Rhonda Lee Smith (Baliles) v. Home Beneficial Life Insurance Company
This text of Rhonda Lee Smith (Baliles) v. Home Beneficial Life Insurance Company (Rhonda Lee Smith (Baliles) v. Home Beneficial Life Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN SECTI ON
RHONDA LEE SM TH ( BALI LES) I ) BRADLEY COUNTY ) 03A01- 9606- CH- 00195 Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) v. ) HON. EARL H. HENLEY, ) CHANCELLOR ) HOM BENEFI CI AL LI FE E ) APPEAL DI SM SSED I N PART; I I NSURANCE COMPANY ) J UDGMENT AFFI RMED I N PART, ) VACATED I N PART, a nd REM ANDED De f e nda nt - Appe l l e e )
W LLI AM J . BROW OF CLEVELAND FOR APPELLANT I N
M CHAEL E. CALLAW OF CLEVELAND FOR APPELLEE I AY
CHARLES W BURSON, At t or ne y Ge ne r a l a nd Re por t e r , a nd . J OHN A. MOORE, As s i s t a nt At t or ne y Ge ne r a l , NASHVI LLE, FOR LARRY W ALLACE, Di r e c t or o f t he TENNESSEE BUREAU OF I NVESTI GATI ON
O P I N I O N
Godda r d, P. J .
Thi s c a s e i s be f or e us pur s ua nt t o t he gr a nt of t wo
Ru l e 9 I nt e r l oc ut or y Appe a l s , one t o Pl a i nt i f f Rhonda Le e Smi t h
a nd t h e ot he r t o La r r y W l l a c e , i n hi s of f i c i a l c a pa c i t y a s a
Di r e c t o r of t he Te nne s s e e Bur e a u of I nve s t i ga t i on. The s ui t gi vi ng r i s e t o t he s e a ppe a l s s t e ms f r om t he
d i s a p p e a r a nc e of Cha r l e s Ve r non Smi t h i n J une of 1985, whi l e h e 1 wa s ma r r i e d t o M . Ba l i l e s . s Pr i or t o hi s di s a ppe a r a nc e , M . r
Smi t h p ur c ha s e d a whol e l i f e i ns ur a nc e pol i c y f r om Home
Be n e f i c i a l i n t he a mount of $100, 000 wi t h a c c i de nt a l de a t h
b e n e f i t s i n a n a ddi t i ona l a mount of $100, 000. Thi s pol i c y na me d
M . Ba l i l e s a s t he b e ne f i c i a r y. s I t i s M . Ba l i l e s ' s t he or y t ha t
M . Smi t h wa s t he vi c t i m of a c ont r a c t ki l l i ng by Bobby Cha dwi c k r
a t t h e i ns t a nc e of De no M Ke nz i e . c
Al t hough ot he r i s s ue s a r e r a i s e d i n t hi s Cour t , we ma y
o n l y c o n s i de r t hos e i s s ue s s pe c i f i e d i n t he Tr i a l Cour t ' s or de r s
g r a n t i n g t he s e a ppe a l s :
MS. BALI LES APPEAL
I t i s t he r e f or e ORDERED, ADJ UDGED AND DECREED THAT t h e mot i on of t he de f e nda nt Home Be ne f i c i a l Li f e I n s ur a nc e Compa ny t o s t r i ke t he de pos i t i ons of Shi r l e y Ha mi l t on a nd Spe c i a l Age nt Ge r a l d Pr e s l e y of t he Te nne s s e e Bur e a u of I nve s t i ga t i on i s gr a nt e d.
I t i s f ur t he r ORDERED t ha t t he pl a i nt i f f i s g r a nt e d a n i nt e r l oc ut or y a ppe a l t o t he Cour t of Appe a l s a s t o t he i s s ue s of t he s t r i ki ng of t he de pos i t i ons a s we l l a s t he pl a i nt i f f ' s mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt , a n d t he t r i a l da t e of Apr i l 29, 1996 i s c ont i nue d p e ndi ng t hi s a ppe a l .
1 S h e wa s s u b s e q u e n t l y d i v o r c e d f r o m M . r S mi t h o n J u l y 3 1 , 1985.
2 MR. WALLACE' S APPEAL
It is f ur t he r ORDERED t ha t t he Te nne s s e e Bur e a u of I n ve s t i ga t i on a nd Spe c i a l Age nt Ge r a l d Pr e s l e y a r e g r a nt e d a n i nt e r l oc ut or y a ppe a l t o t he Cour t of Appe a l s a s t o t he i s s ue of whe t he r t he de pos i t i ons a r e p r i vi l e ge d a nd not s ubj e c t t o i nt r oduc t i on a s e vi de nc e at t r i al .
I n a ddr e s s i ng t he f i r s t poi nt s r a i s e d by M . Ba l i l e s , s
we mu s t f i r s t l ook t o t he de f i ni t i on of he a r s a y f ound i n Rul e 8 0 1
o f t h e Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Evi de nc e :
Rul e 8 01. De f i ni t i ons .
