Opinion FlashJanuary 21, 2004Volume 10 — Number 013 Following this index are summaries of each case, including its name, first paragraph, author's name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion. This Issue (IN THIS ORDER):
TBA members can get the full-text versions of these opinions three ways detailed below. All methods require a TBA username and password. If you have forgotten your password, you can look it up on-line at http://www.tba.org/getpassword.mgi . If you are a TBA member, but do not have a username and password, you can receive one online at http://www.tba.org/signup.mgi. Here's how you can obtain full-text version. Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This option will allow you to download the original document. Howard H. Vogel GINNIE LEACH and J.T. HILL, JR. v. TIM TAYLOR and LARRY TAYLOR, individually and doing business as HUNT FUNERAL HOME Court:TSC Attorneys: Michael Ernest Evans, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Tim Taylor and Larry Taylor, individually and doing business as Hunt Funeral Home. Joseph Ray Taggart, Jackson, Tennessee, for the appellees, Ginnie Leach and J.T. Hill, Jr. Judge: DROWOTA First Paragraph: We granted permission to appeal in this case to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the complaint failed to state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. We also consider Defendants' contention that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that Plaintiffs' cause of action was not time-barred because the discovery rule applies to this case. We hold that Plaintiffs' complaint is sufficient to state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The complaint alleges all the elements of the cause of action. We also hold that the discovery rule tolled the statute of limitations in this case. Plaintiffs could not have been expected to know, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, that Defendants' alleged statements were false, and therefore could not have been expected to know that an injury had occurred because of the false statements. Accordingly, the holding of the Court of Appeals is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and this case is remanded to the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/leachginnie.wpd ROBERT TERRY MOORE v. THE TOWN OF COLLIERVILLE, ET AL. Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel Attorneys: Steve Taylor, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Robert Terry Moore. W. Timothy Hayes, Jr., Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellees, The Town of Collierville and Tennessee Municipal League, Inc. Judge: ANDERSON First Paragraph: In this workers' compensation appeal, we must determine whether an employer is liable to a health insurer who paid necessary and reasonable medical expenses incurred by an employee but did not intervene in the workers' compensation claim to protect its interest. Although the trial court found that the treatment was necessary and reasonable, it further found that the employer was not liable for the medical expenses paid by the employee's health insurer because the insurer failed to intervene and prove its interest. The employee appealed to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, which transferred the case for full Court review without a recommendation. After reviewing the record and applicable authority, we have determined that the employer is liable to the employee's health insurer for all reasonable and necessary medical expenses and that the health insurer is not required to intervene in the workers' compensation suit. Because the record does not fully develop the nature and extent of the expenses paid by the health insurer, we remand to the trial court for that purpose and further action consistent with this opinion. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/moorert.wpd MELVIN ALEXANDER v. QUENTON WHITE Court:TCA Attorneys: Melvin Alexander, Nashville, Tennessee, Pro Se. Paul G. Summers, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Quenton White, Commissioner for Department of Correction, State of Tennessee. Judge: CLEMENT First Paragraph: This is an appeal as of right by an inmate with the Tennessee Department of Correction who had filed a petition for declaratory judgment in the Davidson County Chancery Court seeking to have the court review the Department of Correction's calculation of his sentence. The Chancery Court entered an order which required the petitioner to comply with the statutory requirements of Tenn. Code Ann. S 41-21-801, et seq. and to submit a summons along with a copy of the petition for service upon the respondent. The Chancery Court dismissed his declaratory judgment petition for lack of prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to comply with its order. We affirm. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/alexandermelvin.wpd PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL! GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION! JOIN THE TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION! SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH! UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT! But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi Home • Contact Us • PageFinder • What's New • Help |
|
© Copyright 2004 Tennessee Bar Association
|