Remove Depositions Remove Statute Remove Tort
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. In Vaughn v. Coffee County, Tennessee , No. M2021-00653-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1652552 (Tenn. internal citations omitted).

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
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Spooky Torts: The 2021 List of Litigation Horrors

JonathanTurley

Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more. A tort action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is likely to fail. See Pennsylvania General Assembly Statute §7102.

Tort 50
article thumbnail

Spooky Torts: The 2022 List of Litigation Horrors

JonathanTurley

Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more. However, my students and I often discuss the remarkably wide range of torts that comes with All Hallow’s Eve.

Tort 48
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

During plaintiff’s deposition, he stated that defendant had “done what she had to do” and “acknowledged that he did not think she had done anything wrong.” Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, citing plaintiff’s own deposition as evidence. Defendant was allegedly injured during the accident and filed this negligence suit.

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