ÿWPC- u=ºëçûWDt‡F…¡’D÷Cra6á7Py:À7âo’ºk;oùÄâ[bÙ‚ü ßs±TÙcÙNžVºdTðŒÎp?åÛ“·•cëåçÅ 4#ioŠŠÖOê®Ö/Є›BØ Ñàðk‰ˆ!'íÊ…x5×_ÂLM@ u³ãB6ªÈ§+)# >UNI %— 0cU<w@<4|Ÿ §Ç %Î AQó 0DDˆ 0D*ÔU:þ*8U:bbbbbbbbbbb Bœƹ 0D 0§Ã 0Djj D/®® BÝ D3ú˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(;ÓB$¡¡Ò°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€X^XXXÔ-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman _`Ea[b[cdUeîfÓ€run~<$TS Ô3|xu Ý ƒ"P$ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€XtpXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€commission€has€exclusive€jurisdiction€to€determine€all€monetaryÐ ° Ðclaims€against€the€state€arising€out€of,€among€other€things,€professionalÏmalpractice.€€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307€(a)(1)(D).€€Filing€of€the€claim€against€the€StateÏoperates€as€ð ða€waiver€of€any€cause€of€action,€based€on€the€same€act€or€omission,Ïwhich€the€claimant€has€against€any€state€officer€or€employee.ðð€€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307Ï(b).€€ÌÌà ` àThe€act€specifically€states:ÌÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(h)€State€officers€and€employees€are€absolutely€immuneÐ °  „ Ðfrom€liability€for€acts€or€omissions€within€the€scope€ofÏthe€officerððs€or€employeeððs€office€or€employment,€exceptÏfor€willful,€malicious,€or€criminal€acts€or€omissions€orÏfor€acts€or€omissions€done€for€personal€gain.€€ForÏpurposes€of€this€chapter,€ð ðstate€officerðð€or€ð ðemployeeððÏhas€the€meaning€set€forth€in€ðð€8„42„101(3). ýÝ ƒ"P$ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€XtpXXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€suit€against€Grover€W.€Barnes,€M.D.,€P.C.,€asserts€only€vicariousÐ ° Ðliability€for€the€actions€of€Whitney. Ý ƒ"Q”$ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€Xd~XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Cause€in€fact€and€proximate€or€legal€cause€are€different€concepts.€Ð ° Ðò òòòKilpatrick€v.€Bryantó óóó,€868€S.W.2d€594,€598€(Tenn.€1993).€€Cause€in€fact€dealsÐ ° Ðwith€the€ð ðbut€forðð€consequences€of€act,€and€proximate€or€legal€cause€concerns€aÏdetermination€whether€the€legal€liability€should€be€imposed€because€cause€in€factÏhas€been€established.€€ò òòòId.,€ó óóóat€598. !%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€Xe$XXXÔÔ€ŠzXXe$ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€Xe$XŠzÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€25,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÀ ôXXe$ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€Xe$XXXÔÔ€ŠzXXe$ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€Xe$XŠzÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€22,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÀ ôXXe$ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(W(3P$¤¤Ý ƒÓB!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€XtXXXÔÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒÓB!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€XtpXXXÔÝ  ÝÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€LâXXdðdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óñrññfñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` ttx$,°ð Õrßñfññrññuññrñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` ttx$,°ð Õrßñrññuññuññuñà@Ì Ì ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@)®àAT€JACKSONˆÌà ` àà ¸ à€€€€______________________________________________Ìñuñßt€ (>.