ÿWPCÍ JVL–“ñçmÌ‹x¶ï{òg?‘°l”ˆšzczᜇÄäЩ $ïdÁ=Œ¿—êõ†u\'a/ ÏŒÿ¦dÕë°ó EQÞãqáoÒHû`cóN £&2¯’ïêɽXÓS¥ßƒ«+ ÅEMçöUñ=Í£[‹{´ ²³‚°c–šN„ZmSOÐcІW4 ±–*dI¡ œ[mõC„¡i`?ޤZ²G‹ås²ô‰+þÙ‚TRs)#¥/ÿ õO1(zø]´où,’áËäÉcÁ[û¹»ZMX¯d‘Ȩ5ô]|ìÆ"ÜUZùuüZž—ìðÅ¡.þ®# ¾ /†/oKG¹ÄP]I„à8üÊïO”¿eËÂNÜÀÍ_Á šßÞŸwº¤"'‹(ÛÕÈ? qIísõ%±§^ïú{ªºÌ³æÏæz3¤ XÍ¥0ìó1ÔÙ¡‚'à]E xgáÂ%v+Í@få”$ºKuÖJðý†øJ¸?CñÝä´ó³ÌÔ¹Mô[€eBé=Cærs8eÂ&§0 àeˆ¿±K¸l˜*e†´åQºe&Nt—oœÎéí0’c\7ÝÊP_ÿ AÏÈ̜ÇëËãã*(¾ÏÎb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë ë N±±ü³E¯ 0D±?õUN4U @‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚‚b 0ëÊÊÊÊ Bµµ 0¤Ò D3v D-© 0KÖÖ AS!Æt 0¤: 0DÞ A«"»zu$+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularòK+Èñ£3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0 Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 òÝ ƒRIÜ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÇÒ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Andersons€assert€in€their€brief€to€this€Court€that€the€trial€court€stated€orally€that€the€dismissal€would€notÐ ° Ðbe€with€prejudice.€€However,€the€record€on€appeal€has€no€transcript€of€this€hearing€and€the€trial€courtððs€order€grantingÐ tÄ ÐDr.€Howserððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€does€not€indicate€a€dismissal€without€prejudice.€€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó 5Ý ƒRIÜ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôÇÒ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€do€not€address€the€situation€in€which€it€is€uncertain€whether€the€expert€testifying€by€affidavit€in€responseÐ ° Ðto€a€summary€judgment€motion€will€testify€at€trial.(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman - ù-(|G2IÜ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€,»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô{Ðò»»Ô d(|3…æ$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€,»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3…æ$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€,»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ‡»o*»»»ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼o*»»»o*ÔÑ8€`”XXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  Ñ€Ô_Ô€Ô_Ôà  àà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îģo*ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@íí%ìàAT€MEMPHISÔ#†¼o*»îîÄ£Y#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€10,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X޾X»¼o*ÔÌò òÔ#†¼o*»XX޾@#ÔARTHUR€W.€ANDERSON,€SR.€and€MARY€JEANETTE€C.€ANDERSON€òòóó€Ð úJ Ðv.Ð  ^ ЀJOHN€P.€HOWSER€€M.D.,€P.A.€and€DR.€€JOHN€P.€HOWSER€,€Individually€òòóóÔ‡X޾X»¼o*Ôó óÐ " r ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAn€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ " r Ðà@@øøìàNo.€48196€T.D.€€€€€€James€F.€Russell,€JudgeÐ ^  ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ñ` AßÐ Ò"  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„00937„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€30,€2001Ð Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¤` AßÐ ¥õ Ðó óÌÓ  Óà  àThis€is€a€medical€malpractice€case.€€The€defendants€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,Ð  ð Ðsupported€by€an€affidavit€from€the€defendant€physician.