ÿWPCÑ Õ^ßHŽ4ÁžËwû Æv‰mwš.³ÆÒ÷;—ó“-cÀÆEôqÒpÓ?–T±â“VA·(Š`lQV­3QdøÄ˜áþ¦å¤ ÛS€¬&»ûÖ7$ Åƒóïäo_,£ÇXI=ÿ Êÿ’1Ç\…ë­PG”¯•ÕHéeÃÖJ‡•–4»¾˜$g»^èèqÓ*ªtêK©¦eÁ¥«bâ¾âkUÒH”óy‚Q»¥%”Ú¦!_Ýpž.ýÈFÉla©¶êÔ–3m#îä¹h—Ÿ|Ü踼ãÏír¦ ™‰±”œÒW݃Ån '„Ÿ(C3ëZ ¸g|5©¥Ê«$6تݼèmÔڮʋô%ü½M}"Ÿ0ÆôE’Êõ‡ü´ËSðâô>9Ù2 .³meøàáZè›÷!@•¤ ôðdŽ ú6–Þñð18+E=š iä&¬#ža˲®ð[Í"ì°ôhŒ~+ÑÞ‡8ÞäI¨¨Tl¡e8ù÷}d)óÄ!<ã8†(SÙ¨ý>§x©×8–PaŒ/KbX•Ðx‘Û€^“3üª¯†Ïüm—£nøî~õ!O¥¸¤Å+å%ŒnW¦i îÊéõSU&7[ÝJ9ÃyæûÞä“‹‹ób#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 1‡‘ Æ ÆÞ Ƥ Æj 720Nb 1ud 72ÙE  0c pU NxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxbÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆ 0ëÎÎÎÎ B¹¹ 0¤Ö D3z D-­ 0KÚÚ AS%Æx 0¤> 0Dâ A«&˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0»nf+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularòK+1äK¥ ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(нCEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 A.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à (ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular- ù-(|G2Ð$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô=pò»»Ô d(|3Íò$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Íò$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Bt»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼j»»»ÔÑ8€4ÄXXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÛjÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼j»îîÛ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJuly€13,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X^fX»¼jÔÌÌò òÔ#†¼j»XX^fò#ÔDONALD€MILLER,€òòet€al.óó€v.€CHOO€CHOO€PARTNERS,€L.€P.òòóóÔ‡X^fX»¼jÔó óÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Hamilton€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99CV0720€€€€€€Samuel€H.€Payne,€JudgeÐ Ò " ÐÌFILED€NOVEMBER€5,€2001Ð ªú  Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2001„00007„COA„R3„CVÐ ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌò òó óÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼j»àX^fw#ÔÔ‡X^fX.¼jÔD.€Michael€Swiney,€J.óó,€òòóódissentingÐ P  ÐÌÌà  àà ` àI€find€it€necessary€to€dissent,€respectfully,€from€the€majority€opinion.€€I€believe€theÐ d ÐTrial€Court€erred€in€failing€to€direct€a€verdict€in€Defendantððs€favor€based€upon€Plaintiffsðð€failure€toÐ P Ðpresent€medical€evidence€that€Mr.€Millerððs€back€and€neck€injuries€were€more€likely€than€not€causedÐ ì< Ðby€his€fall.€€I€believe€the€medical€testimony€presented€by€Plaintiffs€fails€to€satisfy€this€burden,€evenÐ Ø( Ðtaking€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€Plaintiffs€as€we€must.Ð Ä ÐÌà  àà ` àAs€discussed€in€the€majority€opinion,€Plaintiffs€presented€medical€evidence€by€theÐ œì Ðtestimony€of€Mr.€Millerððs€two€treating€physicians.€€It€is€this€testimony€that€is€the€crux€of€my€dissent.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àI€have€no€disagreement€with€the€law€as€discussed€in€the€majority€opinion.€€I€agree€withÐ `° Ðthe€majority€as€to€what€the€law€is,€but€disagree€as€to€whether€or€not€Plaintiffs€met€their€burden€asÐ L œ Ðrequired€by€law.€€As€discussed€by€the€majority,€the€causation€of€a€medical€condition€must€beÐ 8!ˆ  Ðestablished€by€testimony€from€a€medical€expert.€€òòThomas€v.€Aetna€Life€&€Cas.€Co.óó,€812€S.W.2d€278,Ð $"t! Ð283€(Tenn.€1991).€€I€rely€upon€the€same€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€case,€and€in€fact€the€sameÐ #`" Ðlanguage,€as€the€majority,€as€follows:Ð ü#L# ÐÌà8  àð ðThe€plaintiff€must€introduce€evidence€which€affords€a€reasonable€basis€for€theÐ Ô%$!