*jxüú¥` `€€@EðU` ttx$(°ð y tßñuñÌò òJAMES€CARROLL€and€FORESTINEÐ ° ÐCARROLL,€for€the€use€and€benefit€ofÌthe€Estate€of€JESSIECA€RENEE€ÌCARROLL,€a€minor,€deceased,€andÌJAMES€CARROLL€and€FORESTINEÌCARROLL,€Individually,ÌÌó óà ` àPlaintiffs„Appellants,Ð ¾  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àShelby€Law€No.€68714„2ÌVs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àC.A.€No.€02A01„9707„CV„00162Ð ¾  ÐÌò òCAROLYN€WHITNEY,€M.D.,€Ð ¾ ÐGROVER€W.€BARNES,€M.D.,€P.C.,€Ìand€LEBONHEUR€CHILDRENððSÌMEDICAL€CENTER,€INC.,€actingÌby€and€through€its€Agents,€Servants,ÌEmployees€and€Others,ÌÌó óà ` àDefendants„Appellees.Ð Ì Ð____________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@œ œ ®àFROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€SHELBY€COUNTYˆÌà@[ [ ®àTHE€HONORABLE€JANICE€M.€HOLDER,€JUDGEˆÌÌà@dd%®àCarl€I.€Jacobson€ofˆÌà@‰ ‰ ®àMcKnight,€Hudson,€Lewis,€Ford€&€Harrison€of€MemphisˆÌà@ÙÙ'®àRoss€Higman€ofˆÌà@ßß®àWyatt,€Tarrant€&€Combs€of€MemphisˆÌà@'®àFor€AppellantsˆÌÌà@° ° ®àThomas€R.€Prewitt,€Jr.€and€Donna€L.€Boyce€of€MemphisˆÌà@@ @ ®àFor€Defendant€Lebonheur€Childrenððs€Medical€CenterˆÌÌà@» » ®àRobert€L.€J.€Spence,€Jr.€and€Chapman€Sellers€Morrow€ofˆÌà@''®àThe€Hardison€Law€Firm€of€MemphisˆÌà@„„®àFor€Defendants€Carolyn€Whitney,€M.D.ˆÌà@‰‰®àand€Grover€W.€Barnes,€M.D.,€P.C.ˆÌÌà@¦¦$®àñ`ññ_ñREVERñ_ññ`ññañò òñaññbñòòñbññcñREVERSED€ñcññbññ^ñòòñ^ññbññaññ]ñò òñ]ññañAND€REMANDEDˆÐ Ì.** ÐÌó óóóà@÷÷&®àOpinion€filed:€€ˆÐ Ì0,, ÐÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ð Ì3// Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEÌÌHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEó óà@®®.®àñdñˆÐ Ü;,779 Їñdññeñ›Ñ7€LâXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓà ` àThe€appeal€of€this€medical€malpractice€case€presents€issues€concerningÐ ° Ðcomparative€fault€principles.€€Plaintiffs,€James€Carroll€and€Forestine€Carroll,€for€theÏuse€and€benefit€of€the€Estate€of€Jesse€Renee€Carroll,€a€minor,€deceased,€and€JamesÏCarroll€and€Forestine€Carroll,€individually,€appeal€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€on€a€juryÏverdict€for€defendants,€Carolyn€Whitney,€M.D.,€Grover€W.€Barnes,€M.D.,€P.C.,׃ ×Ý ƒ##ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€andÐ °  ÐLebonheur€Childrenððs€Medical€Center,€Inc.Ìà ` àPlaintiffsðð€suit€is€for€the€wrongful€death€of€their€fourteenth€month€old€daughterÏallegedly€resulting€from€medical€negligence€or€malpractice.€€Plaintiffs€originally€filedÏsuit€against€the€above„named€defendants€and€Dr.€Azra€Sehic€and€Dr.€Reggie€Lyell,ÏUniversity€of€Tennessee€resident€physicians€working€at€Lebonheur.€€Sehic€and€LyellÏfiled€a€motion€to€dismiss€asserting€their€immunity€from€liability€as€state€employeesÏpursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307€(h).€€The€trial€court€granted€the€motion,€and€the€suitÏagainst€the€resident€physicians,€Sehic€and€Lyell,€was€dismissed.€€Subsequently,Ïplaintiffs€voluntarily€dismissed€that€suit,€and€the€present€suit€was€filed.