€€The€plaintiffs€filed€the€opposing€affidavitÐ ŒÜ Ðof€an€expert€physician.€€When€the€defendants€attempted€to€depose€the€plaintiffsðð€expert,€they€wereÐ xÈ Ðinformed€that€he€would€not€be€testifying€at€trial.€€However,€the€plaintiffsðð€expertððs€affidavit€wasÐ d´ Ðnever€withdrawn€from€the€record,€nor€was€his€testimony€recanted.€€The€trial€court€gave€the€plaintiffsÐ P  Ðadditional€time€to€secure€an€expert€for€trial.€€The€plaintiffs€failed€to€secure€an€expert€within€the€timeÐ <Œ Ðperiod€and€filed€a€notice€of€voluntary€non„suit.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€defendantsðð€motion€forÐ (x Ðsummary€judgment,€holding€that€the€plaintiffsðð€response€to€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€mustÐ d Ðbe€supported€by€the€affidavit€of€an€expert€who€is€expected€to€testify€at€trial.€€The€plaintiffs€appealed.€Ð P ÐWe€affirm.€€Where€the€plaintiff€submits€the€affidavit€of€an€expert€in€response€to€a€motion€forÐ ì< Ðsummary€judgment,€and€it€is€undisputed€that€the€expert€will€not€testify€for€trial,€the€plaintiff€has€notÐ Ø( Ðdemonstrated€that€he€has€a€justiciable€claim€warranting€a€trial,€and€the€granting€of€summaryÐ Ä Ðjudgment€is€appropriate.€€Ð ° ÐÓ\ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Affirmed.Ð ˆ!Ø  Ðó óÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼o*»àX޾8#ÔÔ‡X޾X.¼o*ÔHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,Ð `#°" ÐW.S.óó€and€òòAlan€E.€Ô_ÔHighersÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€joined.Ð L$œ# ÐÌWarner€Hodges,€III,€Germantown,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Arthur€W.€Anderson,€Sr.€and€MaryÐ $&t!% ÐJeanette€C.€Anderson.Ð '`"& ÐÌWilliam€W.€€Dunlap,€Jr.,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€John€P.€Howser,€M.D.,€P.A.€andÐ è(8$( ÐDr.€John€P.€Howser,€Individually.Ð Ô)$%) ÐÓÍ ÓÌò òÐ  ¬+ü&+ý ÐOPINIONó óÔ#†¼o*»XX޾ü #ÔÔ‡X޾X»¼o*ÔÐ ° ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼o*»XX޾š#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X޾X»¼o*ÔÓ Óà  àThis€is€a€medical€malpractice€case.€€In€August€1992,€Arthur€Anderson€and€his€wife€MaryÐ ˆØ ÐJeanette€Anderson€(ð ðthe€Andersonsðð)€filed€a€lawsuit€against€Dr.€John€P.€Howser€and€John€P.€Howser,Ð tÄ ÐM.D.,€P.A.€(€collectively€ð ðDr.€Howserðð)€alleging€medical€malpractice€in€his€care€of€Mr.€Anderson.€Ð `° ÐIn€October€1992,€Dr.€Howser€filed€an€answer.€€Subsequently,€in€September€1994,€Dr.€Howser€filedÐ L œ Ða€motion€for€summary€judgment,€supported€by€his€affidavit.€€In€October€1994,€the€Andersons€filedÐ 8 ˆ Ðan€opposing€affidavit€from€their€expert€physician,€Dr.€Greg€Swafford€€(ð ðDr.€Swaffordðð).€€Dr.€Ð $ t ÐSwafford€is€a€Memphis€physician€who€had€practiced€in€Tennessee€for€more€than€a€year€before€theÐ  ` Ðalleged€malpractice.€€In€his€affidavit,€Dr.€Swafford€averred€that€he€was€familiar€with€the€standard€ofÐ ü L  Ðcare€in€the€treatment€of€patients€with€ailments€similar€to€Mr.€Anderson,€and€that€Dr.€Howserððs€careÐ è 8  Ðof€Mr€Anderson€fell€below€the€applicable€standard€of€care.€€Ð Ô$  Ðà  àIn€January€1996,€Dr.€Howser€filed€a€supplemental€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€In€the€fallÐ ¬ü  Ðof€1998,€counsel€for€Dr.€Howser€sought€to€depose€Dr.