% Ðconclusion€that€it€is€more€likely€than€not€that€the€conduct€of€the€defendant€was€aÐ À&"& Ðcause€in€fact€of€the€result.€€A€mere€possibility€of€such€causation€is€not€enough;€andÐ ¬'ü"' Ðwhen€the€matter€remains€one€of€pure€speculation€or€conjecture€or€the€probabilities€areÐ ˜(è#( Ðat€best€evenly€balanced,€it€becomes€the€duty€of€the€court€to€direct€a€verdict€for€theÐ „)Ô$) Ðdefendant€ð8ðÐp*À%*Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€plaintiff€is€not,€however,€required€to€prove€the€case€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€Ð H,˜', ÐThe€plaintiff€need€not€negative€entirely€the€possibility€that€the€defendantððs€conductÐ 4-„(-ý Ðwas€not€a€cause€and€it€is€enough€to€introduce€evidence€from€which€reasonableÐ ° Ðpersons€may€conclude€that€it€is€more€probable€that€the€event€was€caused€by€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€than€that€it€was€not€...ðð€€Prosser€[and€Keeton,€òòTortsóó,€ðð€41,€p.€269€(5òòthóó€ed.Ð ˆØ Ð1984)].ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àð ðA€doctorððs€testimony€that€a€certain€thing€is€òòpossibleóó€is€no€evidence€at€all.€€HisÐ L œ Ðopinion€as€to€what€is€possible€is€no€more€valid€than€the€juryððs€own€speculation€as€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðwhat€is€or€is€not€possible.€€Almost€anything€is€possible,€and€it€is€thus€improper€toÐ $ t Ðallow€a€jury€to€consider€and€base€a€verdict€upon€a€ððpossibleðð€cause€of€death.ðð€€òòPalaceÐ  ` ÐBar,€Inc.€v.€Fearnotóó,€269€Ind.€405,€381€N.E.2d€858,€864€(1978).€€ð ðThe€mereÐ ü L  Ðpossibility€of€a€causal€relationship,€without€more,€is€insufficient€to€qualify€as€anÐ è 8  Ðadmissible€expert€opinion.ðð€€òòKirschner€v.€Broadheadóó,€671€F.2d€1034,€1039€(7òòthóó€Cir.Ð Ô$  Ð1982).ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€admissibility€of€an€expert€medical€opinion,€of€course,€should€not€turn€on€whetherÐ ˜è  Ðthe€testifying€physician€characterizes€a€particular€potential€cause€of€an€injury€asÐ „Ô  Ðð ðconceivable,ðð€ð ðpossibleðð€or€ð ðprobable.ðð€€See€òòTrapp€v.€4„10€Investment€Corpóó.,€424Ð pÀ ÐF.2d€1261,€1268€(8òòthóó€Cir.€1970).€€Regardless€of€the€term€employed,€if€the€physicianððsÐ\¬Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àð ðtestimony€is€such€in€nature€and€basis€of€hypothesis€as€to€judiciallyÐ 4„ Ðimpress€that€the€opinion€expressed€represents€his€professionalÐ  p Ðjudgment€as€to€the€most€likely€one€among€the€possible€causes€of€theÐ  \ Ðphysical€condition€involved,€the€court€is€entitled€to€admit€the€opinionÐ øH Ðand€leave€its€weight€to€the€jury.ðð€€òòNorland€v.€Washington€GeneralÐ ä4 ÐHospitalóó,€461€F.2d€694,€697€(Cir.€8,€1972).ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àNevertheless,€a€mere€possibility€is€not€an€affirmative€basis€for€a€finding€of€fact.€€ð ðInÐ ¨ø Ðthe€language€of€the€law€of€evidence,€[a€medical€opinion€suggesting]€that€which€isÐ ”ä Ðmerely€possible,€standing€alone€and€not€offered€as€auxiliary€or€rebuttal€testimony€isÐ €Ð Ðimmaterial€to€the€ascertainment€of€the€fact€and€so€is€inadmissible€as€evidence€of€thatÐ l¼ Ðfact.ðð€€òòMartin€v.€United€Statesóó,€284€F.2d€217,€219€(D.C.€Cir.,€1960).€€òòKirschner€v.Ð X ¨ ÐBroadhead,€supraóó,€671€F.2d€at€p.€1039„1040.ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌòòLindsey€v.€Miami€Dev.€Corp.óó,€689€S.W.2d€856,€861„62€(Tenn.€1985)€(emphasis€in€original).Ð #l! ÐÌThe€central€point€of€this€quote€is€that€plaintiffs€must€present€evidence€affording€a€reasonable€basisÐ ô$D # Ðfor€the€conclusion€that€it€is€more€likely€than€not€that€the€defendantððs€conduct€was€a€cause€in€fact€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€result.