In this installment of "Day on Torts," John Day clears up a common misconception about the statute of limitations for wrongful death cases in Tennessee.

People and businesses have attempted to avoid responsibility for wrongful acts for all recorded history. Adam blamed Eve.¹ Eve blamed the serpent.² The Nuremberg defense is frequently offered as an explanation or rationalization for misconduct in both the government and private sectors.³

People and businesses have attempted to avoid responsibility for wrongful acts for all recorded history. Adam blamed Eve.¹ Eve blamed the serpent.² The Nuremberg defense is frequently offered as an explanation or rationalization for misconduct in both the government and private sectors.³

Everyone knows that a personal injury plaintiff has the duty to mitigate his or her damages. This makes good sense: a plaintiff should make a reasonable effort under the circumstances to avoid increasing the financial burden placed on a negligent defendant.

The adoption of the Tennessee Civil Justice Act of 2011¹ meant the words “noneconomic damages” formally entered the lexicon of Tennessee tort lawyers. The phrase has, of course, a comprehensive, statutory definition,² but suffice it to say that “noneconomic damages” are awarded for human losses and do not include medical bills, lost earnings or earning capacity, or property damage.

A recent decision of the Tennessee Court of Appeals reminds us of the interaction between our law of comparative fault and the legislature’s gift of “get out of jail free cards” (immunity and partial immunity) to certain special interest groups.

Edna Green was hurt on a church-sponsored bus ride to a local farm. The bus, driven by a fellow parishioner, hit some berms on the farm road causing severe injury to Ms. Green. Ms. Green sued her church, and the church asked in its answer to the complaint that fault be assigned against the farm. Ms. Green elected not to sue the farm, and went to trial only against her church.1

Your new client thought she could avoid hiring a lawyer and instead work out on her own a settlement with the insurance claims representative for the other driver. The dance lasted 10 months. “Wait until the end of medical treatment.” “Sign these forms.” “Send me your medical bills.” “I need your EOB forms.” “Your employer needs to confirm in writing your lost wages.” And so on.

Mrs. Myres was killed in a multi-car motor vehicle crash. She was a passenger in the car driven by her husband, Charles Myres. Justin Bennett was the driver of one of the other cars involved in the crash. There were allegations of road rage between Bennett and Mr. Myres, who was allegedly under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crash and who was later imprisoned for vehicular homicide in connection with the crash.[1]

Donna Acklen of Franklin County, Tennessee, died as a result of injuries she received when she was mauled by two dogs as she walked on a road near her home. Her death gave rise to the Donna Acklen Act of 2007[1] (the Act), which established a statutory cause of action against dog owners for dog attack injuries and death. The Act imposes strict liability on dog owners[2] for dog attacks, subject to several important exceptions.

Does a minor have a right to seek recovery for medical expenses in a personal injury case?

Historically the answer was generally “no,” with several cases holding that the claim belongs solely to the parent(s) who paid the medical bills.[1] Several other decisions called the strict application of the rule into question,[2] leaving the door open to minors making a claim for medical expenses incurred during minority under certain circumstances.