ÿWPCð 9# .UN9 %‡ 0(bµUH½ 0Dw@I4‰¬ 0J´ 0lþ 0Dj 0T® 0^ 0h` 0rÈ 0|: 0†¶ 0< 1uÌ 0dA B¥ AQ Æ 0DÙ 0@ 0D] D/¡ BÐ D3í U> V^ U*´ U6Þ B)DC= AM€U*Í+÷}"v~ŸvÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù-<à09Z 0Courier (W1) Regular(3¯$©©Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý PUQ PR{STDUDVWeXÓ€bê‚_#Ôô3|xd2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2" 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)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman LÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ)ÝÝ  ÝÌÌÌ< Œ 9p`(Times< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d11117Border 1dd!#2Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial !Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€4ÔÔ€4ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€4XÔÌÌFebruary€17,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó sÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€0ÔÔ€0ôÔòòSeeóó€òòTurner€v.€Jordanóó,€_____€S.W.2d€_____€(Tenn.€1998)€(joinder€ofÏnegligent€and€intentional€tortfeasors€would€be€improper€since€their€ð ðfaultððÏcould€not€be€compared).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿáùEG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÒ ° ÒÒ À ÒÖ€.ÖØ ØÓ&€//XÐd&ÓÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€ÌXXdÈdÈ7ÑÔ€0ÔÓ  ÓœÞ ÞÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àFebruary€17,€1998Ì›à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòòFOR€PUBLICATIONóóÌÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÙ€!ÙœßR€352A1-j|Dþƒ` ç `€€@ÿRß›Ìà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌà@ à(HEARD€AT€COLUMBIA)Ìœ›ÌÌDOUGLAS€E.€SAMUELSON,€AS€THEà àà à(ÌNATURAL€FATHER€AND€PERSONALà àà à(ÌREPRESENTATIVE€OF€KEVIN€L.à àà à(ÌSAMUELSON,à àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àPlaintiff„Appellant,à àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(€€Davidson€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà àà à(€€Hon.€Thomas€W.€Brothers,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(€€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(ÌCECIL€E.€McMURTRY,€M.D.,€WILLIAMà à(€€No.€0lS01„9702„CV„00025ÌA.€HOLLAND,€JR.,€M.D.,€H.C.A.€à à(ÌHEALTH€SERVICES€OF€TENNESSEE,€INC.,(Ìd/b/a€DONELSON€HOSPITAL€EMERGICARE,(ÌINC.,à àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àDefendants,à àà àà àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(ÌMARK€S.€TOTTY,€INDIVIDUALLY€ANDà à(€Ìd/b/a€MARK€S.€TOTTY,€D.C.,€P.C.,à à(Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à(Ìà àDefendant„Appellee.à àà àà à(ÌÌÌÌòòFor€Plaintiff„Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€Defendant„Appelleeóó:ÌÌJoe€Bednarzà àà àà àà àà àà àAlfred€H.€KnightÌLaw€Offices€of€Joe€Bednarzà àà àà àRoger€T.€MayÌNashvilleà àà àà àà àà àà àà àW.€Reese€Willis,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWillis€&€KnightÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashvilleÌÌà@ àòòò òO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÌJUDGMENT€OF€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌDISMISSING€SUIT€AFFIRMED;€CASEÌREMANDED€TO€TRIAL€COURT.à àà àà àà àà àà àREID,€J.ÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓà àThis€is€a€medical€malpractice€case,€which€began€as€a€suitÏagainst€several€defendants,€only€one€of€whom,€Mark€S.