€Swafford,€and€was€told€that€Dr.€SwaffordÐ ˜è  Ðwould€not€be€testifying€at€trial€due€to€a€ð ðfalling€outðð€between€the€Andersons€and€Dr.€Swafford€overÐ „Ô  Ða€joint€business€venture.€€Dr.€Swaffordððs€affidavit€was€not€withdrawn.€Ð pÀ Ðà  àOn€October€30,€1998,€the€trial€court€held€a€€hearing€on€the€defendantsðð€supplemental€motionÐ H˜ Ðfor€summary€judgment.€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€granted€the€AndersonsððÐ 4„ Ðrequest€for€an€additional€ninety€days€to€secure€another€expert€for€trial.€€The€trial€court€told€theÐ  p ÐAndersons€that€if€they€were€unable€to€secure€an€expert€for€trial€within€the€allotted€time€period,€theÐ  \ Ðcase€would€be€dismissed€with€prejudice.€€Despite€efforts€to€do€so,€the€Andersons€were€not€able€toÐ øH Ðsecure€an€expert€for€trial€within€the€allotted€time.€€On€February€11,€1999,€the€Andersons€filed€aÐ ä4 Ðnotice€of€voluntary€non„suit.€€On€June€10,€1999,€Dr.€Howser€filed€a€motion€seeking€an€orderÐ Ð  Ðconfirming€that€the€case€was€dismissed€with€prejudice,€based€on€the€Andersonsðð€failure€to€secure€anÐ ¼  Ðexpert€within€the€ninety„day€period€granted€by€the€court.€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€entered€anÐ ¨ø Ðorder€granting€Dr.€Howserððs€supplemental€motion€for€summary€judgment,€based€on€the€AndersonsððÐ ”ä Ðfailure€to€secure€a€trial€expert.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€ò òó óThe€Andersons€filed€a€motion€under€Rule€59€of€the€Tennessee€RulesÐ €Ð Ðof€Civil€Procedure,€seeking€to€alter€or€amend€the€judgment.€€This€motion€was€denied.€€TheÐ l¼ ÐAndersons€now€appeal.Ð X ¨ Ðà  àOn€appeal,€the€Andersons€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgment€toÐ 0"€  Ðthe€defendants€because€Dr.€Swaffordððs€affidavit€created€a€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€as€to€whetherÐ #l! ÐDr.€Howser€deviated€from€the€applicable€standard€of€care€in€his€treatment€of€Mr.€Anderson.€€TheÐ $X" ÐAndersons€assert€that,€because€Dr.€Swaffordððs€affidavit€was€never€withdrawn,€it€was€competentÐ ô$D # Ðexpert€testimony€that€effectively€rebutted€Dr.€Howserððs€affidavit€in€support€of€the€defendantsðð€motionÐ à%0!$ Ðfor€summary€judgment.€€The€Andersons€also€argue€that€the€trial€court€gave€them€insufficient€timeÐ Ì&"% Ðto€get€another€expert.€€They€contend€that,€had€the€trial€court€given€them€sufficient€time,€Dr.€SwaffordÐ ¸'#& Ðmight€have€changed€his€mind€and€agreed€to€testify,€or€they€might€have€been€able€to€obtain€anotherÐ ° Ðexpert€for€trial.Ð œì Ðà  àThe€Andersons€also€argue€that€summary€judgment€was€improper€because€they€had€filed€aÐ tÄ Ðnotice€of€voluntary€non„suit.€€They€acknowledge€that€they€had€no€òòrightóó€to€a€voluntary€dismissal€inÐ `° Ðlight€of€the€pending€motion€for€summary€judgement,€but€argue€that€the€trial€court€neverthelessÐ L œ Ðretained€the€discretion€to€award€such€a€voluntary€dismissal.€€Since€the€decision€to€grant€the€voluntaryÐ 8 ˆ Ðdismissal€was€within€the€trial€courtððs€discretion,€they€argue€that,€absent€some€showing€of€legalÐ $ t Ðprejudice,€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€by€refusing€to€award€a€voluntary€dismissal€withoutÐ  ` Ðprejudice.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ü L  Ðà  àDr.€Howser€argues€that€summary€judgment€was€appropriate€because€the€Andersons€had€noÐ Ô$  Ðexpert€willing€to€testify€at€trial€to€establish€the€elements€of€malpractice,€as€required€under€TennesseeÐ À  ÐCode€Annotated€ðð€29ð!ð26„115(a).€€Dr.€Howser€maintains€that€Anderson€could€not€take€a€voluntaryÐ ¬ü  Ðnon„suit€because€of€the€pending€motion€for€summary€judgment.Ð ˜è  Ðà  àA€party€faced€with€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€should€neither€ignore€it€nor€treat€itÐ pÀ Ðlightly.€€òòò òByrd€v.€Halló óóó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210€(Tenn.€1993)òòò òóóó ó.€Summary€judgment€is€an€importantÐ \¬ Ðvehicle€designed€to€enable€courts€a€process€by€which€to€determine€whether€a€justiciable€claim€existsÐ H˜ Ðjustifying€the€time€and€expense€of€a€trial,€or€whether€the€claim€can€and€should€be€resolved€on€legalÐ 4„ Ðissues€alone.€€òòò òId.ó óóó(citations€omitted).€€Ô_ÔThus,€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€goes€to€the€merits€of€theÐ  p Ðlitigation€and€òòò òó óóóshould€be€granted€only€when€the€Ô_ÔmovantÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€demonstrates€that€there€are€no€genuine€issuesÐ  \ Ðof€material€fact€Ô_Ôand,Ô_Ô€Ô_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ôtherefore,Ô_Ô€Ô_Ôthe€movantÔ_ÔÔ_Ô€isÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔentitledÔ_Ô€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€lawÔ_Ô.€€òòò òId.óóó ó;€€Tenn.Ð øH ÐR.€Civ.€P.€56.04.€€In€order€to€defeat€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,€the€non„movant€must€establishò òòòó óóóÐ ä4 Ðð ðby€affidavits€or€discovery€materials,€that€there€is€a€genuine,€material€fact€dispute€to€warrant€a€trial.ðð€Ð Ð  Ðò òòòByrdó óóó,€847€S.W.2d€at€€211€(citations€omitted).€€Since€only€questions€of€law€are€involved,€there€is€noÐ ¼  Ðpresumption€of€correctness€regarding€a€trial€court's€grant€of€summary€judgment.€ò òòòBain€v.€Wellsó óóó,€936Ð ¨ø ÐS.W.2d€618,€622€(Tenn.€1997).òòò òóóó ó€€Therefore,€our€review€of€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgmentÐ ”ä Ðis€òòdeò ò€ó ónovoóó€on€the€record€before€this€Court.€€ò òòòWarren€v.€Estate€of€Kirkó óóó,€954€S.W.2d€722,€723€(Tenn.Ð €Ð Ð1997).€Ð l¼ Ðà  à€In€a€medical€malpractice€action,€expert€testimony€is€required€by€statute€to€prove€the€standardÐ D!” Ðof€care€and€deviation€from€the€standard€of€care.€€òòò òSee€óóó óTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„25„115;€òòò òMoon€v.€St.Ð 0"€  ÐThomas€Hosp.óóó ó,€983€S.W.2d€225,€229€(Tenn.€1998).€€Therefore,€to€defeat€summary€judgment€in€suchÐ #l! Ðan€action,€the€non„moving€party€must€produce€competent€expert€opinion,€by€affidavit,€supporting€hisÐ $X" Ðclaim€of€malpractice.€€òòò òBowman€v.€Henardó óóó,€547€S.W.2d€527,€530€(Tenn.€1997).€€Summary€judgmentÐ ô$D # Ðis€inappropriate€if€there€is€conflicting€competent€expert€testimony€on€the€standard€of€care€andÐ à%0!$ Ðwhether€the€defendant€deviated€from€the€standard€of€care.€€òòò òMoonóóó ó,€983€S.W.2d€at€229„230.òòò òóóó ó€€Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€grant€of€summary€judgment€to€Dr.