€€The€answersÏof€both€Whitney€and€Lebonheur€rely€on€the€doctrine€of€comparative€fault€and€allegeÏthat€the€direct€and€proximate€cause€of€plaintiffsðð€loss€was€the€negligence€of€theÏnonparties,€the€resident€physicians,€Sehic€and€Lyell.Ìà ` àPlaintiffsðð€motion€òòin€limineóó€to€strike€the€comparative€fault€defense€and€toÐ °&"" Ðprevent€assessment€of€fault€to€the€resident€physicians€was€denied.€€While€the€instantÏcase€was€pending,€plaintiffs€proceeded€against€the€State€of€Tennessee€in€theÏTennessee€Claims€Commission€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307€(Supp.€1997).׃ ×Ý ƒ##ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р°,(( ÐDefendants€were€permitted€to€refer€to€plaintiffsðð€claim€against€the€state€and€arguedÏthat€the€plaintiffsðð€loss€was€caused€by€the€state€employees,€Sehic€and€Lyell.€€The€trialÏcourt€instructed€the€jury€in€this€regard:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àAs€to€their€claims€concerning€Doctors€Sehic€andÏLyell,€Doctor€Whitney,€Doctor€Barnes€and€LebonheurÏMedical€Center€have€the€burden€of€proving€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence,€one,€the€recognizedÏstandard€of€acceptable€professional€practice€of€physiciansÏin€the€community€in€which€Doctor€Sehic€and€LyellÏpractice€and€in€which€the€alleged€injury€or€wrongfulÏaction€occurred;€two,€that€Doctor€Lyell,€Doctor€Sehic€orÏboth€acted€with€less€than€or€failed€to€act€with€ordinaryÏand€reasonable€care€in€accordance€with€that€standard€and,Ïthree,€that€Doctor€Sehic€and/or€Doctor€Lyellððs€negligence,Ïif€any,€was€a€proximate€cause€of€the€injuries€and€damagesÏto€the€plaintiffs.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*Ð ° ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àIn€a€case€such€as€this,€even€if€you€find€that€a€personÏwas€negligent,€the€party€claiming€that€negligence€mustÏprove€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€theÏpersonððs€negligence€was€a€proximate€cause€of€the€injuriesÏand€damages€to€the€Plaintiffs.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àA€proximate€cause€of€any€injury€is€a€cause€which€inÏnatural€and€continuous€sequence€produces€the€injury€andÏwithout€which€the€injury€would€not€have€occurred.€€InÏother€words,€it€is€that€act€or€failure€to€act€that€directly€orÏimmediately€and€efficiently€brings€about€the€accident€andÏinjury.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*Ð °'## ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àLadies€and€gentlemen,€you€will€be€given€a€verdictÏform€to€record€your€verdict.€€Your€first€obligation€is€toÏdetermine€the€fault,€if€any,€of€each€of€the€persons€whomÏyou€have€been€instructed€may€be€charged€with€fault.€ÏNext€you€must€decide€a€percentage€of€fault,€if€any,€toÏeach€of€those€persons.€€The€percentage€figure€for€eachÏperson€may€range€from€zero€percent€to€100€percent.€ÏWhen€the€percentage€of€the€fault€of€all€persons€beingÏcompared€are€added€together€the€total€must€equal€100Ïpercent.€€The€total€percentage€cannot€be€more€or€less€thanÐ °2.. Ð100€percent.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àThe€persons€to€whom€you€may€assign€fault€areÏCarolyn€Whitney,€M.D.€and€Grover€Barnes,€M.D.,€P.C.;ÏLebonheur€Childrenððs€Medical€Center;€Azra€Sehic,€M.D.;ÏReggie€Lyell,€M.D.