€Totty,€isÏbefore€the€Court€on€appeal.€€In€a€divided€opinion,€the€Court€ofÏAppeals€sustained€the€defendantððs€pleas€of€òòresóó€òòadjudicataóó€andÏcollateral€estoppel€and€pretermitted€all€other€issues.€€TheÏdissenting€judge€would€have€found€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏÑ  Ñsevering€and€dismissing€the€plaintiffððs€claim€against€the€defendantÏTotty€and€would€have€remanded€the€case€for€retrial.€€This€CourtÏfinds€that€the€trial€court€erred€but€the€determinative€issues€wereÏnot€preserved€on€appeal.€€Consequently,€the€judgment€dismissing€theÏsuit€is€affirmed.ÌÌà@ àò òIó óÌÌà àThe€plaintiff,€Douglas€E.€Samuelson,€in€a€representativeÏcapacity,€sued€the€defendants,€Dr.€Cecil€E.€McMurtry,€Dr.€William€A.ÏHolland,€Jr.,€Dr.€Mark€S.€Totty€and€Hospital€Corporation€of€AmericaÏ(HCA)€for€the€wrongful€death€of€Kevin€L.€Samuelson,€who,€onÏAugust2,€1988,€died€from€pneumonia.€€ÌÌà àFor€the€purposes€of€this€appeal,€the€facts€are€notÏdisputed.€€On€July21,€1988,€the€deceased,€who€was€28€years€of€age,Ïwas€treated€by€Dr.€Holland,€a€physician,€at€the€HCA€hospital€atÏDonelson,€Tennessee€for€a€boil€under€his€right€arm.€€The€next€day,ÏSamuelson€returned€to€the€hospital€with€a€fever€and€inflammationÏaround€the€boil€and€was€treated€by€Dr.McMurtry,€a€physician.€€EightÏdays€later,€on€July30,€Samuelson€went€to€the€hospital€emergencyÏroom€with€complaints€of€back€pain,€for€which€he€was€treated€byÏDr.McMurtry.€€The€following€day,€July31,€he€twice€returned€to€theÏemergency€room€with€the€same€symptoms.€€On€his€first€visit,€he€wasÏseen€by€Dr.€Holland,€but€on€his€second€visit€€he€was€discouraged€byÏthe€hospital€personnel€from€seeing€a€physician.€€On€August€1,€heÏwent€to€the€office€of€Dr.Totty,€a€chiropractor,€with€complaints€ofÏintense€back€and€chest€pain€and€was€treated€twice€that€day€byÏDr.Totty.€€The€next€day,€Samuelson€died€from€pneumonia,€which€hadÏnot€been€diagnosed€by€any€of€the€health€care€providers.€€ExpertÏmedical€evidence€showed€that€the€chest€and€back€pain€were€caused€byÏpneumonia€and€that€the€deceasedððs€condition€could€have€been€treatedÏsuccessfully€within€6€to€12€hours€prior€to€his€death.€€ÌÌà àThe€complaint€charged€that€the€physicians,€Drs.€HollandÏand€McMurtry,€failed€to€œ›diagnose€properly€the€deceasedððs€condition;Ïthat€HCA€wrongfully€refused€him€treatment;€and€that€Dr.Totty,€theÍchiropractor,€failed€to€refer€the€deceased€to€a€physician€forÏtreatment.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€granted€Dr.Tottyððs€motion€for€summaryÏjudgment€upon€the€finding€that€ð ðthere€exists€a€genuine€issue€ofÏmaterial€fact€with€respect€to€the€issue€of€negligence,€but€not€as€toÏthe€issue€of€proximate€causation.ðð€€On€appeal,€the€Court€of€AppealsÏreversed€the€summary€judgment,€finding€disputed€evidence€concerningÏthe€proximate€causes€of€Samuelsonððs€death€and€remanded€the€case€forÏtrial.€€ÌÌà àPrior€to€trial€on€remand,€the€trial€court€granted€threeÏmotions€filed€by€Dr.Totty:€a€motion€to€exclude€the€testimony€of€theÏplaintiffððs€expert€witness€regarding€the€standard€of€care€forÏchiropractors,€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€because€the€plaintiffÏwas€not€prepared€to€offer€expert€testimony€regarding€the€standard€ofÏcare€for€chiropractors,€and€a€motion€to€dismiss€the€plaintiffððs€suitÏagainst€Dr.Totty€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€canÏbe€granted.