€€In€short,€Plaintiffs€here€were€required€to€present€medical€evidence€affording€a€reasonableÐ Ì&"% Ðbasis€for€the€conclusion€that€it€is€more€likely€than€not€that€Defendantððs€negligence€resulting€in€Mr.Ð ¸'#& ÐMillerððs€fall€was€a€cause€in€fact€of€his€back€and€neck€problems.€€Plaintiffs€failed€to€do€so.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€majority€believes€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Schock€and€Dr.€Lister€establishesÐ |*Ì%) Ðcausation€as€to€Mr.€Millerððs€injuries.€€I€disagree.€€I€believe€Dr.€Schockððs€and€Dr.€Listerððs€testimonyÐ h+¸&* Ðfail€to€afford€ð ða€reasonable€basis€for€the€conclusion€that€it€is€more€likely€than€not€that€the€conductÐ ° Ðof€the€defendant€was€a€cause€in€fact€of€the€result.ðð€€òòLindseyóó€689€S.W.2d€at€861.Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àFirst,€a€review€of€Dr.€Schockððs€testimony€is€necessary.€€The€majority€sets€out€muchÐ tÄ Ðof€Dr.€Schockððs€relevant€testimony€on€this€issue.€€I€will€not€repeat€all€of€that€testimony€in€this€dissent,Ð `° Ðbut€rather€will€refer€to€the€specific€portions€that€form€the€basis€for€my€dissent.€€Specifically,€Dr.Ð L œ ÐSchock€testified€as€follows:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÓ”Óò ò.€€€€€.€€€€€.ó óÐ  ` ÐÌÓÓà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà0¸ ` x` xàSo€I€cannot€say€with€any,€you€know,€certainty€that,€yes,€theÐ è 8  Ðherniated€disc€was€exacerbated€by€the€fall.€€But€I€can€say€thatÐ Ô$  Ðthe€fall€could€have€exacerbated€the€herniation.ÐÀ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà0¸ ` x` xàAnd€thatððs€about€„€youððre€talking€about€the€neck€herniation?Ð˜è ¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓ€ (н83Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà0¸ ` x` xàBoth€of€them.ÐpÀ¸ x¸ x ÐÌDr.€Schock€clearly€testified€that€he€cannot€say€with€òòany€certaintyóó€that€either€Mr.€Millerððs€neck€orÐ H˜ Ðback€injury€was€exacerbated€by€the€fall,€only€that€ð ðthe€fall€òòcouldóó€have€exacerbated€the€herniationðð.€Ð 4„ ÐThis€testimony€does€not€rise€to€the€level€of€showing€these€injuries€more€likely€than€not€were€causedÐ  p Ðby€Mr.€Millerððs€fall.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àDr.€Schockððs€testimony€continued,€also€as€discussed€by€the€majority.€€He€wasÐ ä4 Ðquestioned€regarding€Mr.€Millerððs€neck€problem:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà0¸ ` x` xàGiven€Mr.€Millerððs€history€and€given€your€physicalÐ ¨ø Ðevaluations€in€1996€and€then€in€early€1997,€can€you€state,€Dr.Ð ”ä ÐSchock,€within€a€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certaintyÐ €Ð Ðwhether€the€fall€he€described€to€you€in€April€of€1996€at€theÐ l¼ ÐChattanooga€Choo„Choo,€formerly€a€Holiday€Inn,€did€or€didÐ X ¨ Ðnot€aggravate€or€exacerbate€this€gentlemanððs€preexisting€neckÐ D!” Ðproblem?Ð0"€ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà0¸ ` x` xàI€„€I€definitely€cannot€put€a€„€say€that€the€fall€caused€it.€€HeÐ $X" Ðdefinitely€has€a€predisposing€condition€that€would€make€himÐ ô$D # Ðsusceptible€to€that€type€of€an€injury€from€a€fall.€€Ðà%0!$¸ x¸ x ÐÌÓ Óò òó óÔ#†¼j»XX^fÃ#ÔòòóóÓ  ÓÔ€X^fX»¼jÔOnce€again,€Dr.€Schock€says€he€cannot€say€the€fall€caused€Mr.€Millerððs€neck€injury.€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àDr.€Schock€also€testifies,€again€as€discussed€in€the€majority€opinion,€only€that€it€is€hisÐ )à$( Ðâ âopinion€to€a€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty€that€Mr.