€Howser€was€based€on€the€fact€that€theÐ ¤(ô#' ÐAndersons€had€not€secured€an€expert€to€testify€at€trial,€as€required€under€the€medical€malpracticeÐ )à$( Ðstatute.€€Under€the€reasoning€advocated€by€the€Andersons,€they€should€have€been€permitted€to€waitÐ |*Ì%) Ðuntil€trial€to€see€if€they€could€either€secure€an€expert€who€was€willing€to€testify€or€persuade€Dr.Ð h+¸&* ÐSwafford€to€agree€to€testify€at€the€trial.€€This€approach€leaves€the€trial€judge€with€no€effective€meansÐ ° Ðto€enforce€a€pre„trial€schedule€and€set€deadlines€for€the€parties€to€secure€expert€testimony,€in€orderÐ œì Ðto€facilitate€discovery€and€pre„trial€preparation.€€The€means€available€to€the€trial€judge€must€includeÐ ˆØ Ðthe€ability€to€dismiss€the€plaintiffððs€case€if€he€fails€to€secure€an€expert€for€trial€by€the€deadlineÐ tÄ Ðimposed.€€This€was€the€action€taken€by€the€trial€judge€in€the€instant€case.€€The€Andersons€were€givenÐ `° Ða€reasonable€amount€of€time€to€secure€an€expert€for€trial,€and€they€failed€to€do€so.€€€€Ð L œ Ðà  àRule€56€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€does€not€expressly€state€that€the€non„Ð $ t Ðmovant€against€whom€a€summary€judgment€motion€is€pending€is€required€to€have€an€expert€who€isÐ  ` Ðexpected€to€testify€at€trial€when€submitting€an€affidavit€to€defeat€the€summary€judgment€motion.€Ð ü L  ÐHowever,€the€purpose€of€summary€judgment€is€to€determine€whether€there€is€a€justiciable€claimÐ è 8  Ðwarranting€the€expense€of€trial.€òòò òSee€Byrdó óóó,€847€S.W.2d€at€210.€€€Moreover,€the€trial€judge€must€haveÐ Ô$  Ðthe€means€to€enforce€and€set€deadlines,€in€order€to€facilitate€discovery€and€pre„trial€preparation.€Ð À  ÐWhen€the€Andersons€failed€to€produce€an€expert€who€could€be€expected€to€testify€at€trial,€they€wereÐ ¬ü  Ðunable€to€demonstrate€that,€at€the€trial€in€this€cause,€there€would€be€a€genuine€issue€as€to€whether€theÐ ˜è  Ðdefendant€deviated€from€the€standard€of€care,€i.e.,€whether€there€was€justiciable€claim€warranting€aÐ „Ô  Ðtrial.€€This€is€the€purpose€of€a€summary€judgment€motion.€€In€this€case,€it€is€undisputed€that€Dr.Ð pÀ ÐSwafford€would€not€testify€at€trial.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Andersons€were€given€adequate€time€to€secure€an€expertÐ \¬ Ðfor€trial.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€find€no€error€in€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgmentÐ H˜ Ðto€the€defendants.€€Ð 4„ Ðà  àThe€Andersons€also€argue€that€the€trial€judge€abused€his€discretion€in€refusing€to€permit€theÐ  \ ÐAndersons€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit€while€the€summary€judgment€motion€was€pending.€€We€findÐ øH Ðno€abuse€of€discretion€in€the€trial€courtððs€decision.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.€€€Ð ä4 Ðà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€and€the€cause€is€remanded€for€further€proceedingsÐ ¼  Ðconsistent€with€this€Opinion.€€Costs€are€taxed€to€the€appellants,€Arthur€W.€Anderson,€Sr.€and€MaryÐ ¨ø ÐJeanette€C.€Anderson,€and€their€surety,€for€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€à x àÐ ”ä ÐÌÓ Óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à___________________________________€Ð D!” Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHOLLY€K.€LILLARD,€JUDGEÔ#†X޾XXX޾{#Ô