€€The€court€òòsuaóó€òòsponteóó€severed€the€action€againstÏDr.Totty€from€the€suit€against€the€other€defendants.€€ÌÌà àThe€case€went€to€trial€against€Dr.€Holland,€Dr.€McMurtry,Ïand€HCA.€€The€jury€found€damages€in€the€amount€of€$500,000€andÍallocated€51€percent€of€the€fault€to€Dr.Holland€and€49€percent€toÏthe€deceased,€resulting€in€a€verdict€for€the€plaintiff€in€the€amountÏof€$255,000.€€The€jury€found€in€favor€of€Dr.€McMurtry€and€HCA.€€TheÏtrial€court€suggested€a€remittitur€reducing€the€judgment€againstÏDr.Holland€to€$204,000,€which€the€plaintiff€accepted€under€protest.€ÏThere€was€no€appeal€from€any€action€of€the€trial€court€regarding€theÏdefendants€Holland,€McMurtry€and€HCA.€€The€plaintiff€acceptedÏpayment€of€the€judgment€in€the€amount€of€$204,000€and€filed€with€theÏclerk€of€the€trial€court€a€certification€that€the€judgment€was€fullyÏsatisfied.€€ÌÌà@ àò òIIó óÌÌà àThe€plaintiff€assigned€as€error€the€trial€courtððs€actionÏin€dismissing€and€severing€the€plaintiffððs€suit€against€Dr.€Totty.ÌÌà àAs€stated,€the€Court€of€Appeals€found€on€the€first€appealÏthat€affidavits€filed€on€behalf€of€the€plaintiff€created€materialÏissues€of€fact€regarding€Dr.Tottyððs€negligence€and€proximateÏcausation€and€remanded€the€case€for€trial€against€all€defendants.€ÏNo€useful€purpose€would€be€served€by€discussing€in€this€opinion€theÏplaintiffððs€expertððs€qualifications€or€the€standard€of€care€owed€theÏplaintiff€by€the€defendant€Totty€under€the€circumstances€of€theÍcase.€€For€the€purposes€of€this€appeal,€this€Court€finds€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€dismissing€the€plaintiffððs€suit€against€Dr.ÏTotty€rather€than€allowing€the€case€to€proceed€to€trial€as€orderedÏby€the€Court€of€Appeals.ÌÌà àThe€issue,€then,€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏsevering€for€trial€the€claim€against€Dr.€Totty.€€Rule€19.01,€Tenn.ÏR.€Civ.€P.,€provides,€ð ð[a]€person€who€is€subject€to€the€jurisdictionÏof€the€court€shall€be€joined€as€a€party€if€(1)€in€the€personððsÏabsence€complete€relief€cannot€be€accorded€among€those€alreadyÏparties.€.€.€.ðð€€This€portion€of€the€rule€would€compel€the€joinderÏof€Dr.Totty,€because€complete€relief€in€this€action,€which€isÏgoverned€by€comparative€fault,€could€not€be€accorded€all€partiesÏunless€Dr.Totty€was€a€party.€€However,€the€rule€contains€theÏfurther€provision:€€ð ðThis€rule€shall€be€construed€to€allow€jointÏtort„feasors€and€obligors€on€obligations€that€are€joint€and€severalÏto€be€sued€either€jointly€or€severally.ðð€€The€application€of€thisÏportion€of€the€rule€obviously€has€been€affected€by€the€adoption€ofÏcomparative€fault.€€€ÌÌà àJudge€Koch,€dissenting€in€the€Court€of€Appeals,€succinctlyÏsummarized€the€rules€regarding€the€apportionment€of€fault€underÏcomparative€fault:ÌÌÓÓà8 à[T]he€Court€has€articulated€four€principles€withÏregard€to€the€apportionment€of€fault€or€awardingÏdamages€against€non„parties.€€First,€fault€mayÏbe€apportioned€only€to€persons€against€whom€theÏplaintiff€has€a€cause€of€action.€€òòOwens€v.ÏTruckstops€of€Am.óó,€915€S.W.2d€at€428;€òòRidings€v.ÏRalph€M.€Parsons€Co.óó,€914€S.W.2d€at€83.€€Second,Ïfault€may€be€apportioned€to€both€parties€andÏnon„parties.