ÿWPC …#†VUNÜ %* 0(04Xl 0J{ 0TÅ 0^ 0hw 0rß 0|Q 0†Í 0S 1uã U,X 0d„ U,è U> B)R DC{ AM¾ U* 5v~QvÓÏ B¢ D3¿ 0@ò AO2Æ 0DG 0D‹ D/Ï Bþ˜IBM Laser Printer 4019IBM4019ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0ÎÙP _Bž7<Ng ^P(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡˜€* 3|xh2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òFebruary€20,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò d%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌFELTON€ALLEN€and€wife,ó óà à)à àShelby€County€Circuit€CourtÌò òBARBARA€ALLEN,ó óà à)à àNo.€23278€T.D.Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Plaintiffs/Appellees.à à)Ìà à)ÌÙ€€ÙßL€!;+'h|Œ¾` Å `€€LßVS.à à)à àC.€A.€No.€02A01„9406„CV„00131Ìà à)Ìò òDELTA€MATERIALS€HANDLING,ó óà à)Ìò òINC.€ó óà à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Circuit€Court€of€Shelby€County€at€Memphis.Ìò òHonorable€Janice€M.€Holder,€Judge€ó óÌÌÌÌò òStuart€A.€Wilsonó ó,ÌWILSON,€McRAE,€IVY,€SEVIER,€McTYIER€and€STRAIN,€Memphis,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellant.ÌÌÌÌò òMarvin€A.€Bienvenu,€Jr.ó ó,ÌGATTI,€KELTNER,€BIENVENU€&€MONTESI,€Memphis,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiffs/Appellees.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌHIGHERS,€J.€ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌò òTOMLIN,€Sp.€J.€ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓà àThe€plaintiffs,€Felton€Allen€and€wife,€Barbara€Allen€sued€Delta€Materials€Handling,ÏInc.€(Delta)€for€injuries€sustained€by€Mr.€Allen€when€he€was€struck€by€a€forklift€that€had€beenÏleased€from€Delta€to€his€employer,€The€Regina€Company.€€The€complaint€alleges€that€Delta€wasÏnegligent€in€leasing€or€renting€the€forklift€to€Allen's€employer€when€Defendant€knew€or€shouldÏhave€known€that€the€brakes€were€defective.ÌÌà àThe€jury€returned€a€verdict€in€favor€of€the€plaintiffs€and€Delta€appeals.€€The€issueÏbefore€us€as€framed€by€the€appellant€is:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àWhether€a€defendant€in€a€negligence€action€can€assert,€as€anÏaffirmative€defense,€that€the€comparative€negligence€and/or€fault€ofÏthe€plaintiff's€employer€or€co„employee€was€the€direct€and/or€aÏcontributing€cause€of€any€alleged€damages€sustained€by€the€plaintiffÏin€an€on„the„job€accident,€notwithstanding€that€the€employer€or€co„employee€may€not€be€subject€to€suit€or€liability€by€virtue€of€theÏTennessee€Workers'€Compensation€Act.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAppellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€allow€the€jury€to€use€theÏcomparative€fault€verdict€form€submitted€by€Defendant€and€in€failing€to€charge€the€jury€onÏcomparative€fault,€thus€allowing€the€jury€the€opportunity€to€consider€the€percentage€of€faultÏchargeable€to€Mr.€Allen's€employer€or€co„workers.€€Our€supreme€court€has€recently€ruled€on€thisÏquestion€in€the€matter€of€òòò òRidings€v.€Ralph€M.€Parsons€Co.,óóó ó€No.€02„S„01„9406„CV„00032Ï(Tenn.€filed€January€29,€1996).€€This€was€an€action€for€personal€injury€sustained€by€Mr.€RidingsÏwhen€he€was€injured€during€the€course€and€scope€of€his€employment€by€CBI„Nacon,€Inc.€€TheÏcomplaint€alleged€an€action€in€negligence,€gross€negligence€and€strict€liability€against€the€Ralph€M.ÏParsons€Company€and€other€defendants.€€Our€supreme€court,€speaking€through€Justice€Reid,Ístated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€issue€presented€is€whether€the€defendants€in€this€suit€forÏpersonal€injuries€based€on€allegations€of€negligence€and€strictÏliability€in€tort€can€assert€as€an€affirmative€defense€that€the€plaintiff'sÏemployer€caused€or€contributed€to€the€plaintiff's€injuries€andÏdamages,€notwithstanding€that€the€injuries€alleged€were€sustained€inÏthe€course€and€scope€of€the€plaintiff's€employment€which€wasÏcovered€by€the€workers'€compensation€law€of€Tennessee.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€plaintiff€contends€that€allowing€the€jury€to€attribute€faultÏto€the€plaintiff's€employer,€against€whom€the€plaintiff€cannotÏmaintain€an€action€for€damages,€violates€the€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó€principle€thatÏthe€"plaintiff's€damages€are€to€be€reduced€in€proportion€to€theÏpercentage€of€the€total€negligence€attributable€to€the€plaintiff."€Ïòòò òMcIntyre€v.€Balentineóóó ó,€833€S.W.2d€at€57.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€defendants€counter€that€excluding€the€plaintiff'sÏemployer€from€those€persons€to€whom€fault€may€be€attributedÏviolates€the€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó€principle€that€defendants€will€be€"liable€onlyÏfor€the€percentage€of€a€plaintiff's€damages€occasioned€by€thatÏdefendant's€negligence."€€òòò òIdóóó ó.€at€58.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà àThe€decision€in€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó€obviously€does€not€allow€theÏemployer€to€be€held€liable€directly,€as€a€defendant€in€the€employee'sÏsuit€for€damages,€or€indirectly,€as€a€joint€tortfeasor€liable€forÏcontribution€or€indemnity.€€However,€the€defendants€insist€that€faultÏcan€be€attributed€to€the€employer,€and€the€liability€of€the€defendantsÏcan€be€decreased€accordingly,€without€the€imposition€of€liabilityÏupon€the€employer.€€This€proposition€is€not€consistent€with€theÏTennessee€doctrine€of€comparative€fault.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€principle€of€several€liability€among€tortfeasors,Ïannounced€in€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó,€provides€the€policy€basis€for€the€decisionÏin€this€case.€€In€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó,€the€Court€set€forth€the€framework€forÏdetermining€liability€on€the€defendant€side€of€the€equation.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àFourth,€fairness€and€efficiency€require€thatÏdefendants€called€upon€to€answer€allegations€inÏnegligence€be€permitted€to€allege,€as€an€affirmativeÏdefense,€that€a€nonparty€caused€or€contributed€to€theÏinjury€or€damage€for€which€recovery€is€sought.€€InÏcases€where€such€a€defense€is€raised,€the€trial€courtÏshall€instruct€the€jury€to€assign€this€nonparty€theÏpercentage€of€the€total€negligence€for€which€he€isÏresponsible.€€However,€in€order€for€a€plaintiff€toÏrecover€a€judgment€against€such€additional€person,Ïthe€plaintiff€must€have€made€a€timely€amendment€toÏhis€complaint€and€caused€process€to€be€served€onÏsuch€additional€person.€€Thereafter,€the€additionalÍparty€will€be€required€to€answer€the€amendedÏcomplaint.€€The€procedures€shall€be€in€accordanceÏwith€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€ÌÌà8 àòòò òMcIntyre€v.€Balentineóóó ó,€833€S.W.2d€at€58.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€rationale€of€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó€postulates€that€fault€may€beÏattributed€only€to€those€persons€against€whom€the€plaintiff€has€aÏcause€of€action€in€tort.€€The€designation€"nonparty,"€used€inÏòòò òMcIntyreóóó ó,€is€not€a€term€of€art;€it€means€"not€a€party."€€However,€itÏis€given€a€particular€meaning€by€the€decision€in€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó,€whereinÏthe€Court€found€that,€upon€a€defendant's€allegation€that€a€person€notÏa€party€to€the€suit,€a€"nonparty,"€caused€or€contributed€to€theÏplaintiff's€injuries,€the€plaintiff,€by€amendment€to€the€complaint€andÏservice€of€process,€may€make€the€"nonparty"€a€"party"€that€isÏanswerable€to€the€plaintiff€in€actions€for€damages€according€to€theÏRules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€Consequently,€only€a€nonparty€againstÏwhom€the€plaintiff€has€a€cause€of€action€can€be€made€a€party.€€SinceÏthe€plaintiff's€employer€cannot€be€made€a€party€to€the€plaintiff's€tortÏaction€for€personal€injuries€sustained€in€the€course€and€scope€of€hisÏemployment,€the€rationale€of€òòò òMcIntyreóóó ó,€both€as€to€principle€andÏprocedure,€will€not€permit€fault€to€be€attributed€to€the€plaintiff'sÏemployer.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà àLimiting€the€parties€to€whom€fault€may€be€attributed€to€thoseÏsubject€to€liability,€accomplishes€the€policy€objectives€of€fairnessÏand€efficiency.€€Since€liability€is€several€and€is€in€direct€proportion€toÏlegal€fault,€each€defendant€will€be€liable€only€for€the€percentage€ofÏthe€damages€caused€by€it.€€Since€fault€is€limited€to€the€plaintiff€andÏthose€against€whom€the€plaintiff€has€a€cause€of€action,€the€plaintiff€isÏnot€denied€the€right€to€recover€those€damages€to€which€it€is€entitled.€ÏHowever,€the€plaintiff€will€bear€the€loss€for€any€liability€that€it€failsÏor€is€unable€to€assert€and€any€judgment€that€cannot€be€enforced.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€result€is€that€the€plaintiff's€right€to€recover€on€allegationsÏof€negligence€and€strict€liability€is€determined€without€reference€toÏthe€employer's€conduct.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òRidingsóóó ó,€slip€op.€at€3„13€(footnotes€omitted).€€As€a€result€of€the€decision€in€òòò òRidingsóóó ó,€we€findÏAppellant's€issue€to€be€without€merit.ÌÌà àAlthough€not€presented€as€an€issue,€Appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€notÏgranting€its€motion€for€a€mistrial€on€the€basis€that€"during€closing€argument,€counsel€for€theÍplaintiff€told€the€jury€that€counsel€for€the€defendant€had€asked€the€court€to€instruct€the€jury€on€theÏdoctrine€of€intervening€cause."€€The€record€reveals€that€Plaintiffs'€attorney€made€the€followingÏstatement€during€the€course€of€closing€argument€to€the€jury:ÌÌÓÓà8 àAt€the€defense€counsel's€request,€the€Court's€[sic]€agreed€to€instructÏyou€on€„„„ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAt€that€point€the€trial€judge€interrupted€counsel,€called€the€attorneys€to€the€bench€andÏadmonished€counsel€not€to€state€to€the€jury€by€whom€requests€were€made.€€The€court€then€excusedÏthe€jury€and€a€discourse€took€place€between€the€court€and€the€respective€counsel.€€At€this€point,Ïcounsel€for€the€defendant€moved€for€a€mistrial€on€the€basis€that€the€interrupted€statement€ofÏPlaintiffs'€attorney€was€highly€prejudicial€to€the€defendant.ÌÌà àWhen€the€jury€returned,€Plaintiffs'€attorney€resumed€his€closing€statement€byÏstating€"I€think€I€forgot€where€I€was€so€I'll€just€try€to€be€real€brief€and€finish."€€At€this€point€heÏexpressed€to€the€jury€his€understanding€of€intervening€cause.ÌÌà àAs€the€trial€court€accurately€expressed€to€counsel,€the€jury€charge€is€the€charge€ofÏthe€court€and€may€or€may€not€include€special€requests€made€by€counsel€for€the€respective€parties.€ÏIt€is€improper€for€an€attorney€to€state€to€the€jury€at€whose€request€a€charge€was€given.€€However,Ïsince€the€trial€court€interrupted€Plaintiffs'€counsel€before€he€had€identified€the€defense€counsel'sÏrequest,€we€cannot€say€that€his€incomplete€statement€justified€a€mistrial€and€affirm€the€trial€court'sÏdenial€of€the€motion.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trialÏcourt.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓ` Ü` È“XÓÓÓà à________________________________Ìà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌTOMLIN,€Sp.€J.€(Concurs)