (9th Cir. 2002).
Construction worker brought False Claims Act qui tam claim against client, a contractor, arising out of modifications to Bozeman, Montana airport. Laborer claimed when he was initially hired, a subcontractor paid him wages lower than required by Davis-Bacon Act but acknowledged error was corrected when brought to attention of subcontractor. Worker sued alleging client had violated False Claims Act by allegedly falsely certifying it had complied with Davis-Bacon. District Court granted summary judgment in favor of client. Court of appeals affirmed, holding that there was no evidence client knowingly submitted false statements to government. Attorneys: William P. Snyder and John C. Burgin, Jr.
Martin v. Boeing Oak Ridge Co., 244 F.Supp.2d 863 (E.D.Tenn. 2002).
African-American employee sued alleging the existence of a racially hostile work environment citing incidents by co-workers over course of several years. In each instance of claimed harassment, however, the district court held the client had taken “decisive disciplinary action” to correct and/or prevent the occurrence of any further incidents. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson and John C. Burgin, Jr.
Weigel v. Baptist Hospital of East Tennessee, 302 F.3d 367 (6th Cir., 2002).
Plaintiff resigned as a nurse and in exit interview documents claimed that younger workers received favorable treatment. When she later reapplied, she was not hired. She brought suit alleging age discrimination and retaliation. The Sixth Circuit upheld summary judgment for client because plaintiff had not timely filed and she failed to establish that her exit interview comments played a role in the decision not to rehire her. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and Penny A. Arning.
New Covenant Baptist Church v. Panther Sark, 2002 Tenn. App. LEXIS 162 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002).
Church purchased a subdivision lot with intention of using the lot as a driveway to newly purchased property outside of subdivision. Client, homeowners association, sought to enforce restrictive covenant which precluded the use of any lot for vehicular access to real property located beyond the subdivision. Court of appeals ruled in favor of client and held the proposed use of the property as a driveway violated the restrictive covenant. Attorneys: Thomas M. Hale.
Flynt Eng’g Co. v. Cox, 99 S.W. 3d 99 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002).
Two long-time friends entered oral contract; later, when engineering company proposed withdrawing from the project and suing for unpaid services, the parties executed a written contract. Court of Appeals ruled that defendant could not later invalidate contract on theory of economic duress, as engineering firm had every right to withdraw and/or sue. Attorney: Adrienne L. Anderson.
Wade v. Knoxville Utilities Board, 259 F.3d 452 (6th Cir. 2001).
A mentally ill former employee with history of performance and behavioral problems brought suit alleging racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation. A year and a half later, he attempted to amend his complaint to add disability as well as new racial allegations and whistleblower claims. The trial court refused to allow the amendment, and granted summary judgment to the employer. On appeal, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s findings on the issues of timeliness and upon the merits. Attorneys: Adrienne A. Anderson and Edward G. Phillips.
Shelton v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., ARB No. 98-100 (ARB March 30, 2001).
After employee “exploded in tirade of verbally abusive and profane language” she was given lowest form of formal discipline under employer’s progressive discipline policy. Employee brought action against client contended discipline was retaliatory. Administrative Review Board held that discipline was not an adverse employment action and that there was overwhelming evidence that discipline would have been imposed even if employee had not engaged in protected activity. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson, John C. Burgin, Jr.
Angel v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. & Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 3:99-cv-644 (E.D. Tenn. 2001).
Employee contended she was unable to work at any position because she had carpal tunnel syndrome, knee problems and fibromyalgia. In claim for long term disability benefits, Court found substantial evidence supported clients’ denial of benefits because claim was not supported by objective evidence. Court also held that there was no inherent conflict of interest in LTD Plan because Plan was funded pursuant to Department of Energy contract. Attorney: John C. Burgin, Jr.
Dew v. Pro-Temp, et al., 2001 WL 12225 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
Retaliatory discharge case by employee of temporary agency (client) assigned to third party employer. Third party removed employee for poor performance but employee continued to work for client. Court of Appeals ruled employee was not discharged by client. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips.
FTA Enterprises, Inc. v. Pomeroy Computer Resources, Inc., No. E2000-01246-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
Client, computer services company, brought suit after defendant sudden hiring of substantially all of client’s employees and finding office in shambles. Client was unable to perform work on major contract due to loss of employees. Jury found in favor of client on because defendant tortiously interfered with contract. Jury also found in favor of client on breach of fiduciary duty claim against former manager who provided confidential information on client’s business to defendant, and solicited client’s current employees to come work for defendant even though he was still manager for client. Court of appeals affirmed jury verdict including the imposition of punitive damages. Attorneys Hugh W. Morgan and John E. Winters.
Cox v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., ARB No. 99-040 (ARB March 30, 2001).
In unrelated decisions, two married workers were terminated from East Tennessee Technology Park (formerly K-25) in reduction in force. Employees brought action against client contending that their termination was in retaliation for their complaints about worker safety. After lengthy hearing and appeal, ARB ruled that client had presented credible evidence that neither decision was discriminatory. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson; John C. Burgin, Jr.
Messner v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 126 F. Supp. 2d 502 (E.D. Tenn. 2000),
Age discrimination claim against client arising out of reduction in force at Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant. Summary judgment granted for the client; employee’s second hand testimony of age conscious statements excluded as hearsay. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips, E.H. Rayson, John C. Burgin, Jr.