€€òòVolz€v.€Ledesóó,€895€S.W.2d€at€680.€ÏThird,€the€plaintiff€bears€the€risk€of€notÏjoining€a€potentially€liable€tortfeasor€againstÏwhom€it€has€a€cause€of€action.€€òòRidings€v.€RalphÏM.€Parsons€Co.óó,€914€S.W.2d€at€83;€òòVolz€v.€Ledesóó,Ï895€S.W.2d€at€680.€€Fourth,€failure€to€identifyÏpotentially€liable€tortfeasors€who€are€notÏalready€parties€as€required€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ20„1„119(a)€will€prevent€defendants€fromÏattributing€fault€to€these€non„parties.€€òòRidingsÏv.€Ralph€M.€Parsons€Co.óó,€914€S.W.2d€at€84.Ìà àÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€effect€of€comparative€fault€principles€on€joint€andÏseveral€liability€was€considered€in€òòOwens€v.€Truckstops€of€Am.óó,€915ÏS.W.2d€420€(Tenn.€1996).€€There€the€Court€concluded€that€ð ðwhere€theÏseparate,€independent€negligent€acts€of€more€than€one€tortfeasorÏcombine€to€cause€a€single,€indivisible€injury,€each€tortfeasor€willÏbe€liable€only€for€that€proportion€of€the€damages€attributable€toÏits€fault.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€430.€€And,€further,€ð ðwhen€liability€is€based€onÏnegligence,€each€of€the€defendants€is€severally€liable€only€for€theÏpercentage€of€damages€caused€by€its€negligence.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€433.€€RuleÏ8.03,€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.,€requires€that€comparative€fault,€includingÏthe€identity€or€description€of€any€other€alleged€tortfeasors,€beÍpled€by€a€defendant€as€an€affirmative€defense.€€Also,€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€20„1„119(a)(1994)€has€been€amended€to€allow€additional€timeÏfor€other€persons€to€be€made€defendants€in€cases€of€comparativeÏfault.€€This€Court€has€stated€that,€ð ðRule€8.03,€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.,Ïinsures€that€the€rights€and€liabilities€of€the€parties€subject€toÏsuit€be€resolved€in€one€action.€€Section€20„1„119€provides€theÏprocedure€for€joining€additional€defendants....ðð€€òòRidings€v.ÏRalph€M.€Parsons€Co.óó,€914€S.W.2d€79,€83€(Tenn.€1996).€€TheÏconclusion€to€be€drawn€from€these€decisions€is,€where€the€separate,Ïindependent€negligent€acts€of€more€than€one€tortfeasor€combine€toÏcause€a€single,€indivisible€injury,€all€tortfeasors€must€be€joinedÏin€the€same€action,€unless€joinder€is€specifically€prohibited€byÏlaw.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€Here,€the€complaint€alleged€that€the€separate€and€independentÏacts€of€Dr.Totty€combined€with€the€separate€and€independent€acts€ofÏthe€other€defendants€to€cause€a€single,€indivisible€injury.€ÏConsequently,€since€Dr.Totty€and€the€other€defendants€would€not€beÏjointly€liable€for€the€decedentððs€death,€that€provision€in€Rule€l9Ïwhich€allows€joint€tortfeasors€to€be€sued€either€jointly€orÏseverally€is€not€applicable.€€ÌÌà àThe€procedure€required€under€Tennesseeððs€comparative€faultÏformulation€retains€the€efficiency€of€joint€liability€and€theÏfairness€of€comparative€fault.€€It€also€conserves€judicial€resourcesÏand€eliminates€inconsistent€judgments.€€It€resolves€fairly€theÏcompeting€interests€of€full€recovery€for€the€plaintiff€and€theÏequitable€allocation€of€liability€for€the€defendants.