€and€Forestine€Carroll.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àThe€jury€found€the€plaintiffsðð€damages€to€be€$600,000.00€and€apportionedÏzero€percent€fault€to€Forestine€Carroll,€defendants€Whitney€and€Lebonheur,€andÏassessed€thirty€percent€fault€to€Dr.€Sehic€and€seventy€percent€fault€to€Dr.€Lyell.€ÏJudgment€was€entered€on€the€jury€verdict,€and€plaintiffsðð€appeal€presents€a€singleÏissue€as€set€out€in€their€brief:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àDid€the€Circuit€Court€err€in€allowing€the€defendants€toÏplead€the€comparative€fault€of,€and€in€allowing€the€jury€toÏapportion€fault€to,€non„parties€who€were€immune€fromÏsuit€in€tort?Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àPlaintiffs€contended€in€the€trial€court€and€argue€in€this€Court€that€pursuantÏto€the€Supreme€Courtððs€opinion€in€ò òòòRidings€v.€Ralph€M.€Parsonððs€Co.,€ó óóó914€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð79€(Tenn.€1996),€defendants€cannot€assert€the€fault€of€Sehic€and€Lyell€because€ofÏtheir€immunity€granted€by€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307€(h).€€In€ò òòòRidingsó óóó,€plaintiff€was€injured€inÐ ´  Ðthe€course€and€scope€of€his€employment€which€was€covered€by€the€workersÏcompensation€law€of€Tennessee.€€He€subsequently€filed€a€third„party€tort€actionÏagainst€the€manufacturer€and€distributor€of€the€ladder€which€he€alleged€caused€hisÏinjury.€€The€defendant€sought€to€present€proof€that€plaintiffððs€employer€caused€orÏcontributed€to€his€injury,€and€the€issue€before€the€Supreme€Court€was€whether€theÏdefendants€in€a€third„party€suit€for€personal€injuries€sustained€in€the€course€andÏscope€of€plaintiffððs€employment€and€covered€under€the€workersðð€compensation€lawÏcan€assert€as€an€affirmative€defense€that€the€plaintiffððs€employer€caused€orÏcontributed€to€the€plaintiffððs€injuries.€€914€S.W.2d€at€80.Ìà ` àIn€holding€that€there€could€be€no€apportionment€of€fault€to€the€€employer,€theÏCourt€said:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àThe€rationale€of€ò òòòMcIntyreó óóó€postulates€that€fault€mayÐ ¸844 Ðbe€attributed€only€to€those€persons€against€whom€theÐ º9 55 Ðplaintiff€has€a€cause€of€action€in€tort.€€The€designationÏð ðnonparty,ðð€used€in€ò òòòMcIntyreó óóó,€is€not€a€term€of€art;€itÐ ° Ðmeans€ð ðnot€a€party.ðð€€However,€it€is€given€a€particularÏmeaning€by€the€decision€in€ò òòòMcIntyreó óóó,€wherein€the€CourtÐ ² Ðfound€that,€upon€defendantððs€allegation€that€a€person€notÏa€party€to€the€suit,€a€ð ðnonparty,ðð€caused€or€contributed€toÏthe€plaintiffððs€injuries,€the€plaintiff,€by€amendment€to€theÏcomplaint€and€service€of€process,€may€make€theÏð ðnonpartyðð€a€ð ðpartyðð€that€is€answerable€to€the€plaintiff€inÏactions€for€damages€according€to€the€Rules€of€CivilÏProcedure.€€Consequently,€only€a€nonparty€against€whomÏthe€plaintiff€has€a€cause€of€action€can€be€made€a€party.€ÏSince€the€plaintiffððs€employer€cannot€be€made€a€party€toÏthe€plaintiffððs€tort€action€for€personal€injuries€sustained€inÏthe€course€and€scope€of€his€employment,€the€rationale€ofÐ ´ Ðò òòòMcIntyreó óóó,€both€as€to€principle€and€procedure,€will€notÐ ´ Ðpermit€fault€to€be€attributed€to€the€plaintiffððs€employer.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌ914€S.W.2d€at€81„82.ÌÌÓÓà ` àOur€first€line€of€inquiry€is€whether€Sehic€and€Lyell,€resident€physicians€actingÏin€the€course€and€scope€of€their€employment€with€the€University€of€Tennessee,€€areÏimmune€from€suit€as€provided€for€in€ò òòòRidingsó óóó.€€Art.€I,€ðð€17,€Constitution€of€the€StateÐ ¶ Ðof€Tennessee,€provides€in€part:€€ð ðSuits€may€be€brought€against€the€state€in€such€aÏmanner€and€in€such€courts€as€the€legislature€may€by€law€direct.ðð€€Ìà ` àT.C.A.€ðð€20„13„102€(a)€(1994)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àò ò20„13„102.€€Actions€against€state€prohibited.ó 󀄀(a)€NoÐ º$  Ðcourt€in€the€state€shall€have€any€power,€jurisdiction,€orÏauthority€to€entertain€any€suit€against€the€state,€or€againstÏany€officer€of€the€state€acting€by€authority€of€the€state,Ïwith€a€view€to€reach€the€state,€its€treasury,€funds,€orÏproperty,€and€all€such€suits€shall€be€dismissed€as€to€theÏstate€or€such€officers,€on€motion,€plea,€or€demurrer€of€theÏlaw€officer€of€the€state,€or€counsel€employed€for€the€state.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àThe€legislature€has€not€provided€for€the€state€to€be€sued€for€an€action€in€tortÏin€the€courts€of€this€state€but€has€provided€for€claims€to€be€filed€against€the€stateÏbefore€the€board€of€claims€or€the€claims€commission.€€T.C.A.€ðð€9„8„307€(1992€&ÏSupp.€1997).€€Notwithstanding€the€provision€for€making€a€claim€against€the€state,Ïthe€legislature€did€not€see€fit€to€relinquish€the€stateððs€sovereign€immunity€and€allowÏtort€actions€to€be€brought€against€the€state€in€the€state€courts.€€Ìà ` àThe€statutory€immunity€granted€to€the€resident€physicians€is€basically€a€òòquidÐ ¼9 55 Ðpro€quo€óósituation,€i.e.,€the€State,€as€the€master€or€employer,€becomes€subject€toÐ ° Ðliability,€while€at€the€same€time€the€servants,€or€employees,€are€relieved€of€liability.€ÏGenerally,€when€the€master€or€employerððs€liability€is€based€on€the€doctrine€ofÏòòrespondeat€superioróó,€the€master€or€employer€cannot€be€held€liable€if€the€employee€is€notÐ °  Ðliable.€€ò òòòLoveman€Co.€v.€Baylessó óóó,€128€Tenn.€307,€315,€160€S.W.€841€(1913);€ò òòòSadlerÐ °  Ðv.€Draperó óóó,€46€Tenn.€App.€1,€326€S.W.2d€148€(1959).€€This€rule€does€not€applyÐ ´  Ðwhere€the€nonliability€of€the€servant€is€based€upon€personal€immunity,€30€C.J.S.ÏòòEmployer„Employee€Relationshipóó,€ðð€299€(1992);€27€Am.Jur.2d€òòEmployment€Relationshipóó,Ð ¸ Ððð€469€(1996),€and€this€result€is€reached€in€the€Tennessee€Claims€Commission€Act.€ÏThe€State,€in€effect,€is€the€alter„ego€of€the€resident€physicians.€€Although€the€StateÏcan€be€held€responsible€to€plaintiff€under€the€Claims€Commission€Act,€the€StateÏremains€immune€from€suit€in€the€state€courts.Ìà ` àò òòòRidingsó óóó€specifically€states:€€ð ðSince€the€plaintiffððs€employer€cannot€be€made€aÐ ¸ Ðparty€to€the€plaintiffððs€tort€action€for€personal€injuries€sustained€in€the€course€andÏscope€of€his€employment,€the€rationale€of€ò òòòMcIntyreó óóó,€both€as€to€principle€andÐ ¼  Ðprocedure,€will€not€permit€fault€to€be€attributed€to€the€plaintiffððs€employer.ðð€€Ïò òòòRidings,€ó óóó914€S.W.2dòòò ò€ó óóó€at€82.