€Millerððs€symptoms€ð ðcould€beðð€consistentÐ |*Ì%) Ðwith€his€fall.€€Again,€he€does€not€testify€that€it€is€more€probable€than€not,€or€likely,€or€to€a€reasonableÐ ° Ðdegree€of€medical€certainty,€but€instead€testifies€only€to€a€ð ðcould€beðð€standard.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àà ` àNext€is€Dr.€Listerððs€testimony,€also€as€quoted€in€the€majority€opinion€as€follows:Ð tÄ Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà0¸ ` x` xàIn€your€opinion,€Dr.€Lister,€is€it€more€likely€than€not€that€theÐ L œ Ðrecurrent€disc€disease€in€the€lumbar€spine€was€caused€as€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðresult€of€the€fall€he€described€to€you?Ð$ t¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà0¸ ` x` xàI€donððt€know€what€caused€his€recurrent€disc€herniation.€€òòBasedÐ ü L  Ðon€his€history,€the€two€are€relatedóó,€but€I€donððt€know€whatÐ è 8  Ðcaused€the€disc€herniation.ÐÔ$ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌThe€majority,€in€discussing€this€testimony€of€Dr.€Lister,€admits€that€Dr.€Lister€testified€that€he€didÐ ¬ü  Ðnot€know€ð ðwhat€caused€the€disc€herniation.ðð€€The€majority€explains€away€this€testimony€by€sayingÐ ˜è  Ðit€ð ðcan€be€legitimately€construed€as€a€statement€by€the€doctor€that€he€did€not€know€what€caused€thisÐ „Ô  Ðcondition€òòoriginallyóó.€€This€is€the€ð ðstrongest€legitimate€viewðð€of€this€evidence€in€favor€of€the€plaintiffsÐ pÀ Ð.€.€.€.ðð€€I€would€not€necessarily€disagree€with€that€interpretation,€except€that€the€majority€overlooksÐ \¬ Ðthe€fact€that€in€the€very€first€sentence€of€that€exact€same€answer€Dr.€Lister€testified€not€that€he€didnððtÐ H˜ Ðknow€ð ðwhat€caused€the€disc€herniationðð€but€specifically€that€ð ðI€donððt€know€what€caused€the€òòrecurrentóóÐ 4„ Ðdisc€herniation.ðð€[emphasis€added].€€I€believe€there€is€no€way€to€argue€that€the€strongest€legitimateÐ  p Ðview€in€Plaintiffsðð€favor€of€the€first€sentence€of€Dr.€Listerððs€answer€can€be€anything€other€thanÐ  \ Ðpertaining€to€Mr.€Millerððs€conditions€after€the€fall€as€Dr.€Lister€specifically€referenced€Mr.€MillerððsÐ øH Ðòòrecurrentóó€disc€herniation.€€This€being€so,€what€Dr.€Lister€testified€to€was€that€he€did€not€know€whatÐ ä4 Ðcaused€Mr.€Millerððs€recurrent€disc€herniation,€only€that€he€believed€they€were€related€to€the€fall.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àContrary€to€the€majorityððs€statement,€I€do€not€exclude€from€consideration€Dr.€ListerððsÐ ¨ø Ðtestimony€that€ð ðI€donððt€know€what€caused€the€disc€herniation.ðð€I€agree€with€the€majority€that€this€canÐ ”ä Ðbe€construed€as€Dr.€Listerððs€admission€that€he€did€not€know€what€caused€the€disc€herniation€to€firstÐ €Ð Ðmanifest€itself.€€The€problem€with€the€majorityððs€opinion€on€this€issue€is€that€Dr.€Lister€said€more.€Ð l¼ ÐHe€specifically€testified€ð ðI€donððt€know€what€caused€the€recurrent€disc€herniation.ðð€€The€statement€byÐ X ¨ ÐDr.€Lister€relied€on€by€the€majority€in€no€way€qualifies€his€statement€that€he€does€not€know€whatÐ D!” Ðcaused€Plaintiffððs€recurrent€disc€herniation.€€Dr.€Lister€made€two€statements.€€In€the€first,€he€said€heÐ 0"€  Ðdid€not€know€what€caused€Plaintiffððs€recurrent€disc€herniation.€€In€the€second,€according€to€theÐ #l! Ðmajorityððs€interpretation€€with€which€I€do€not€disagree,€Dr.€Lister€arguably€stated€he€did€not€knowÐ $X" Ðwhat€caused€the€original€disc€herniation.€€Therefore,€Dr.€Lister€testified€he€does€not€know€whatÐ ô$D # Ðcaused€the€disc€herniation€originally€and€he€does€not€know€what€caused€the€recurrent€disc€herniation.