Jackson v. The Group Long Term Disability Plan for Salaried and Hourly Employees of Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., and Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 99-cv-594 (E.D. Tenn. 2000), Employee brought long term disability claim against clients contending she was unable to work at any position due to a constellation of problems including chronic fatigue syndrome. Court found that only physician who supported her claim had relied upon assessments by other specialists and none of these specialists considered the employee to have physical conditions that would prevent her from returning to work. Attorney: John C. Burgin, Jr.
Copeland v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 221 F.3d 1334 (6th Cir. 2000) (unpublished),
Age discrimination claim after employee was selected for inclusion in a reduction in force. Summary judgment granted to the client and affirmed on appeal. Attorneys: Edward G. Phillips and John C. Burgin, Jr.
Local 760 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. The City of Harriman and The Harriman Utilities Board, 2000 WL 1801856 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).
Union comprised of municipal employees sought to establish the right to collectively bargain with the client municipality. Court held that municipal employees were prohibited from requiring the City to bargain with their union. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips.
Hackney v. DRD Management, Inc. 2000 Tenn. App. LEXIS 205; 16 Ind. Empl. Rights Cases (BNA) 359 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000), p.t.a. denied 2000,
Employee at will was terminated following positive drug screen. Employee brought wrongful discharge claim against client contending that employer’s alleged failure to follow chain of custody procedures constituted violation of public policy. Court of appeals ruled in favor of clients holding that the public policy of Tennessee was to prohibit illegal drug use and did not require employers who test employees for drugs to follow chain of custody requirements. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and Robert L. Bowman.
Minga v. Modine Manufacturing Company, No. 3:99-CV-122 (E.D. Tenn. 2000),
Sex discrimination involving termination for insubordination. Tried to the jury with jury verdict for the client. Attorneys: Edward G. Phillips and Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr.
Browning v. Rohm & Haas Tennessee, Inc., 16 F. Supp. 2d 896 (E.D. Tenn. 1998), aff’d, 194 F.3d 1311 (6th Cir. 1999) (unpublished).
Former employees sued for age discrimination when they were rehired by client based upon the client’s new hiring criteria. District Court and Court of appeals held summary judgment on all claims was appropriate because client had the right to adopt hiring criteria based upon its need for more highly qualified and educated chemical operators in light of the rapidly evolving world of chemical operations: “[T]he district court appropriately recognized that an employer is ‘entitled to improve the quality of its workforce by hiring persons with more experience and/or education than has been required before, especially in a chemical plant with rapidly expanding technology.'” Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and John B. Rayson.
Elliott v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 61 F.Supp.2d 745 (E.D. Tenn. 1999).
Employee sought declaratory judgment that offsetting long term disability benefits for unrelated workers’ compensation settlement violated terms of long term disability plan. Court ruled in favor of client on ground that its interpretation of the LTD plan was reasonable. Attorney: John C. Burgin Jr.
Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. v. Edward A. Slavin Jr., 190 F.R.D. 449 (E.D. Tenn. 1999).
Following final decision in favor of client in Varnadore (see below), client sought recovery of interim fees ordered to be paid to employee’s counsel by Administrative Review Board (“ARB”). ARB ordered return of fees and client brought action against counsel to enforce ARB order. When defendant filed answer asserting frivolous defenses, client moved for sanctions under Rule 11. District Court ordered repayment of fees and granted motion for sanctions finding, among other things, that the “Answer is the worst such pleading the Court has seen filed by a lawyer in its four and one half years on the bench.” Court reprimanded counsel, ordered apology, payment of costs and expenses, and imposed $10,000.00 suspended monetary sanction but which court later imposed due to defendant’s violation of the conditions of the suspension. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson, John B. Rayson, and John C. Burgin Jr.
Anderson v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., No. 3:97-CV-060 (E.D. Tenn. 1999),
Age discrimination and disability discrimination claim arising out of employee’s selection for inclusion in a reduction in force. Summary judgment granted to the client. Attorneys: Edward G. Phillips and John C. Burgin Jr.
Burns v. Lockheed Martin Energy Research, Inc., No. 3:97-CV-657 (E.D. Tenn. 1999),
Disability discrimination case against client by employee who was terminated for viewing pornographic web sites on government owned computers. Summary judgment granted to the client on ground that employee did not have impairment that substantially limited a major life activity. Attorneys: John B. Rayon, Robert L. Bowman.
Musick v. Massey Electric Company, Inc., No. 3:98-CV-286 (E.D. Tenn. 1999),
Disability discrimination claim arising out of employee’s termination for poor job performance. Summary judgment granted to the client on ground that employee was not a qualified individual with a disability. Attorney: Edward G. Phillips.
Alexander v. Sandpiper Properties, Inc., 1999 WL 93580 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999),
Following her termination, employee brought breach of contract claim against ex-husband’s corporation. Court ruled in favor of client and held that terms of investment brief did not create a contract for a definite term of employment and employee was at will employee of corporation. Attorney: Charles M. Finn.
Varnadore v. Department of Labor & Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 141 F.3d 625 (6th Cir. 1998).
Appeal of Department of Labor decisions holding client had not retaliated against employee under environmental and nuclear whistleblower statutes. The court of appeals upheld agency decision and the constitutionality of Secretary of Labor’s creation of Administrative Review Board. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, John Rayson, and John C. Burgin Jr.