€€€Since€the€State€and€its€employees€cannot€be€madeÐ À$  Ðparties€to€plaintiffððs€tort€action,€they€are€immune€from€suit€under€the€ò òòòRidingsó óóóÐ Ä&"" Ðrationale.Ìà ` àThe€Court€in€ò òòòMcIntyre€v.€Ballentineó óóó,€833€S.W.2d€52€(Tenn.€1992)€noted€thatÐ È*&& Ðð ðfairness€and€efficiency€require€that€defendants€called€upon€to€answer€allegations€inÏnegligence€be€permitted€to€allege,€as€an€affirmative€defense,€that€a€nonparty€causedÏor€contributed€to€the€injury€or€damage€for€which€recovery€is€sought.ðð€€833€S.W.2dÏat€58.€€A€corollary€to€this€a€statement€is€that€fairness€and€efficiency€require€that€aÏplaintiff€be€allowed€to€make€the€so„called€nonparty€a€party€to€the€tort€action€so€thatÏall€claims€can€be€resolved€at€one€time.Ìà ` àSubsequent€to€ò òòòRidingsó óóó,€and€after€this€case€was€concluded€in€the€trial€court,€ourÐ Ì844 ÐSupreme€Court€decided€the€case€of€ò òòòSnyder€v.€Ltg€Lufttechnische€GmbHó óóó,€955€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð252€(Tenn.€1997).€€This€case€came€to€the€Supreme€Court€pursuant€to€Rule€23€of€theÏRules€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€Tennessee€concerning€certified€questions€of€law€fromÏfederal€courts.€€The€primary€question€presented€was:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  à1.€€Whether€products€liability€defendants€in€a€suitÏfor€personal€injuries€based€on€allegations€of€negligenceÏand€strict€liability€in€tort€may€introduce€evidence€at€trialÏthat€the€plaintiffððs€employerððs€alteration,€change,Ïimproper€maintenance,€or€abnormal€use€of€defendantsððÏproduct€proximately€caused€or€contributed€to€theÏplaintiffððs€injuries.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓ955€S.W.2d€at€253.€€The€Court€determined€that€an€employer€cannot€be€found€to€be€Ïthe€proximate€or€legal€cause€of€the€plaintiffððs€injuries,€because€the€employer€isÏimmune€from€tort€liability€under€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„108€(a).€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€256.€€The€Court€didÐ ´ Ðnote,€however,€that€the€defendants€in€a€products€liability€suit€ð ðfor€personal€injuriesÏbased€on€allegations€of€negligence€and€strict€liability€in€tort€may€introduce€relevantÏevidence€at€trial€that€the€plaintiffððs€employerððs€alteration,€change,€improperÏmaintenance,€or€abnormal€use€of€the€defendantsðð€product€was€a€cause€in€fact€of€theÏplaintiffððs€injuries.€€Put€another€way,€the€jury€may€consider€all€evidence€relevant€toÏthe€event€leading€up€to€the€incident€that€injured€the€plaintiff.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€257.€€TheÐ ¸$  ÐCourt€then€gave€instructions€as€to€how€this€evidence€should€be€considered€by€theÏjury.€€The€Court€said:€ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à[T]he€defendants€may€not€take€the€legal€position€that€theÏemployerððs€actions€were€the€legal€cause€of€the€plaintiffððsÏinjuries.€€The€jury€should€be€instructed€that€it€mayÏconsider€the€actions€of€the€employer€only€in€assessingÏwhether€the€plaintiff€has€met€his€burden€of€establishingÏthe€elements€necessary€to€recover€against€the€defendants.€ÏAlso,€the€jury€should€be€instructed€that€it€may€not,€inÏmaking€that€determination,€assess€fault€against€theÏemployer.