Remove Depositions Remove Statute Remove Tennessee
article thumbnail

Summary Judgment Based on Tennessee Recreational Use Statute Affirmed.

Day on Torts

First, the Claims Commissioner ruled that the claim was “barred by § 70-7-102(a) of Tennessee’s Recreational Use Statute, which protects landowners, including the State of Tennessee, from responsibility for injury to recreational visitors.” In Victory v. State , No. M2020-01610-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. internal citation omitted).

Statute 59
article thumbnail

Plaintiff’s deposition created issue of fact in GTLA premises liability case.

Day on Torts

Where plaintiff’s deposition created a “dispute of material fact” as to whether defendant had actual notice of the alleged dangerous condition in this GTLA premises liability case, summary judgment for defendant was reversed. Coffee County, Tennessee , No. In Vaughn v. M2021-00653-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1652552 (Tenn.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Dismissal of Defamation and False Light Claim under Tennessee Public Participation Act partially reversed.

Day on Torts

Where plaintiff real estate professional brought an action for defamation and false light based on an online review written by defendant, defendant moved to dismiss the action pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA). Because the TPPA is a relatively new statute, it has not been interpreted in many opinions.

article thumbnail

Exclusion of HCLA expert based on locality rule affirmed.

Day on Torts

Where an HCLA plaintiff’s expert testified at his deposition that he was not very familiar with Kingsport and that he had only reviewed information about Kingsport the night before the deposition, rather than before forming his medical opinions, the trial court did not err by excluding the expert based on the locality rule.

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Evidence of car accident occurring not enough to support negligence claim.

Day on Torts

Where defendant driver stated that the accident that injured plaintiff passenger was due to her swerving to avoid a wild animal that unexpectedly entered the roadway, and plaintiff “presented no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant,” summary judgment for defendant was affirmed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals. In Owings v.

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Summary judgment affirmed where defendant did not place structure creating nuisance on defendant’s easement.

Day on Torts

In support of its motion, the State pointed to deposition testimony that the structure in question was “funky,” was not something the State would have used at any point, and was available to consumers. Note: Chapter 82, Section 1 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law has been updated to include this decision.

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Vegetation management contractor had no duty to remove tree located beyond scope of contract with electrical service.

Day on Torts

The contract incorporated the terms of the SCES Manual, and looking at those two documents plus the deposition testimony from witnesses, the Court found that trees of a certain size and trees located beyond the 10-foot right of way were to be removed “at the sole discretion of SCES or SCES Project Representative.” Code Ann. §