€€Allowing€aÏplaintiff€to€sue€defendants€in€separate,€consecutive€actions€wouldÏdefeat€the€efficiency€and€fairness€that€are€the€objectives€of€theÏprinciples€of€comparative€fault.€€òòSeeóó€John€Scott€Hickman,€òòOne„ActionÏRuleóó,€48€Vand.€L.€Rev.€739,€762€(1995).ÌÌà àIn€òòCogdell€v.€Hospital€Center€at€Orangeóó,€560€A.2d€1169Ï(N.J.€1989),€which€was€a€medical€malpractice€suit€against€severalÏdefendants€who€were€charged€with€consecutive€acts€of€negligence,€theÏSupreme€Court€of€New€Jersey€set€forth€the€policy€considerations€uponÏwhich€that€court€based€its€ð ðentire€controversy€doctrine.ðð€€ThoseÏconsiderations€support€the€decision€reached€in€this€case.€€ÌÌÓÓà8 à[T]here€can€be€little€doubt€that€theÏparticipation€of€all€potentially€responsibleÏpersons€as€parties€in€the€original€action€wouldÏhave€resulted€in€a€fuller€and€fairerÏpresentation€of€the€relevant€evidence€and€wouldÏhave€enabled€the€jury€to€make€a€more€informedÏand€complete€determination€of€liability.€€ItÏwould€have€assured€an€ultimate€determinationÏthat€would€be€comprehensive,€just€and€conclusiveÏas€to€all€persons€implicated€in€the€controversy.ÌÌà8 à€€€€€.€.€.€€The€failure€to€have€joined€theseÏdefendants€in€the€earlier€action€seemsÏprejudicial€and€unfair€.€.€.€.€€[W]hileÏtechnically€their€interests€were€not€determinedÏin€the€earlier€action,€they€do€not€now€have€theÏsame€opportunity€to€persuade€a€jury€that€will€beÏdetermining€their€liability€that€the€formerÏdefendants€are€to€be€blamed.ÌÌÌÌòòId.óó€at€1178.€€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€conclusion€is€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissingÏand€severing€the€claim€against€Dr.Totty.€€The€trial€courtððs€errorsÏdeprived€the€plaintiff€of€the€right€to€proceed€against€the€defendantÏTotty€in€the€same€trial€with€the€other€defendants€and€also€of€theÏright€to€have€the€decedentððs€fault€compared€with€the€fault€of€allÏthe€defendants.€€The€defendants€other€than€Dr.Totty€were€deprivedÏof€an€opportunity€to€have€fault€apportioned€against€Dr.Totty.€€ThisÏresult€could€have€been€accomplished€on€remand€had€the€plaintiffÏappealed€the€entire€case.€€ÌÌà àDespite€the€plaintiffððs€insistence€that€relief€can€beÏgranted€on€the€record€before€the€Court,€the€Court€finds€that€theÏplaintiffððs€failure€to€appeal€the€judgments€against€the€defendantsÏother€than€Dr.Totty€was€fatal€to€his€right€to€a€new€trial.€€PerhapsÏthe€plaintiff€could€not€have€anticipated€the€precise€decision€thatÍwould€be€rendered€by€the€Court€on€the€issues€presented,€but€theÏplaintiff€chose€to€accept€payment€in€satisfaction€of€the€judgmentÏagainst€the€defendant€Holland,€thereby€precluding€an€appeal€thatÏwould€have€allowed€the€Court€to€do€justice€for€all€the€parties.€€ÌÌà àThe€Court€has€been€referred€to€no€authority€that€wouldÏallow€it€to€set€aside€a€final€judgment€against€a€defendant€who€isÏnot€a€party€to€the€appeal€and€who€has€paid€the€judgment€and€receivedÏfrom€the€plaintiff€an€acknowledgment€of€full€satisfaction.€ÌÌà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€AppealsÏdismissing€the€suit€is€affirmed,€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€theÏtrial€court.ÌÌà àCosts€of€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€plaintiff.€€€€€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àReid,€J.à àÌÌÌConcur:ÌÌAnderson,€C.J.,€Drowota,€Birch,Ì€€€€and€Holder,€JJ.