This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
A third complaint filed more than one year after dismissal of the original complaint did not fall within the savings statute and was time barred. 23, 2024), plaintiff filed a complaint alleging several tort claims, including assault, battery, and trespass. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations.
Where a patient left the hospital with known pressure ulcers and no wound treatment plan, the statute of limitations for his HCLA (health care liability act, formerly known as medical malpractice) claim related to those skin wounds began to run on the day he was discharged from the hospital. In Jackson v. This ruling was affirmed on appeal.
Where plaintiff’s claims against defendant county were based on intentional torts, a one-year statute of limitations applied. Lauderdale County, Tennessee , No. In Anderson v. W2022-00332-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. 21, 2023), plaintiff was pulled over by a sheriff’s deputy employed by defendant county.
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.
Where plaintiff filed a products liability claim based on a hip replacement device she had received, but her hip replacement occurred more than ten years before her suit was filed, dismissal based on the statute of repose was affirmed. In Jones v. Smith & Nephew Inc. , W2021-00426-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 767709 (Tenn. Code Ann. §
When appealing a trial court’s order dismissing or refusing to dismiss a case under the Tennessee Public Protection Act (TPPA), the appeal “must be filed within thirty days of the entry of that order.”. The TPPA is Tennessee’s anti-SLAPP statute, which stands for “strategic lawsuits against public participation.” In Laferney v.
The trial court noted that “the facts regarding [defendant attorney’s] agreement to bifurcate damages were referenced in various motions leading up to the entry of final judgment,” and accordingly dismissed the action based on the statute of limitations. On appeal, dismissal was affirmed.
Where defendant governmental entity did not own the park where plaintiff was injured, and plaintiff was attending a concert in the park when she fell, summary judgment based on both the GTLA and Recreational Use Statute was affirmed. The Court next turned to whether summary judgment was appropriate under the Recreational Use Statutes.
When a litigant has filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act (TPPA), that motion should be analyzed under the provisions of the TPPA rather than under the traditional Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12 analysis. In Reiss v. Rock Creek Construction, Inc. , internal citation omitted).
The Tennessee Supreme Court reviews very few cases in a given year. There are other types of cases that the Court is required to hear.) Given the case selection criteria in discretionary review matters and the types of appeal-as-of-right cases, each opinion is highly likely to materially impact Tennessee law. Code Ann. §
Where plaintiff knew her husband was killed in a car accident with a firefighter but did not know all the details regarding how the accident occurred, the one-year statute of limitations began to run on the day of the crash and her GTLA suit that was filed more than one year after the accident was untimely. In Durham v.
Note: Chapter 25, Section 10 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
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.
The Tennessee Court of Appeals has ruled plaintiffs can pursue claims based on recklessness and gross negligence under the GTLA. Pursuant to the language of the statute, the trial court had held that plaintiffs’ claims could not proceed because they were based on allegations of reckless conduct. In Lawson v. Hawkins County, TN , No.
Where the gravamen of plaintiff’s complaint was his tort claim for defamation seeking unliquidated damages, the chancery court did not have subject matter jurisdiction and the case should have been transferred to circuit court. In Lowery v. Redmond , No. W2021-00611-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. internal citation omitted).
Where plaintiff wife failed to give written notice of her loss of consortium claim against the State of Tennessee to the Division of Claims and Risk Management, dismissal of her claim was affirmed, despite the fact that her complaint was filed with the Claims Commission within the statute of limitations. In Kampmeyer v. State , No.
Where plaintiff had filed complaints with the Board of Professional Responsibility (BPR) complaining of the same allegations that allegedly supported her legal malpractice claim, and those BPR complaints were filed more than one year before the legal malpractice suit was filed, summary judgment based on the statute of limitations was affirmed.
Although plaintiff labeled his complaint as a tort claim, the gravamen of the complaint was a dispute over “the amount, time and manner of payment of plaintiff’s pension plan benefits.” Defendant filed a motion to dismiss based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(1).
Where defendant physician was employed by a state university and received no personal gain from the clinical services she rendered at a hospital, and plaintiff had brought an HCLA action based on these hospital clinical services, summary judgment pursuant to defendant’s absolute immunity under the Tennessee Claims Commission Act was affirmed.