The f ol l owi ng de f i ni t i ons a ppl y unde r t hi s ar t i cl e: ( a ) St a t e me nt . A " s t a t e me nt " i s ( 1) a n or a l or wr i t t e n a s s e r t i on or ( 2) nonve r ba l c onduc t of a pe r s on i f i t i s i nt e nde d by t he pe r s on a s a n a s s e r t i on. ( b) De c l a r a nt . A " d e c l a r a nt " i s a pe r s on who ma ke s a s t a t e me nt . ( c ) He a r s a y. " He a r s a y" i s a s t a t e me nt , 2 ot he r t ha n o n e ma de by t he de c l a r a nt whi l e t e s t i f yi ng a t t he t r i a l o r he a r i ng, of f e r e d i n e vi de nc e t o pr ove t he t r ut h of t h e ma t t e r a s s e r t e d.
A c ur s or y e xa mi na t i on of t he de pos i t i on of Shi r l e y
Ha mi l t o n a nd Spe c i a l Age nt Pr e s l e y de mons t r a t e s t ha t c e r t a i n
t e s t i mo ny e l i c i t e d i s c l e a r l y not he a r s a y. For e xa mpl e , a s t o
M . Ha mi l t on, s he t e s t i f i e d a s t o t he f ol l owi ng f a c t s a bout t he s
t i me of M . Smi t h' s d i s a pp e a r a nc e : r
2 Or a l or wr i t t e n o r non- ve r ba l conduc t i nt e nde d as an a s s e r t i on.
3 1. He r t he n hus ba nd, Bobby Cha dwi c k, c a me i nt o t he i r
h o me a n d " ha d bl ood down hi s s hi r t , down hi s pa nt s . "
Ad d i t i o na l l y, on t hi s oc c a s i on, " he ha d a bi l l f ol d s t r e t c he d o u t
i n h i s ha nd. I s e e n - - I don' t know i f i t wa s a dr i ve r ' s l i c e n s e
o r a n I D or wha t . I t j us t ha d a pi c t ur e of M . Smi t h. " r On t h e
s a me o c c a s i on, he t ook out a r e vol ve r a nd l a i d i t on t he c of f e e
t a bl e . For s e ve r a l d a ys t he r e a f t e r , M . Smi t h wa s s i c k a nd c ou l d r
n o t e a t nor dr i nk.
2. Tha t s ome t i me l a t e r , a t he r hus ba nd' s r e que s t , s h e
a c c o mp a ni e d hi m t o t he home of De no M Ke nz i e , whe r e he r e move d a n c
e n v e l o p e f r om M . M Ke nz i e ' s ma i l box a nd ha nde d i t t o he r . r c W en h
s h e o p e ne d t he e nve l ope s he f ound i t c ont a i ne d $3000.
I t f ur t he r a ppe a r s t ha t e ve n s ome s t a t e me nt s t ha t a r e
h e a r s a y mi ght be e xc e pt i ons t o t he ge ne r a l r ul e . Rul e 803,
Te n n e s s e e Rul e s of Evi de nc e , 3r d Ed. W a l s o poi nt out wi t hou t e
t r y i n g t o mi c r o- ma na ge t he Cha nc e l l or ' s t r i a l of t hi s c a s e t ha t
q u e s t i o ns a nd c omma nds a r e a s a ge ne r a l r ul e a dmi s s i bl e . Se c t i o n
8 0 1 . 9 , Te nne s s e e La w of Ev i de nc e , 3r d Ed.
Fi na l l y, a s t o t ha t por t i on of M . Ba l i l e s ' s a ppe a l
wh i c h a s s e r t s s he s houl d ha ve be e n gr a nt e d a s umma r y j udgme nt , we
c a n n o t f i nd t ha t t he undi s put e d pr oof s hows M . Smi t h i s de c e a s e d r
o r t h a t hi s de a t h r e s ul t e d a s a l l e ge d i n t he c ompl a i nt " f r om
b o d i l y i nj ur i e s s us t a i ne d t hr ough e xt e r na l , vi ol e nt , a nd
a c c i d e nt a l me a ns . "
4 As t o t he de pos i t i on of Spe c i a l Age nt Pr e s l e y, we
r e c o g n i z e t ha t muc h of i t mi ght not be a dmi s s i bl e a s vi ol a t i ve o f
t h e h e a r s a y r ul e but ot he r por t i ons a r e a nd, wi t h t hi s de pos i t i o n
a s wi t h t he de pos i t i on of M . Ha mi l t on, t he r ul i ngs of t he Tr i a l s
Co u r t s houl d be on a n a ns we r - by- a ns we r ba s i s whi c h c oul d ve r y
we l l b e i nf l ue nc e d by t he t e s t i mony r e c e i ve d a t t r i a l pr i or t o
t h e o f f e r of t he t e s t i mony c ont a i ne d i n t he de pos i t i ons .
I t a ppe a r s t he pr i nc i pa l c onc e r n a s t o M . W l l a c e ' s r a
a p p e a l i s t ha t M . Ha mi l t on' s na me woul d be c ome known t o M . s r
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rhonda Lee Smith (Baliles) v. Home Beneficial Life Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhonda-lee-smith-baliles-v-home-beneficial-life-in-tennctapp-2004.