Shapira v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 88 F.Supp.2d 813 (E.D. Tenn. 1998), aff’d, 201 F.3d 441 (6th Cir. 1999) (table).
Gender discrimination and retaliation claim after architect at Y-12 Nuclear Weapons Plant was selected for inclusion in a reduction in force. District court held employee failed to establish client’s elimination of architect’s job was discriminatory or in retaliatory. Court of appeals affirmed on basis of district court decision. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and Edward G. Phillips.
International Union, United Plant Guards Workers of America v. Lockheed Martin Utility Services, Inc., 156 F.3d 1230 (6th Cir. 1998) (unpublished).
Union representing guards at Department of Energy’s Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion sought to compel client, M&O contractor, to arbitrate grievance regarding use of non-bargaining unit personnel to escort employees of two construction subcontractors. Court of appeals held that grievance was not arbitrable because it was attempt to modify DOE approved security plan establish for work on two subcontracts. Attorneys: E. H. Rayson; John C. Burgin Jr.
Hennessee v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 168 F.3d 489 (6th Cir. 1998) (unpublished).
Gender and age discrimination action against client arising out of employees selected for inclusion in a reduction in force. Summary judgment granted to the client on ground that employee had not established prima facie case or that the reasons for her selection were pretextual. Attorneys: Edward G. Phillips and John C. Burgin Jr.
Browning V. Rohm & Haas Tennessee, Inc., 16 F.Supp. 2d 896 (E.D. Tenn. 1998)
Balogh v. Sertoma Center, Inc., No. 97-CV-664 (E.D. Tenn. 1997),
Disability discrimination case under the ADA after employee was terminated for excessive absenteeism. Summary judgment granted in favor of client.
Hensley v. Baptist Hospital, 7 AD Cases 1798 (E.D. Tenn. 1997),
Disability discrimination case under the Americans with Disabilities Act and wrongful discharge under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Summary judgment granted to the client. Attorney: John B. Rayson.
Birge v. Boeing Co., 1997 WL 68325 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997),
Former manager brought breach of contract claim contending client failed to comply with relocation agreement following his retirement. The Chancellor determined that plaintiff was not entitled to recover damages, but declared the employee could enforce the relocation agreement at a later time. Court of Appeals held that employee had been given reasonable time to enforce relocation agreement. Attorney: Thomas M. Hale.
Gerwels v. Phillips, 1997 Tenn. App. LEXIS 523 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).
After client, a contractor, responded to complaints lodged by homeowner with two not-for-profits, homeowner sued for defamation and construction defects. Jury entered judgment for contractor on both counts, and for contractor on his counterclaim for work performed. On appeal, defamation judgment in favor of contractor was upheld because non-profits were homeowner’s agents and hence statements to them were not “published.” Attorneys: Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr. and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Howell v. Aluminum Company of America, Inc., 8 F.Supp.2d 1012 (E.D. Tenn. 1997).
Employee brought action against his employer, alleging employer misappropriated his design for an improved “skim boom” for his employer’s ingot facilities. Court held employer did not breach implied agreement with employee to purchase right to use his design and granted summary judgment to employer. Attorneys: Wayne R. Kramer and Donelson M. Leake.
Varnadore v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 92-CAA-2 (Secretary of Labor Jan. 26, 1996).
Employee at Oak Ridge National Laboratory brought action against client under whistleblower provisions of environmental acts alleging a hostile work environment. Secretary of Labor held that employee had failed to establish that his supervisors were aware of his protected activity and that there was any alleged violation within the limitations period. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, John Rayson, John C. Burgin Jr.
Varnadore v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., 92-CAA-2 (Administrative Review Board, June 14, 1996).
Secretary of Labor created Administrative Review Board and referred to it allegations of hostile work environment by employee at Oak Ridge National Laboratory subsequent to decision summarized above. Employee contended various acts, including allegedly adverse performance appraisal, after he filed initial complaint constituted hostile work environment. ARB held employee failed to establish that client had created hostile work environment because of employees alleged protected activity and dismissed all claims against client. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, John B. Rayson, John C. Burgin Jr.
United States of America, ex rel., v. MK-Ferguson Company, 99 F.3d 1538 (10th Cir. 1996).
Former Department of Energy Inspector General employee brought False Claims Act claim against DOE contractor arising out of uranium mill tailings remediation in Oregon. Court ruled in favor of client and held there was no subject matter jurisdiction because the claims had been publicly disclosed in a DOE IG report and that former IG employee was not an original source. Attorneys: William P. Snyder and John C. Burgin Jr.
Cross Mountain Coal, Inc. Petitioner, v. Ward, 93 F.3d 211 (6th Cir. 1996).
Employer petitioned for review of decision of Benefits Review Board (BRB) affirming award to claimant under Black Lung Benefits Act. Court of appeal upheld award of benefits to client. Attorneys: John T. Johnson, Jr. and Robert L. Bowman.
DeVault v. Boeing Defense & Space-Oak Ridge, Inc., 76 F.3d 378 (6th Cir. 1996) (unpublished).
Sex discrimination case in which employee alleged the district court had erroneously ruled in favor of client after bench trial. Employee contended court erred in concluding that the plaintiff failed to carry her ultimate burden of proof when it failed to reappoint her to a supervisory position. Court of appeals affirmed ruling in favor of client. Attorneys E.H. Rayson, John B. Rayson, and John C. Burgin Jr.