€Ð à%0!$ ÐThis€was€his€testimony.€€Again,€we€are€left€with€medical€testimony€not€that€Mr.€Millerððs€injuriesÐ Ì&"% Ðwere€more€likely€than€not€or€probably€caused€by€his€fall,€but€only€that€Dr.€Lister€does€not€know€whatÐ ¸'#& Ðcaused€Mr.€Millerððs€recurrent€disc€herniation€but€believes€that€the€injury€and€fall€are€related€in€someÐ ¤(ô#' Ðway.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àI€agree€with€the€majority€that€we€must€ð ðtake€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÐ ° Ðâ âevidence€favoring€the€opponent€of€the€motion.ðð€€€òòLongóó,€797€S.W.2d€at€892.€€I€likewise€agree€that€allÐ œì Ðreasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€Plaintiffs€as€the€opponents€of€the€motion€must€be€allowed€and€allÐ ˆØ Ðevidence€contrary€to€Plaintiffsðð€position€must€be€disregarded.€€òòEatonóó,€891€S.W.2d€at€590;€òòLongóó,€797Ð tÄ ÐS.W.2d€at€892.€€I,€however,€would€hold€that€even€taking€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€medicalÐ `° Ðevidence€presented€by€Plaintiffs€and€applying€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€Plaintiffs,Ð L œ ÐPlaintiffsðð€medical€testimony€simply€never€ð ðaffords€a€reasonable€basis€for€the€conclusion€that€it€isÐ 8 ˆ Ðmore€likely€than€not€that€the€conduct€of€the€defendant€was€a€cause€in€fact€of€the€result.ðð€€òòLindseyóó,€689Ð $ t ÐS.W.2d€at€861.€€Plaintiffsðð€lawyers€attempted€to€get€this€level€of€opinion€testimony€from€Dr.€SchockÐ  ` Ðand€Dr.€Lister,€but€were€unsuccessful€in€getting€medical€testimony€that€Mr.€Millerððs€neck€and€backÐ ü L  Ðinjuries€more€likely€than€not€were€caused€by€his€fall.€€Plaintiffððs€attorneys€used€the€appropriateÐ è 8  Ðlanguage€in€their€questions€to€these€two€doctors,€language€such€as€ð ðwithin€a€reasonable€degree€ofÐ Ô$  Ðmedical€certaintyðð€and€ð ðmore€likely€than€not.ðð€€The€short„coming€was€not€in€the€lawyerððs€questions,Ð À  Ðbut€rather€in€the€witnessesðð€answers.€€I€believe€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€Plaintiffsðð€medicalÐ ¬ü  Ðevidence€can€be€no€more€than€Mr.€Millerððs€fall€òòcouldóó€have€been€the€cause€of€his€neck€and€backÐ ˜è  Ðinjuries,€and€that€his€injuries€were€consistent€with€such€a€fall.€€This€falls€far€short€of€being€aÐ „Ô  Ðreasonable€basis€for€the€conclusion€that€Mr.€Millerððs€injuries€were€more€likely€than€not€caused€byÐ pÀ Ðhis€fall.€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€majority€says€that€a€medical€expert€is€not€required€ð ðto€testify€with€legalÐ 4„ Ðprecision.ðð€€While€I€am€unsure€exactly€what€the€term€ð ðlegal€precisionðð€means,€a€medical€expert€isÐ  p Ðrequired,€under€the€law€of€this€state,€to€testify€to€a€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty€which,€IÐ  \ Ðbelieve,€means€more€likely€than€not.€€Plaintiffsðð€experts€did€not€do€that.€€Therefore,€there€being€noÐ øH Ðevidence€that€Mr.€Millerððs€injuries€were€more€likely€than€not€caused€by€his€fall,€it€became€ð ðthe€dutyÐ ä4 Ðof€the€court€to€direct€a€verdict€for€the€defendant€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòLindseyóó,€689€S.W.2d€at€861.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àFor€these€reasons,€I€believe€it€was€error€for€the€Trial€Court€to€fail€to€direct€a€verdictÐ ¨ø Ðin€favor€of€Defendant.€€I€would€reverse€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court,€and€award€judgment€in€favorÐ ”ä Ðof€Defendant.€Ð €Ð ÐÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð $X" Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGE