Tennessee Injury Attorney Blog

January 23, 2021

Tennessee Court of Appeals Affirms $200,000 Damages Award to Student Injured by Teacher’s Shot Put Toss During Track and Field Tryouts

Lawsuits against governmental entities for the allegedly negligent acts of their employees can be difficult. As with other defendants accused of negligence, the government resists being held accountable in many East Tennessee personal injury cases.

Generally, the argument is that the employee in question acted reasonably under the circumstances presented and that the plaintiff was the one at fault. However, this is not always the government’s strategy.

A recent case against a large county school system was the “exception that proves the rule,” so to speak. In this case, the governmental entity insisted that its employee’s conduct was so egregious as to not be considered negligence, thus removing the case from the statute under which the injured party pursued compensation.

January 8, 2021

Infants Hurt by Opioids Stated a Claim Under Tennessee Drug Dealer Liability Act

by Mark Hartsoe

In a Knoxville product liability lawsuit, one of the first considerations is whether the plaintiff has “standing” to sue. Standing is a legal concept that simply means a litigant must have a sufficient enough connection to the action at issue to support that party’s participation in the case.

If a party lacks standing, there is no reason for the case to move forward. The courts are busy enough without entertaining cases that would clearly be a waste of judicial economy.

Of course, opinions can vary on the issue of standing, just as they can on many other issues that arise during the litigation process. Like other decisions involving whether a case should move forward, there is the possibility of an appeal if one party is disgruntled with the trial court’s ruling on standing.

December 19, 2020

Appeals Court Refuses to Order Sanctions to Physician Against Whom Malpractice Was Asserted by Pharmacy in Tennessee Woman’s Negligence Case

by Mark Hartsoe

Tennessee follows a principle of negligence known as “comparative fault.” Initially established by case law back in the 1990s, this doctrine holds that, in a Tennessee personal injury case in which a plaintiff seeks money damages for injuries allegedly caused by another’s negligence, the finder of fact is to make a finding as to the relative fault of the various parties to the lawsuit.

In other words, the plaintiff’s fault is to be “compared” to that of the defendant. If the defendant is not found to be more at fault than the plaintiff, then the plaintiff’s case fails. (Tennessee is a “modified” comparative negligence state; in some states, the outcome of a case involving two equally negligent parties could differ.)

This idea seems simple enough, at least when there are only one plaintiff and one defendant. However, there are many cases in which this is not so; when there are multiple defendants, for instance, the jury must determine not only the relative fault between the plaintiff and the defendants but also compare the fault of the defendants among them so that, if the plaintiff prevails in the suit, the amount due him or her from each defendant can be determined.

December 5, 2020

Tennessee Court of Appeals Reverses Dismissal of Mother’s Suit on Deceased Son’s Behalf for Damages Arising in Car Accident

by Mark Hartsoe

One of the foremost considerations in a Knoxville personal injury lawsuit is whether the would-be plaintiff has standing to file suit. “Standing,” in the legal sense, means that the person who is seeking redress has a right to relief under the law.

This may seem like a straightforward question, but it can be a more complex issue than one might imagine. This is especially true in cases involving persons who have passed away.

Determining who has standing to sue on behalf of a person who, had he or she lived, had the right to bring a lawsuit against an allegedly negligent individual can be a matter of statutory law in some cases. It may also be resolved based on prior case law in some situations.

November 19, 2020

Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds that Uninsured Motorist Policy Did Not Preclude Prejudgment Interest

by Mark Hartsoe

If you have never been involved in a lawsuit involving uninsured motorist insurance coverage, you might be surprised to find that the insured individual and their insurance company are in an adversarial relationship in such proceedings. In other words, in an east Tennessee car accident case, to determine the amount due an insured person who has been hurt by the negligence of an uninsured motorist, the injured person is on the opposite side of the lawsuit as his or her insurance company.

Although the case may not be styled in the case of “insured versus insurer,” the reality is that the insurance company is the real defendant in the case because it is the party who will be paying out any monies awarded to the plaintiff. It is possible that the insurance company may eventually recoup some of these funds from the party that caused the crash, but a full recovery is unlikely.

Therefore, the insurance company effectively stands in the shoes of the at-fault, uninsured motorist during the litigation of the case and may assert the same types of defenses that the motorist could have asserted had he or she been present at trial. Of course, the insurance company may have a few defenses of its own, in addition.