BellSouth Telecommunications v. United States of America, 991 F.Supp. 920 (E.D. Tenn. 1996).
Successor to company that had installed phone systems at Oak Ridge Nuclear Facilities brought action in district court against United States and client, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., the M&O contractor at the facilities, alleging various contract and tort claims arising out of alleged misappropriation of phone system when new phone contractor was selected. District court dismissed all claims against defendants on ground that action was governed by Contract Disputes Act and had to be brought in that forum or in the Court of Federal Claims. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, William P. Snyder, and John C. Burgin Jr.
Daugherty v. Braun, 1996 WL 200632 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).
Homeowners brought suit against client, a construction company, its President and the financing partner for construction defects. Trial Judge dismissed the claims against the President and the financing partner for construction defects. Trial judge dismissed the claims against the President and the financing partner, since contract was clearly between the homeowners and the company itself, not the individuals. Homeowners appealed that finding, as well as the trial court’s calculation of damages. The Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s findings on the responsibility of the individual defendants and its calculation of damages. Attorneys: Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr., and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Myers v. Aluminum Company of America, 1996 WL 275001 (Tenn. 1996) (unpublished).
Workers’ compensation appeal. Attorneys: Donelson M. Leake and Robert L. Bowman.
McCain v. Airport Honda, 1996 Tenn. App. LEXIS 618 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).
Employee who was discharged six weeks after reporting that co-workers were forging customer signatures on contracts for services they did not request brought a common law retaliatory discharge action. Trial court held, and Court of Appeals affirmed, that temporal proximity and “some” evidence of satisfactory job performance did not show the required causal connection between the whistle blowing and the termination. Attorneys: Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr. and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Phipps v. Walker, 1996 Tenn. App. LEXIS 210 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).
Homeowners brought suit for negligent hiring against client construction sub-contractor when its employee (the sub-contractor’s son) burglarized their home. The court of appeals upheld the dismissal of the claim because the contractor had no prior indication or knowledge of son actions. Attorneys: Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr. and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Middleton v. Allegheny Electric Company, Inc. and Rust Engineering Company, Inc., 897 S.W.2d 695 (Tenn. 1995).
Trial court awarded workers’ compensation claimant 75 percent permanent partial impairment to the body as a whole. Supreme Court ruled in favor of client and reduced award. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Gredig v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 891 S.W.2d 909 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).
Insured sought coverage under homeowner’s policy for losses sustained as result of fire in residence being lived in by brother of insured. Trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and client (insurer) appealed. Court of appeals held that losses were not covered by policy due to fact that insured was not living in house at time of fire. Attorneys: John T. Johnson, Jr. and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Sweet v. Rimmer, 1995 WL 515743 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).
Plaintiff brought action for damages for personal injuries as the result of a motor vehicle accident. Jury returned a verdict of $2,516.20 and plaintiff appealed, insisting the award of damages was inadequate. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of client and damage amount was not modified. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Cardin v. Campbell, 1995 WL 687566 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995).
Client appealed from a judgment in favor of guest riding in automobile at time of accident. Court of appeals reversed trial court’s ruling that client was judicially estopped and held summary judgment should have been entered in favor of client. Attorneys: Beecher A. Bartlett, Jr., and Adrienne L. Anderson.
Harp v. Robertshaw Controls Company, 1994 WL 587007 (M.D. Tenn. 1994).
Employee alleged she was discharged from her employment in retaliation for exercising her rights under Tennessee’s workers’ compensation statute. Court ruled in favor of client and dismissed claim. Attorney: Hugh W. Morgan.
Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company v. Crick, 1994 WL 725201 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994).
Declaratory judgment suit by client to void coverage under a personal liability policy for failure to give timely notice of an accident. Court of Appeals upheld ruling in client’s favor. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
East Tennessee Baptist Hosp. v. NLRB, 6 F.3d 1139 (6th Cir. 1993).
Client sought review of NLRB order finding that it had committed unfair labor practices by refusing to provide information on non-bargaining unit employees to union. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of client and held NLRB had erred in finding unfair labor practice. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, John B. Rayson, Warren L. Gooch and John C Burgin Jr.
Lamb v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 835 F.Supp.959 (W.D. Ky, 1993).
Property owners near Department of Energy Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant sued clients, M&O Contractors, who had operated plant. Property owners contended that environmental contamination from plant had contaminated their groundwater. Tests established, however, that there was no detectable levels of contaminants in plaintiffs’ well water. District Court granted clients’ motion for summary judgment on ground that plaintiffs could not recover for unfounded fears that property was contaminated of where evidence established property had not been contaminated. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson, Donald C. Wood.
Fiser v. Ettenger, 1993 WL 104636 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1993).
An action asking the Chancery Court to declare a withdrawal of consent to foreclosure a breach of the dissolution agreement. Attorney: David E. Rodgers.
Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company v. Wilhoit, Campbell Circuit, CA No. 03A01-9209-CV-00330 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1993).
Client (insurer) appealed a declaratory judgment holding that neither the exclusions in the insurance policy nor the false statements made by the Defendant in his application for liability insurance relieved the client from its requirement to defend and pay the judgment. Court of Appeals reversed trial court and ruled in favor of client. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Fisher v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 1992 WL 503591 (6th Cir. 1992) (unpublished).
