SARAH WHITE v. TARGET CORPORATION
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Gregory D. Cotton, Collierville, Tennessee, for the Plaintiff/Appellant Sarah White

Betty Ann Milligan, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Defendant/Appellee Target Corporation

Judge: KIRBY

This appeal involves claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and misappropriation of image. The plaintiff, a customer of the defendant store, brought clothing into the store’s dressing room to try it on. While in a state of undress in the dressing room, the customer noticed in the reflection of her dressing-room mirror a globe on the store ceiling that appeared to contain a surveillance camera. Store employees initially told the customer that the globe contained a camera, but a store manager later told the customer that the ceiling globe did not contain a camera. Eventually, the plaintiff customer filed this lawsuit against the defendant store, seeking damages for, inter alia, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and misappropriation of image. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant store. The plaintiff now appeals. We reverse, finding that the standard for summary judgment under Hannan v. Alltel Publishing has not been met in this case.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article 

EDNA H. IRWIN, v. CHRISTOPHER MARTIN ANDERSON
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Dail R. Cantrell, Clinton, Tennessee, for the appellant, Edna H. Irwin.

George H. Buxton, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for the appellee, Christopher Martin Anderson.

Judge: FRANKS

Plaintiff received serious injuries in an automobile accident, when she turned left in front of the oncoming vehicle operated by defendant. The suit resulted in a jury trial wherein the jury returned a verdict for defendant, which was approved by the Trial Judge. On appeal, we affirm the Trial Judge's Judgment.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

NORMAN HILL v. DANNY TAPIA, JR., ET AL.
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

James B. Johnson and Lauren Paxton Roberts, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Norman Hill.

C. Benton Patton, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Danny Tapia, Jr., and Tabet Enterprises.

David S. Zinn and Raney B. Cronin, Brentwood, Tennessee, for the appellee, Estate of Norma Aguila.

Judge: STAFFORD

This is a personal injury case resulting from an automobile accident. After the accident, Plaintiff/Appellant learned that he suffered from a degenerative disc disease, which required surgery. Appellant sued the two drivers involved in the accident for damages, which included his medical expenses for the disc surgery . At trial, Appellant’s surgeon’s deposition testimony was read to the jury, in which the surgeon testified that while the accident “aggravated” Appellant’s existing condition, the treatment he received was not “causally related” to the accident. Appellant offered another expert’s testimony, however, that did relate the treatment to the accident. At the close of proof, Appellant moved for a directed verdict on the issue of causation for his medical expenses, arguing that because the surgeon’s testimony was contradictory, it was subject to the cancellation rule. The trial court denied the motion and sent the issue to the jury. The jury returned a verdict for Appellant, but in an amount that did not include the medical expenses he incurred to treat the degenerative disc disease. Appellant was also awarded discretionary costs. After a careful review of the record, we affirm. 

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

LATONY BAUGH, ET AL. v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., ET AL.
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

James S. Higgins, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellants, James Denzmore.

Dana C. Holloway and David A. Chapman, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, United Parcel Service, Inc. and Jason Sanders.

H. Anthony Duncan, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Latony Baugh.

Judge: DINKINS

Shortly after the mother of four children was killed in an accident, her husband instituted an action to recover damages for her death; the father of the children moved to intervene in the action and for the court to hold a hearing on whether the husband had abandoned the mother, thereby waiving his right as surviving spouse to participate in the wrongful death action. The trial court did not hold a hearing; rather, it held that the husband was the proper party to pursue the action, allowed the Guardian of the children to represent the interest of the children in the action, and dismissed Father’s petition. The surviving spouse, Guardian and tortfeasor subsequently petitioned the court for approval of a settlement of the wrongful death claim; the court granted the petition. Father appeals, contending that the court erred in failing to hold a hearing on the issue of whether the husband was estranged from the mother, in approving the settlement, and in placing the settlement documents under seal. We remand the case for a hearing on whether the husband waived his right as surviving spouse to participate in the wrongful death action and reverse the court’s placement of the settlement documents under seal; in all other respects the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

THERESA A. KERBY v. MELINDA J. HAWS, MD, ET AL.
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Al H. Thomas, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Theresa A. Kerby.

Dixie W. Cooper, Kim J. Gruetzmacher, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Melinda J. Haws, MD, and The Plastic Surgery Center of Nashville, PLLC.

Judge: COTTRELL

A woman who suffered a series of persistent infections after surgery filed a malpractice complaint against the defendant surgeon. Her complaint alleged that the infections were cause by a small metal object that the defendant had negligently left in her body during the surgery. The plaintiff attached to her complaint the statutorily required certificate of good faith, which certified that she had consulted with an expert, who provided a signed statement confirming that he believed, on the basis of the medical records, that there was a good faith basis to maintain the action. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-122. After the object was discovered to be a surgical clip of a type that was designed to be retained by the patient’s body, the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, which the plaintiff did not oppose. The defendant surgeon subsequently filed a motion for sanctions against the plaintiff under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-122 (d)(3), which gives the court the authority to punish violations related to the certificate of good faith. The trial court granted the motion, and awarded the defendant doctor over $22,000 in attorney fees. We reverse.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

ROSE A. CHAPMAN, ET AL. v. WELLMONT HOLSTON VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Wendal D. Jackson, Bristol, Tennessee, for the appellants, Rose A. Chapman and Alfred C. Chapman.

Russell W. Adkins, Kingsport, Tennessee, for the appellee, Wellmont Holston Valley Medical Center, a member of Wellmont Health System.

Judge: SWINEY

Rose A. Chapman and Alfred C. Chapman (“Plaintiffs”) sued Wellmont Holston Valley Medical Center (“the Hospital”) regarding a fall Ms. Chapman suffered while a patient at the Hospital. The Trial Court entered judgment upon the jury’s verdict finding and holding that the Hospital was not at fault. Plaintiffs appeal raising one issue regarding whether the Trial Court erred in granting the Hospital’s motion in limine to exclude testimony about an apology and offer to pay bills allegedly made by one of the Hospital’s nurses. We find this issue has been waived, and we affirm.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

KEVIN MICHAEL JORDAN v. A.C. ENTERPRISES, INC., A/K/A DIPSTICK, INC.
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Bradley E. Griffith, Johnson City, Tennessee, for the appellant, A.C. Enterprises, Inc., a/k/a Dipstick, Inc.

Sandra Lee Stanbery-Foster, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Kevin Michael Jordan.

Judge: FRANKS

Plaintiff's action for retaliatory discharge resulted in a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff and an award of $120,000.00. Defendant appealed. We affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court upholding the jury verdict.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

BETTY LOU LAWING v. GREENE COUNTY EMS, et al.
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Jeffrey M. Ward, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Greene County/Greeneville EMS and Greene County, Tennessee.

R. Wayne Culbertson, Kingsport, Tennessee, and Wayne Ritchie, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee Betty Lou Lawing.

Arthur P. Brock and William J. Rieder, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority.

Judge: FRANKS

In this action the defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds the statute of limitation had run on plaintiff's cause of action. The Trial Court overruled the Motion on the grounds that the tolling provisions in Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-201(c) was applicable to GTLA actions and granted permission to appeal pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 9. On appeal, we hold that the tolling provision does not apply because the statute did not expressly extend it to GTLA actions.

.PDF Version of Case  

Comment on this Article

U.S. BANK, N.A., AS SERVICER FOR THE TENNESSEE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AGENCY v. TENNESSEE FARMERS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Charles L. Trotter, Jr., Huntingdon, Tennessee, for the appellant, Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company.

Michael F. Rafferty, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, U.S. Bank, N.A., as Servicer for Tennessee Housing Development Agency.

Judge: FARMER

U.S. Bank, N.A. (“Bank”) had a mortgage on a residence which was insured against fire loss by Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company (“Tennessee Farmers”). When the owner of the residence failed to pay the mortgage, the Bank commenced foreclosure proceedings. Thereafter, the owner filed for bankruptcy which stayed the foreclosure proceedings. After the residence was destroyed in a fire, the Bank filed a claim to recover the insurance proceeds. Tennessee Farmers refused to pay the claim. As a result, the Bank filed suit against Tennessee Farmers alleging breach of contract, bad faith refusal to pay an insurance claim, and unfair or deceptive practices under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). The trial court granted partial summary judgment to the Bank, concluding that the Bank's failure to give Tennessee Farmers notice of the foreclosure proceedings did not invalidate the insurance coverage. On appeal to this Court, we reversed, finding that the Bank’s commencement of foreclosure proceedings amounted to an increase in hazard under the policy and the Bank’s failure to provide notice precluded coverage. After granting the Bank’s application for permission to appeal, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of this Court, and held that commencement of foreclosure proceedings did not constitute an increase in hazard under the terms of the insurance policy or the applicable statutory provisions, and therefore, the Bank was not required to give notice to Tennessee Farmers. U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 277 S.W.3d 381 (Tenn. 2009). Subsequently, on remand from the Supreme Court, the trial court entered a judgment in favor of the Bank for the amount due on the mortgage plus accrued interest. The trial court further awarded the Bank attorney’s fees and costs based on its finding that Tennessee Farmers’ interpretation of the policy, that the Bank was required to provide them with notice of the commencement of foreclosure proceedings, amounted to bad faith and an unfair act or practice under the TCPA. After thoroughly reviewing the record, we reverse and remand.

PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article

KENNETH E. KING v. ANDERSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE
Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys:

Jonathan Swann Taylor, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Anderson County, Tennessee.

Bruce D. Fox and John A. Willis, Clinton, Tennessee, and Ronald C. Koksal, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Kenneth E. King.

Judge: SUSANO

Kenneth E. King was arrested for driving on a revoked license. He was put in a cell with several violent criminals. At his arraignment, the court ordered him released. The person charged with processing the release delayed his release by simply doing nothing. While awaiting his release, Mr. King was assaulted by one of his cellmates. He sustained serious injuries, including partial loss of vision in one eye. He filed this action against Anderson County (“the County”). After a bench trial, the court found the County 55% at fault and King 45% at fault for provoking the assault. It determined that the total damages were $170,000 reduced to $93,500 to account for King’s comparative fault. The County appeals. We affirm.

.PDF Version of Case

Comment on this Article