€€Finally,€the€trial€judge€should€give€anÏinstruction€that€lets€the€jury€know€that€the€employerððsÏlegal€responsibility€will€be€determined€at€a€later€time€orÏhas€already€been€determined€in€another€forum.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌò òòòId.ó óóóÐ ¼7 33 ÐÌÓÓà ` àWhile€we€are€not€dealing€with€a€products€liability€suit€involving€an€employer„Ð ¼9 55 Ðemployee€relationship€and€the€employerððs€action,€we€do€have€a€question€of€sovereignÏimmunity.€€In€both€instances,€provision€is€made€for€proceeding€against€an€immuneÏparty€in€another€forum.ÌÑ7€Œ“XXdðXXdð7Ñà ` àThus,€we€believe€the€rationale€of€ò òòòSnyderó óóó€should€apply€to€the€instant€case.€€TheÐ °  Ðtrial€œcourt›€did€not€have€the€benefit€of€the€Supreme€Courtððs€opinion€in€ò òòòSnyderó óóó€at€theÐ ´  Ðtime€this€case€was€tried,€and€the€jury€instructions€concerning€the€activities€of€theÏnonparties€dealt€with€proximate€or€legal€cause€as€opposed€to€cause€in€fact.€€TheÏdefendants,€while€denying€any€error€in€the€trial€court€proceedings,€assert€that€if€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€its€jury€instructions,€it€was€harmless€error,€because€the€juryÏassessed€no€fault€to€Whitney€and€Lebonheur.€€T.R.A.P.€36(b)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(b)€Effect€of€Error.€„€A€final€judgment€from€which€relief€isÏavailable€and€otherwise€appropriate€shall€not€be€set€asideÏunless,€considering€the€whole€record,€error€in€involving€aÏsubstantial€right€more€probably€than€not€affected€theÏjudgment€or€would€result€in€prejudice€to€the€judicialÏprocess.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àIn€the€instant€case,€the€jury€was€instructed€to€determine€the€proximate€causeÏof€plaintiffsðð€loss€as€opposed€to€a€determination€of€cause€in€fact.׃ ×Ý ƒ##ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€ò òòòSnyderó óóó,€theÐ ¸! ÐSupreme€Court€expressly€provided€that€there€could€be€no€finding€of€proximate€orÏlegal€cause€for€plaintiffsðð€injuries€because€of€the€employerððs€complete€immunity€forÏtort€liability.€€ò òòòSnyder,ó óóó€955€S.W.2d€at€256.€€The€ò òòòSnyderó óóó€Court€noted€that€ð ðtheÐ ¼' ## Ðlegislature€has€already€determined€that€for€policy€reasons€the€employer€may€not€beÏthe€legal€cause€of€the€plaintiffððs€injuries.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€In€the€instant€case,€by€the€same€token,Ð À+'' Ðthe€legislature€has€determined€that€the€State€and€its€employees€are€immune€from€suitÏin€the€state€courts,€and€the€legislature€provided€another€forum€to€settle€claims€filedÏagainst€the€State.Ð Ä1-- Ðà ` àThe€jury€in€the€instant€case€was€instructed€to€assign€a€percentage€of€fault€toÏthe€resident€physicians,€and€this€instruction€is€contra€to€the€Supreme€Courtððs€holdingÏin€ò òòòSnyderó óóó.€€Moreover,€the€jury€was€instructed€to€determine€proximate€or€legal€causeÐ ° Ðfor€the€plaintiffððs€injuries.€€The€fault€assessed€to€the€resident€physicians€wasÏdetermined€to€be€the€proximate€or€legal€cause€of€plaintiffððs€injuries.€€€If€these€residentÏphysicians€are€immune€from€suit,€as€the€employer€in€ò òòòSnyderó óóó,€they€cannot€be€foundÐ ´  Ðto€be€the€proximate€or€legal€cause€of€plaintiffððs€injuries€if€we€follow€the€mandate€ofÏthe€Supreme€Court.Ìà ` àOn€the€issue€of€harmless€error,€we€believe€there€is€a€distinction€between€thisÏcase€and€the€recent€Supreme€Court€case€of€ò òòòTurner€v.