Former plant doctor brought Equal Pay Act claim and Tennessee Human Rights Act claim alleging client had discriminated against her on the basis of her race and her sex. Court of appeals held that client had legitimate reason for claimed wage disparity and that employer had not harassed employee and had not forced her to resign. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and Edward G. Phillips
Davidson v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. 935 F.2d 269 (6th Cir. 1991) (unpublished).
Appeal from district court decision listed below in which court of appeals affirmed district court decision. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson
Easter v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 823 F.Supp. 489 (E.D. Tenn. 1991).
Employee who had worked for predecessor contractor but quit without notice sued when he was not rehired years later. Court granted summary judgment in favor of client and held that employee had failed to establish that the reason he was not rehired, his previous resignation without notice, was a pretext for age discrimination. Attorney: E.H. Rayson, John C. Burgin Jr.
Ensor v. Rust Engineering Co., 704 F.Supp. 808 (E.D. Tenn. 1989), aff’d. 935 F.2d 269 (6th Cir. 1991) (unpublished).
Worker at a nuclear facility refused to provide sample for drug testing alleging it violated his constitutional rights. District Court and court of appeals ruled in favor of client and upheld constitutionality of drug testing at nuclear production facility. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Headrick v. Union Carbide Corporation, 825 S.W.2d 424 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991).
Employee brought retaliatory discharge claim against client more than one year after her termination. Court of appeals held the claim was barred by the one year statute of limitations even though employee claimed she was deprived of a property right. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and John C Burgin Jr.
PEP Properties v. Town of Farragut, 1991 WL 50211 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991).
After Town annexed property, owner of store being constructed sued to defeat application of Town’s zoning requirements contending county building permits were all that were required. Court rule in favor of client and held Town of Farragut could apply zoning requirements to store construction. Attorney: David E. Rodgers.
NLRB v. United Mine Workers, 921 F.2d 645 (6th Cir. 1990).
Union petitioned for review of unfair labor practice finding after new mine owner gave seniority credit for past service only for union members. Court of appeals refused to enforce Board unfair labor practice finding because seniority provision in contract protected employees working under a collective bargaining agreement, with expectations of seniority, during a change of mine ownership. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and E.H. Rayson.
Davidson v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 797 F.Supp. 613 (E.D. Tenn. 1990), aff’d 935 F.2d 269 (6th Cir. 1991).
Security inspectors at Department of Energy nuclear facility sued client for negligence, claiming that employer’s failure to timely implement training program required by federal regulation resulted in inspectors’ inability to pass fitness test, and in their subsequent demotions to guard positions. Court held employees had no private right of action and they were not entitled to arbitration on the employer’s application of Department of Energy security regulation. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Powell v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 902 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1990) (unpublished).
Employee claimed he was harassed because of his race. Magistrate ruled in favor of client and judgment was affirmed on appeal. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Slade v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 935 F.3d 269 (6th Cir. 1990) (unpublished).
Plaintiff alleged his termination violated Age Discrimination in Employment Act among others. Court affirmed and held client was entitled to summary judgment. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Pruitt v. Swanger, 1989 WL 98062 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989).
Passengers in car accident sued driver and alleged they were insureds for purposes of uninsured motorist policy. Court held passengers were not covered by client’s policy. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Smith v. Levi Strauss & Co., 1988 WL 73095 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1988).
Employee sought reimbursement from client’s health care plan for her dental expenses. Court held denial of benefits was not arbitrary and capricious where plan did not cover dental expenses. Attorney: E.H. Rayson and John T. Buckingham.
Copeland v. Union Carbide Corporation, 831 F.2d 1063 (6th Cir. 1987) (unpublished).
Class of 105 former salaried employees of Union Carbide Corporation who retired rather than to accept virtually identical employment with new government contractor at Oak Ridge facility brought claim against client for a “full layoff allowance.” Court of appeals held employees were not entitled to layoff allowance under the terms of the Plan. Attorney E.H. Rayson.
Fisher v. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., 815 F.2d 703 (6th Cir. 1987) (unpublished).
Terminated employee claimed termination was in retaliation for having sought workers’ compensation benefits. Court held arbitration award in favor of client was res judicata on claim of retaliatory discharge. Attorney E.H. Rayson.
First Utility District of Knox County, Tennessee v. City of Knoxville, 1986 WL 5900 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986).
Suit over rights, duties and obligations pursuant to a Waste Water Facility Agreement entered into by said parties. Attorneys: Thomas M. Hale and David E. Rodgers.
Hughes v. Hughes, 1986 WL 7852.
After death of mother, suit was filed contending she had made a gift of bearer bonds to her son. Court held evidence failed to show mother had given bonds to son. Attorney: Hugh W. Morgan.
Landmark International Trucks, Inc. v. NLRB, 775 F.2d 148 (6th Cir. 1985).
Client, trucking company, withdrew recognition of union for service department employees after change in ownership. In first decision, 699 F.2d 815, Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of client and against Board on “virtually every premise” offered by Board. Court remanded case for a Board determination as to whether employer withheld dues at time it withdrew recognition. On remand, Board ruled against client because client sent letter to employees asking employees to advise employer if they withdrew from union. On second appeal, court ruled client’s letter request was not coercive. Attorneys: John B. Rayson.
United Mine Workers v. Eastover Mining Co., 603 F.Supp.1038 (W.D.Va. 1985).
Client, United Mine Workers sued former mine owner after it sold mine and structured sale to avoid impact of successor clause in Collective Bargaining Agreement. Court held the former mine owner breached the contract because they failed to pass along the signatory agreement to the successor owner. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and E.H. Rayson.
Inman v. Aluminum Company of America, 697 S.W.2d 350 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985).
Employee of independent contractor sued client for injuries sustained in fall from tower being torn down on client’s property. Court held exclusion of contract between owner and contractor from trial was proper on ground that it would not have establish liability of client. Attorney: Hugh W. Morgan.
Bell v. Union Carbide Corporation, 582 F.Supp. 824 (E. D. Tenn. 1984).
Employee claimed he was forced to quit his job and deprived of contractual rights. Court held employee’s claim against client was preempted by Collective Bargaining Agreement. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Cary v. Cary, 675 S.W.2d 491 (Tenn. Ct.App. 1984).
Former wife brought action against executrix of her former husband’s estate on behalf of her children, seeking to enforce a property settlement agreement entered into pursuant to divorce decree in which husband agreed to keep life insurance in force for his minor children. Court held action was barred by Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance Act provisions. Attorneys: Leslie Shields and Wayne R. Kramer.
Union Carbide Corporation v. Alexander, 679 S.W.2d 938 (Tenn. 1984).
Client, M&O contractor at Department of Energy nuclear facility in Oak Ridge sought review of State Board of Equalization ruling holding that contractor had taxable interest in real property owned by government. Court held Contractor did not have interest in real property subject to taxation. Attorneys: Jackson C. Kramer, Wayne R. Kramer, Erma G. Greenwood and David L. Oakley, Jr.
Hutchinson v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 652 S.W.2d 904 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983).
Action was brought against client insurer for uninsured motorist coverage for after Alabama court judgment. Court held for client because Alabama law did not apply to uninsured motorist claim and client was permitted to assert defenses. Attorney: John T. Johnson, Jr.
Lieber v. Union Carbide Corporation, 577 F.Supp. 562 (E. D. Tenn. 1983). Former employee brought breach of contract claim against client alleging he had right to be provided an annual performance appraisal, thus resulting in a loss of salary increases and retirement benefits. Court held employee had no contractual right to annual performance appraisal. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and Warren L. Gooch.
Shultz v. Dempster Systems, Inc., 561 F.Supp. 1230.
Employee brought age discrimination action against client. Court held employee had failed to bring action within 180 day time period appliable at time of his termination and that amended 300 day limitations period did not apply retroactively. Attorneys: Edward G. Phillips and E.H. Rayson.
Fuqua v. Aluminum Company of America, 631 S.W.2d 140 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1982).
After death of employee, his employer sued client property owner for wrongful death, client sued employer for indemnity. Court held indemnity agreement was valid where employer failed to exercise contractual duty to comply with applicable safety standards. Attorneys: Hugh W. Morgan and Donelson M. Leake.
Biddle v. Town of Farragut, 646 S.W.2d 925 (Tenn. Ct. Ap. 1982).
Case concerning whether Tenn. Code Ann. 6-6-102 only required publication of notice of ordinance before effective date and not before ordinance is passed by municipal government. Attorney: David E. Rodgers.
Cardwell v. Golden, 621 S.W.2d 774 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981).
After trial ended with verdict in favor of client, plaintiff appealed claiming jury instructions on remote contributory negligence should have been given. Court of appeals held jury could not find plaintiff’s negligence was remote and request for special instruction was properly denied. Attorneys: John T. Johnson, Jr. and Edward G. Phillips.
Rogers v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 620 S.W.2d 476 (Tenn. 1981).
Administrator of estate brought claim against uninsured motorist carrier of decedent for damages arising out of automobile accident. Court held driver’s coverage precluded recovery against client, uninsured carrier. Attorneys: Andrew Johnson and John T. Johnson, Jr.
Giant Food Markets, Inc. v. NLRB., 633 F.2d 18 (6th Cir. 1980).
Client, owner of retail store sought review of NLRB finding that it had engaged in unfair labor practice by asking area standards pickets to leave premises. Court refused to enforce unfair labor practice against owner. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and E. H. Rayson.
Headrick v. Aluminum Company of America, 487 F.Supp. 351 (E.D. Tenn. 1980).
Employment discrimination action against client dismissed because female former employee did not file timely complaint with Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within 180 days after allegedly discriminatory layoffs occurred. Attorney: John B. Rayson.
Sutton v. Aluminum Company of America, 500 F.Supp. 824 (E.D. Tenn. 1980).
Employment discrimination claim against client was dismissed because it was untimely. Court held employee’s pursuit of grievance procedures did not toll time for filing charge with Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Attorney: John B. Rayson.
Management Investor v. United Mine Workers of America, 459 F.Supp. 90.
Mine owners sought damages against client union for alleged secondary boycott and sought to litigate state law claims in federal court. District Court declined to exercise pendant (now supplemental) jurisdiction over novel state law claims. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Roberts v. Board of Equalization, 557 S.W.2d 502 (Tenn. 1977).
Roane County Trustee sought ad valorem taxes for storage of uranium owned by foreign utilities but stored in Roane County. Board of Equalization denied claim. Trustee sued but action was dismissed because Trustee did not join Roane County as plaintiff. Attorneys: Erma G. Greenwood, Jackson C. Kramer and David L. Oakley, Jr.
Moulton v. Ford Motor Company, 533 S.W.2d 295 (Tenn. 1976).