November 6, 2020

Federal District Court in Tennessee Denies Nursing Home’s Motion to Arbitrate, Citing Physician’s Illegible Dating of Signature

by Mark Hartsoe

More and more frequently, health care providers such as hospitals and nursing homes are seeking to prevent those whom they injure via negligence, abuse, and malpractice from having their day in court. They often do this in a very surreptitious way, such that many litigants are not even aware that they may have jeopardized their right to a trial by jury until it is too late.

It happens under the guise of “signing some papers” during admission into a Knoxville nursing home, convalescent center, hospital, or other medical center. The patient or his or her family member often has no idea of the ramifications of signing the pile of complex documents that are shoved in front of them during what is probably one of the most difficult days of their life.

Fortunately, not all such attempts to thwart the legal process are successful. In some cases, the court system refuses to grant the health care provider’s request to send the case to an arbitrator rather than have it rightfully proceed through the litigation process.

October 23, 2020

Tennessee Trial Court Should Have Given Due Consideration to Litigants’ Motion for Expansion of Time for Service of Process in Personal Injury Lawsuit

by Mark Hartsoe

Timeliness is critically important in personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. There are deadlines for filing a claim, deadlines for effectuating service of process, and so on.

Failure to file the appropriate paperwork in a timely fashion can mean the end of the plaintiff’s case – and his or her chance of receiving fair compensation for a serious injury. Thus, it is very important that the injured person consult an east Tennessee personal injury attorney who can help him or her comply with all of the procedural requirements of the case.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case, the plaintiffs were a married couple who sought to recover monetary compensation for the alleged negligence of the defendants, an advanced practice nurse and a medical clinic. The plaintiffs began their case by filing a complaint in the Circuit Court of Shelby County on February 24, 2017. Summons were issued to the defendants at the time of the filing of the plaintiff’s suit, but they were returned without having been served. On September 5, 2017, alias summons were issued. These were served on the defendants on December 6, 2017, which was some 92 days after the complaint had been filed.

October 9, 2020

Appellate Court Says That a Tennessee Trial Court Was Correct in Ordering New Trial After Doctor Tried to Shift Blame for Alleged Negligence

by Mark Hartsoe

Doctors and nurses spend many years learning the professions. This does not mean, however, that they never make mistakes. They do, much more often that the general public would like to believe.

When someone is hurt or passes away because of a healthcare practitioner’s mistake, the individual or the family of a deceased patient may be able to seek monetary compensation via an east Tennessee medical malpractice lawsuit. Time of the essence in a medical negligence case, as there are strict deadlines for filing a claim.

The first step in a malpractice case is usually to retain a qualified medical expert to examine the patient’s medical records. If that professional is of the opinion that the would-be defendant breached the applicable standard of care, the next step is filing suit in the appropriate court. Continue reading

September 23, 2020

Tennessee Court of Appeals Holds that Wrongful Death Litigant Was Not Bound by Arbitration Agreement Proffered by Nursing Home

by Mark Hartsoe

For several years now, there has been a concerted effort to limit the legal rights of those who might seek to file a Knoxville nursing home abuse lawsuit. Typically, a representative of the nursing home begins this process by asking the patient or someone in his or her family to sign “routine paperwork” that includes an agreement to arbitrate, rather than litigate, any potential claims that may arise during the patient’s care.

The patient or family member often has no idea that, by signing these admission papers, he or she is giving up the right to have a future personal injury or wrongful death case decided by a judge or jury. Instead, if a claim arises, the case will proceed in front of an arbitrator.

Arbitrators tend to be much more conservative in their awards – if they even agree that there was negligent or wrongful conduct on behalf of the nursing home or its employees – thus potentially saving the potential defendant and its insurance company a considerable amount of money in some cases. Fortunately, not every such “agreement” to arbitration is upheld in court.

September 10, 2020

Tennessee Court of Appeals Agrees that Personal Injury Suit Against the Employer of an Allegedly Negligent Trucker Was Saved Under the Savings Statutes

by Mark Hartsoe

There are many steps involved in the litigation of a Knoxville truck accident case. While the need for an initial investigation (such as the interviewing of witnesses, the gathering of records, and the like) and the filing of a formal complaint in the appropriate court are essential, these steps represent only the beginning of what can be a very lengthy process.

Securing service of process and answering discovery requests is also required, and many cases require the plaintiff to respond to various motions, including summary judgment motions seeking dismissal of the case. Of course, each case is unique and must be addressed on its own merits.

In some cases, a plaintiff may even have to go through the appellate process before having an opportunity to have his or her day in court. In a recent case, the plaintiff actually had his case go up on appeal twice during the pre-trial phase of the litigation.