Regarding the claims against Goodall, the trial court had found in part that the claim was barred by the applicable statute of repose found in Tenn. Accordingly, Goodall could only be liable if it “undertook a duty to maintain or warn about a dangerous condition on the sidewalk beyond the four-year statute of repose.” Code Ann. §
Plaintiff asserted various claims against defendants, including breach of contract, fraud, intentional misrepresentation, and negligence, all of which the trial court dismissed as untimely pursuant to the three-year statute of limitations applicable to claims of injuries to real property. In Simpkins v. John Maher Builders, Inc. , 28-3-105.)
After decedent’s death, plaintiffs filed this suit in Tennessee, attempting to have the remaining settlement proceeds distributed as wrongful death proceeds rather than having them distributed under decedent’s will. Note: Chapter 108, Section 3 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision.
Defendant argued that plaintiffs knew about the alleged conversion in October 2009 and that the claim was therefore time-barred, but the trial court found that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until after the father’s death. Conversion is subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Code Ann. §
The Court pointed out that there is no Tennessee caselaw supporting the argument that “a lease or bailment was sufficient to meet the final element of conversion…,” but that caselaw instead “confirms that, in the typical case, the true owner of a property subject to a bailment is the bailor, not the bailee.” internal citation omitted).
To be liable for civil trespass in Tennessee, the alleged tortfeasor does not have to intend to enter the property of another; he or she can commit trespass while believing the property is his or her own and only needs to intentionally be on the land. In Barrios v. Simpkins , No. M2021-01347-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 16846642 (Tenn.
Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, asserting that plaintiff failed to file her complaint within the three-year statute of repose. Defendant filed a new motion to dismiss, asserting that plaintiffs’ various informed consent claims were barred by either the statute of repose or the statute of limitations. Rule 56.04
On appeal, plaintiffs attempted to rely on Tennessee’s Post-Mortem Examination Act to support their argument that the distribution of the autopsy photos was not protected speech under the U.S. and Tennessee Constitutions. This case is an important read for anyone litigating a tort case involving a matter of public concern.
Note: Chapter 28, Section 11 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
Note: Chapter 41, Section 8 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
Note: Chapter 82, Section 1 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
25, 2022), the patient underwent a hysterectomy at a hospital in Kingsport, Tennessee. An HCLA expert witness must be licensed to practice in Tennessee or a contiguous bordering state “during the year preceding the date the alleged injury…occurred.” In Jackson v. Thibault , No. E2021-00988-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 14162828 (Tenn.
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.
More than two weeks after the order of dismissal was entered, defendants filed a “combined motion to alter or amend and petition to dismiss with prejudice pursuant to the Tennessee Public Participation Act” (TPPA). voluntary dismissals in Tennessee. internal citation omitted). internal citation omitted). Rule 41.01
Here, the State argued “that it owed no duty to Plaintiff because it delegated responsibility for maintaining the relevant portions of [the highways] to the City of Kingsport under Tennessee Code Annotated §§ 54-5-201 and -203.” The Court rejected this argument. Click on the link to see the book’s Table of Contents.
April 14, 2022), plaintiff filed an HCLA claim against several defendants, including the State of Tennessee as the employer of Dr. Landry, who was allegedly negligent. Note: Chapter 46, Section 2 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. In Gilbert v. State , No.
When that friend could not find a Tennessee lawyer to take her case before the statute of limitations ran out, he sent her a sample pre-suit notice form. Note: Chapter 45, Sections 3, 9 and 12 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision.
Coffee County, Tennessee , No. Note: Chapter 41, Section 7 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
While there were no Tennessee cases directly on point, the Court of Appeals explained that this case “share[d] similarities with cases involving a landlord who leases property to a tenant who maintains a vicious dog on the property.” Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law ? Tennessee Law of Civil Trial ?
A premises liability plaintiff must prove the elements of the tort, but must also “first prove that a dangerous or defective condition existed on the owner’s property” and must show that the defendant either created the dangerous condition or had actual or constructive notice of the condition. Summary judgment for DSS was affirmed on appeal.
The biggest takeaway here is the Court’s ruling that defendant did not have a duty to remove the tire debris from the interstate, as this is the first Tennessee case to address this issue. Note: Chapter 30, Section 1 and Chapter 73, Section 6 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision.
Note: Chapter 89, Sections 4 and 10 of Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law has been updated to include this decision. Day on Torts: Leading Cases in TennesseeTort Law contains summaries of leading cases on over 500 topics and citations to more than 1500 additional cases.
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.
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.
Perry County, Tennessee , No. The Tennessee Supreme Court “has adopted a planning-operational test to determine whether a decision is discretionary within the meaning of the GTLA,” explaining that “planning or policy-making decisions are immune from liability” while “operational decisions do not enjoy the same protection.”
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content