Action was brought against car manufacturer and dealer for injuries sustained by buyer and his wife. Court held claim was barred by res judicata when prior suit was dismissed based upon statute of limitations. Attorney: Hugh W. Morgan.
McCall v. Maryland Casualty Company and Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 516 S.W.2d 353 (Tenn. 1974).
Action against uninsured motorist who was not served with process. Court held passengers could not bring direct action against insurers. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and Andrew Johnson.
Gill v. Union Carbide Corporation, 386 F.Supp. 364 (E.D.Tenn. 1973).
Age Discrimination in Employment Act and Fair Labor Standards Act claim arising out of employee’s layoff from economically motivated reduction in force from Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Court held that when Atomic Energy Commission notified client that it had to reduce the number of employees, client had carefully established layoff criteria and conscientiously applied them in determining the employees who had to be terminated. Court further held that not only had employee failed to show his age had been used as an adverse factor in layoff decision evidence established that client had given positive consideration to age and experience of employees in reduction in force decisions. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Beam v. Maryland Casualty Company, 477 S.W.2d 510 (1972).
Suit concerning workers’ compensation insurers right to subrogation from wrongful death settlement. Attorneys: Donelson M. Leake and Erma G. Greenwood.
Ramsey v. United Mine Workers of America, 344 F.Supp. 1029 (E.D. Tenn. 1972).
After remand from Supreme Court, 401 U.S. 302, district court held there was insufficient evidence of a conspiracy between client and members of Bituminous Coal Operators Association to fix wages on non-member operators. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R. A. Kramer.
Smith v. Sheet Metal Workers International Association et al., 357 F.Supp. 1386 (E.D. Tenn. 1972).
Union business manager sought reinstatement. Court held client had lawfully terminated manager for conduct detrimental to interest of union. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and James A. Ridley, III.
Ramsey v. United Mine Workers, 401 U.S. 302 (1971).
Coal mine operators brought antitrust conspiracy action against Client (UMW) alleging that Union had agreed with major coal producers to impose the provisions of the 1950 National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreement on all coal mine operators. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Teague v. Gardner, 281 F.Supp. 43 (E.D. Tenn. 1968).
Client, fifty-two year-old woman sought disability insurance benefits. District Court held that evidence required conclusion that applicant’s organic impairments, combined with her mental impairments, rendered her unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity, thus entitling her to disability insurance benefits. Attorneys: John B. Rayson and Hugh W. Morgan.
Thomas v. Anderson, 222 Tenn. 204, 435 S.W.2d 109 (1968).
Court held that failure to serve secretary of state with process more than one year after automobile collision rendered action against client untimely. Attorney: Hugh W. Morgan.
United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966),
Mine operators sought damages against client for alleged secondary boycott under National Labor Relations Act and tortious interference under state law. Court established principles for federal court to exercise pendant jurisdiction of state law claim and held mine operator, in state law conspiracy claim, as modified by Section 6 of the Norris LaGuardia Act, failed to establish involvement of international union. Attorney E.H. Rayson.
Guffey v. Scott and Standard Knitting Mills, Inc., 400 S.W.2d 705.
Unemployment compensation case. Court held employee had voluntarily quit job with client. Attorney: E.H. Rayson.
Schultz v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 218 Tenn. 465, 404 S.W.2d 480 (1966).
Action for personal injuries from automobile accident. Court held driver who borrowed car with permission of insured’s son but not insured was not covered under policy issued by client. Attorney: Andrew Johnson.
Wilson v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company, 219 Tenn. 560, 411 S.W.2d 699 (1967).
Insured sought declaration that agreement between client insurer and insured subrogating insurer to rights of insured against tortfeasor for medical payments was void as unlawful assignment of right of action. Court held agreement was a lawful assignment of right of action.
Brotherhood’s Relief and Compensation Fund v. Grubbs, 53 Tenn.App. 697, 386 S.W.2d 526 (1965).
Employee sued to collect employment benefits. Court held employee breached contract with client by failing to report to work when called and not entitled to benefits.
Harvey v. Southern Railway Company, 55 Tenn.App. 304, 399 S.W.2d 523 (1965).
Action for wrongful death. Court reversed directed verdict in favor of railroad and to allow client a hearing. Attorneys: Donelson M. Leake and E.H. Rayson.
Mine Workers v. Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 (1965).
When Union sued companies to recover trust fund royalties, companies counterclaimed for antitrust violation. Court held client Unions did not violate antitrust laws by seeking to influence public officials even if goal of such contact was to eliminate competition. Attorneys: R.R. Kramer, E.H. Rayson.
United States v. Boyd, 378 U.S. 39 (1964).
On appeal from Tennessee Supreme Court, United States sought refund of use taxes paid by client, Atomic Energy Commission contractor at nuclear production facility. Court held tax based upon client’s use of government owned property was not barred by government’s sovereign immunity. Attorney: R.R. Kramer.
City of Oak Ridge v. Morgan, 214 Tenn. 561, 381 S.W.2d 901 (1964).
City established by United States Government sued state commissioner of education seeking City’s share of state school funds for time school system was funded by Atomic Energy Commission. Court ruled that City of Oak Ridge was not entitled to state school funding at the time because it was not operated by the State of Tennessee. Attorneys: Jackson C. Kramer and R.R. Kramer.
Bradford v. Bradford, 51 Tenn.App. 101, 364 S.W.2d 509.
