Opinion FlashJuly 30, 2004
Volume 10 Number 146
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
SALLY QUALLS MERCER, ET AL. v. VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY, INC., ET AL. CORRECTED OPINION Court:TSC Attorneys: Clinton L. Kelly and F. Dulin Kelly, Hendersonville, Tennessee, for the appellant-plaintiff, Sally Qualls Mercer. G. Brian Jackson, Robert J. Walker, and Steven E. Anderson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee- defendant, Vanderbilt University, Inc. Robyn E. Smith and William B. Hubbard, Nashville, Tennessee, for the amicus curiae, Tennessee Hospital Association. Judge: HOLDER First Paragraph: We granted this appeal, in part, to determine whether fault was properly assessed against the patient in this medical malpractice action. We overrule Gray v. Ford Motor Co., 914 S.W.2d 464 (Tenn. 1996), and hold that fault may not be assessed against a patient in a medical malpractice action in which a patient's negligent conduct provides only the occasion for the medical attention, care, or treatment which is the basis for the action. We also hold that the additional issues raised by the defendant are without merit. We therefore affirm the trial court's post-trial ruling that the defendant is 100% at fault and is responsible for the full amount of damages found by the jury. CORRECTED OPINION http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/mercersq.wpd
DANNY L. DAVIS CONTRACTORS, INC. v. B. ALLEN HOBBS, ET AL. Court:TCA Attorneys: Danny P. Dyer, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Mullen Construction Co., Inc. John T. McArthur and Melanie E. Davis, Maryville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Danny L. Davis Contractors, Inc. Judge: SUSANO First Paragraph: Danny L. Davis Contractors, Inc. ("the plaintiff") sued (1) B. Allen Hobbs and Pete Roach, who together did business as BH Construction, and (2) Mullen Construction Co., Inc., ("Mullen Construction"), a Tennessee corporation, seeking to collect money owed under a contract the plaintiff entered into with BH Construction for the performance of electrical work in connection with the construction of a CiCi's Pizza restaurant. The general sessions court awarded a judgment against Mullen Construction for $12,506.71. Mullen Construction filed an appeal bond, and the case was then tried de novo without a jury in the trial court. The trial court entered a judgment of $12,506.21 against Mullen Construction. Additionally, the trial court revoked the contractor's license of Mullen Construction, with reinstatement dependent upon the company satisfying the judgment. Mullen Construction appeals, contending that the trial court (1) abused its discretion in admitting "hearsay" testimony into evidence; (2) erred in finding Mullen Construction liable on the contract under an agency theory; and (3) erred in revoking its contractor's license pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. S 62-6- 118 (1997). We affirm. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/davisdanl.wpd
JERRY LEE CHILTON v. DAVID MILLS, WARDEN Court:TCCA Attorneys: Joe H. Walker, District Public Defender and Walter V. Johnson, II, Assistant Public Defender, for the appellant, Jerry Lee Chilton. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; John H. Bledsoe, Assistant Attorney General; J. Scott McCluen, District Attorney General; and Roger Delp, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WELLES First Paragraph: The Defendant appeals from the judgments of the trial court denying him habeas corpus relief. The trial court dismissed the petitions, finding that they failed to state cognizable claims for habeas corpus relief. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/chiltonjl.wpd
Effect of Tenn. Code Ann. S 40-6-215 on Type of Process Available to Initiate Contempt Proceeding for Non-Payment of Court-Ordered Fine Date: July 27, 2004 Opinion Number: 04-124 http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2004/op124.pdf
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