€Jordanó óóó,€957€S.W.2d€815€(Tenn.Ð ¸ Ð1997).€€In€ò òòòTurneró óóó,€the€plaintiffððs€nurse€was€attacked€and€severely€beaten€by€aÐ ¼  Ðpsychiatric€patient€at€the€hospital.€€The€defendant€was€the€attending€psychiatrist,Ïand€the€nurse€sued€the€defendant€for€medical€negligence€alleging€ð ðhe€violated€hisÏduty€to€use€reasonable€care€in€the€treatment€of€his€patient,€which€proximately€causedÏher€injuries€and€damages.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€817.€€The€jury€was€instructed€œto›€allocate€faultÐ À  Ðbetween€the€alleged€negligence€of€the€physician„defendant€and€the€alleged€intentionalÏconduct€of€the€mental€patient.€€The€jury€allocated€one€hundred€percent€fault€to€theÏdefendant„psychiatrist.€€The€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€conduct€of€the€negligentÏphysician€should€not€have€been€compared€to€the€conduct€of€the€mental€patient,Ïstating€ð ð[t]he€conduct€of€a€negligent€defendant€should€not€be€compared€with€theÏintentional€conduct€of€another€in€determining€comparative€fault€where€theÏintentional€conduct€is€the€foreseeable€risk€created€by€the€negligent€tortfeasor.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóóÐ Ä.** Ðat€823.€€The€Court€noted€that€while€a€negligent€defendant€may€raise€intentional€actsÏof€others€to€refute€elements€of€duty€and€causation€on€the€part€of€the€defendant,Ïð ðfairness€dictates€that€it€should€not€be€permitted€to€rely€upon€the€foreseeable€harmÏit€had€a€duty€to€prevent€so€as€to€reduce€itððs€liability.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€823.€€NotwithstandingÐ È622 Ðthe€error€occurring€in€the€juryððs€comparison€of€fault,€the€Supreme€Court€determinedÐ Ì844 Ðthat€it€was€harmless€error,€because€the€jury€assessed€one€hundred€percent€of€the€faultÏto€the€defendant„physician.€€Thus,€in€ò òòòTurneró óóó,€notwithstanding€an€instructionÐ ° Ðallowing€the€comparing€of€the€fault€mentioned,€the€jury€determined€that€theÏphysician€bore€the€entire€responsibility€because€of€his€failure€to€attempt€to€negate€theÏforeseeable€damages€that€he€had€a€duty€to€prevent.€€So,€in€ò òòòTurneró óóó,€plaintiff€did€notÐ ´  Ðsuffer€from€the€error€that€the€Supreme€Court€found.€€However,€in€the€instant€case,Ïit€is€uncertain€as€to€whether€the€jury€would€have€assessed€zero€fault€to€Whitney€andÏLebonheur€if€they€had€not€been€instructed€that€they€could€assess€fault€to€Sehic€andÏLyell.€€Moreover,€in€view€of€the€Supreme€Courtððs€specific€instructions€in€ò òòòSnyderó óóó,€theÐ ¸ Ðerroneous€charge€in€the€case€at€bar€could€result€in€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.Ìà ` àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed,€and€the€case€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€ÏCosts€of€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€appellees.ÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€Ð ¼  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÐ ¾  ÐÌò òCONCUR:Ð À" ÐÌÌó ó____________________________________Ð Æ%!! Ðò òDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEó óÐ Æ&"" ÐÌò ò____________________________________Ð È($$ ÐHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEó óœñeñ