Will contest alleging abuse of discretion in not permitting challenge to size of the estate. Attorney: John B. Rayson.
United States of America and Union Carbide Corporation v. Boyd, 211 Tenn. 139, 363 S.W.2d 193 (1962).
Suit to recover certain sales taxes paid under protest. Court held that Atomic Energy Commission Contractors were purchasing agents for the government and as such were not subject to state sales tax but were subject to state use taxes. United States Supreme Court Affirmed. Attorneys: R.R. Kramer and Jackson C. Kramer.
Dixon v. McClary, 209 Tenn. 81, 349 S.W.2d 140 (1961).
Election contest proceeding was held in Polk County against client. Court held jurisdiction was not exclusively in the Law Court of Ducktown. Attorneys: R.R. Kramer, R. Arnold Kramer and Carter B. Wall.
Lewis v. Benedict Coal Corp., 361 U.S. 459 (1960).
Coal mine operator sued clients, United Mine Workers and Mine Workers Trust Fund, for alleged strike related damages. Court held mine operator was not entitled to set off from obligation to make royalties to trust fund. Attorney: Russell R. Kramer. E.H. Rayson.
Aluminum Company of America v. Walker, 207 Tenn. 417, 340 S.W.2d 898 (1960).
Five employees of the Aluminum Company of America sued client attempting to collect unemployment compensation benefits. Court held employees were not eligible for unemployment because they had refused job offers. Attorneys: Franklin J. McVeigh, E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Textile Workers Union of America, Local No. 513 v. Brookside Mills, Inc., 205 Tenn. 394, 326 S.W.2d 671 (1959).
Action against client by discharged employees for amount allegedly due as vacation pay. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Jack D. Walls v. Robert C. Lueking, 46 Tenn.App. 636, 332 S.W.2d 692 (1959).
Truck owners sued strip coal mine operator for damages caused by tree falling on two trucks which were being loaded with coal at site of strip mining operation. Court held client, mine operator, was not liable. Attorneys: John B. Rayson, Stuart F. Dye.
City of Alcoa v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, IBEW 760, 308 S.W.2d 476.
Suit was filed as a result of the members of the captioned union striking and picketing in an effort to compel client, City of Alcoa, to recognize and bargain with it as the agent of certain of the municipality’s employees. Court held municipal employees could not compel city to enter into collective bargaining agreement. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Finchum Steel Erection Corporation v. Local Union 384, International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Ironworkers, 202 Tenn. 580, 308 S.W.2d 381 (1957).
Company sued client, labor union, alleging union refused to furnish plaintiff with union iron workers causing third party to cancel contract. Court held plaintiff could not maintain action because contract violated Tennessee “right to work” statute. Attorneys: Franklin J. McVeigh, E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Roane-Anderson Company v. Evans, 200 Tenn. 273, 292 S.W.2d 398 (1956).
Client, who had contract with Atomic Energy Commission to provide municipal services for City of Oak Ridge, sued Commissioner of Finance and Taxation to recover amounts of state gross receipts taxes from revenue derived from operation of government owned buses used on project to support atomic bomb production. Court held that revenue from property vested in government after purchase was not subject to gross receipts tax. Attorneys: Jackson C. Kramer and R.R. Kramer.
Hobbs v. Lewis, 197 Tenn. 44, 270 S.W.2d 352 (1954).
Employee sought pension from a pension fund held in trust in Washington, D. C. Court held Tennessee courts lacked jurisdiction over trust situated in Washington. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Carson v. Roane-Anderson Co., 342 U.S. 232 (1952).
Client, who had contract with Atomic Energy Commission to provide municipal services for City of Oak Ridge, protested imposition of sales and use taxes by State of Tennessee. Court held taxes were preempted by the Atomic Energy Act of 1946.
Todd v. Roane-Anderson Co., 35 Tenn.App. 687, 251 S.W.2d 132 (1952).
Employee sued client, Roane-Anderson Co. to recover unpaid overtime compensation. Court held employee was within exemption for executive employees. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Vaughn v. City of Alcoa, 194 Tenn. 449, 251 S.W.2d 304 (1952).
Wrongful death suit against City of Alcoa. Attorney: R.R. Kramer.
Burrell v. La Follettee Coach Lines, 97 F.Supp. 279 (E.D. Tenn. 1951).
Suite by employees seeking overtime compensation. Court ruled in favor of client and dismissed all claims by employees who had not given their consent to suit within the statute of limitations period. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Anderson v. Aluminum Co. of America, 193 Tenn. 106, 241 S.W.2d 932 (1951).
Unemployment compensation appeal. Attorneys: E.H. Rayson and R.R. Kramer.
Carver v. Anthony, 35 Tenn.App. 306, 245 S.W.2d 422 (Tenn. App. 1951).
Probate proceeding. Attorneys: Erma Greenwood and R.R. Kramer.
State ex rel. Ammons v. City of Knoxville, 232 S.W.2d 564 (Tenn. 1950).
City of Knoxville appealed from Chancellor’s holding that two police officers had executed resignations under duress. Attorney: R.R. Kramer.
Donathan v. McMinn County, 187 Tenn. 220, 213 S.W.2d 173 (1948).
Suit in equity by J. C. Donathan and others against McMinn County and others for adjudication of the unconstitutionality of the private act reorganizing the government of such county. Attorneys: R. Arnold Kramer, Erma G. Greenwood and R.R. Kramer.