§19.1 Generally
1. Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation Co., Inc., E2006-00903-SC-R11-CV (Tenn. Sept. 9, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"This appeal involves the efforts of the estate of a twenty-five-year-old woman who contracted mesothelioma to recover damages for her death. While she was alive, the woman filed a negligence action against her father’s employer, alleging that the employer had negligently permitted her father to wear his asbestos-contaminated work clothes home from work, thereby regularly and repeatedly exposing her to asbestos fibers over an extended period of time. After the woman died, the Circuit Court for Blount County permitted her father to be substituted as the personal representative of her estate. The employer moved for a judgment on the pleadings on the narrow ground that it owed no duty to its employee’s daughter. The trial court granted the motion. The deceased woman’s father appealed the dismissal of his daughter’s wrongful death claim. The Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the trial court. Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation Co., No. E2006-00903-COA-R3-CV, 2007 WL 1159416 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 19, 2007). We granted the employer’s application for permission to appeal to determine whether the deceased woman’s complaint can withstand a motion for judgment on the pleadings. We have determined that it does because, under the facts alleged in the complaint, the employer owed a duty to those who regularly and for extended periods of time came into close contact with the asbestos-contaminated work clothes of its employees to prevent them from being exposed to a foreseeable and unreasonable risk of harm." View opinion. View concurring and dissenting opinion.
2. Adams v. Hendersonville Hospital Corp., 2007 WL 1462245 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"Patient presented to hospital emergency department with complaints of high fever, body aches (specifically in her right knee and calf), vomiting, nausea, and diarrhea. Approximately four and a half hours later, patient was discharged from the emergency room with a diagnosis of flu and dehydration. The patient died three days later, and an autopsy revealed that the cause of death was septic shock, secondary to a bacterial infection. In the suit against the hospital and treating physician, Appellant submitted three suggested jury instructions to the trial court, all three of which were denied. Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of the three jury instructions, as well as a specific portion of the instructions given to the jury. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case remanded for a new trial." View opinion.
3. Daniel Pantoja Garcia vs. Norfolk Southern Railway Company,
E2006-02674-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"In this appeal of a directed verdict in a wrongful death case, Daniel Pantoja Garcia (“Husband”) claims that Norfolk Southern Railway Company (“Norfolk Southern”) was negligent in failing to warn his now-deceased wife, Lydia Garcia (“Wife”), of the presence of diesel fuel inside a fuel tank that Wife, as an employee of Progress Rail Services Corporation (“Progress Rail”), was assigned to dismantle. As Wife was cutting the tank with a torch-cutter on Norfolk Southern’s property, the tank exploded, killing Wife. The trial court granted a directed verdict because it found no evidence that Norfolk Southern owed any duty in this case. We affirm." View opinion.
4. Robert A. Ward and wife, Sally Ward v. City of Lebanon, Tennessee; City of Lebanon Gas Department; James N. Bush Construction, Inc.; Foster Engineering & Energy, Inc. & Water Management Services, LLC, M2006-02520-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. April 25, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff, while excavating, struck a gas line which resulted in an explosion and fire, seriously injuring plaintiff. Plaintiffs brought this action against several defendants and the case went to trial against the City of Lebanon and Bush Construction Company, Inc. A jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs and allocated percentages of fault as to both defendants and the plaintiff. The Trial Court entered Judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and defendants appealed. We reverse the Trial Court Judgment and remand for a new trial on the grounds that a part of the charge to the jury was erroneous."
View opinion.
5. Downs v. Bush, M2005-01498-SC-R11-CV (Tenn. Sept. 10, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"We granted the plaintiff’s application for permission to appeal in this wrongful death case to determine whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment to each of the defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment. Although the parties have raised several issues in this appeal, the central issue is the nature of the legal duty, if any, owed by the defendants to the plaintiff’s decedent. The decedent was socializing and consuming alcohol with the defendants. While riding in a four-door pick-up truck with the defendants, he became ill. The defendants stopped the truck on the side of an interstate highway so the decedent could vomit. After resuming the trip, the decedent rode in the bed of the truck and, for reasons unknown, exited it. After exiting the truck, he was struck by two vehicles and subsequently died. Upon careful review of the record and applicable authority, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendants placed the decedent in the bed of the truck. Similarly, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the decedent was helpless and whether the defendants took charge of him. Lastly, we hold that none of the defendants stood in any special relationship with the plaintiff’s decedent and consequently they did not assume any affirmative duty to aid or protect him. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings." View opinion. View concurring and dissenting opinion.
7. Burgess v. Kone, Inc., M2007-02529-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 18, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"A state maintenance worker was injured while cleaning water out of an elevator pit in the Legislative Plaza. The worker sued the contractor that provided elevator maintenance and repair services to the state. He claimed that the contractor was responsible for his injuries because the contractor violated its contract with the state by refusing to remove the water from the elevator pit and because it was negligent in not locking down the elevator when its employee knew people would be working in the pit. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the contractor. The worker appealed. We affirm." View opinion.
The Court's Summary:
"This appeal involves the efforts of the estate of a twenty-five-year-old woman who contracted mesothelioma to recover damages for her death. While she was alive, the woman filed a negligence action against her father’s employer, alleging that the employer had negligently permitted her father to wear his asbestos-contaminated work clothes home from work, thereby regularly and repeatedly exposing her to asbestos fibers over an extended period of time. After the woman died, the Circuit Court for Blount County permitted her father to be substituted as the personal representative of her estate. The employer moved for a judgment on the pleadings on the narrow ground that it owed no duty to its employee’s daughter. The trial court granted the motion. The deceased woman’s father appealed the dismissal of his daughter’s wrongful death claim. The Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the trial court. Satterfield v. Breeding Insulation Co., No. E2006-00903-COA-R3-CV, 2007 WL 1159416 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 19, 2007). We granted the employer’s application for permission to appeal to determine whether the deceased woman’s complaint can withstand a motion for judgment on the pleadings. We have determined that it does because, under the facts alleged in the complaint, the employer owed a duty to those who regularly and for extended periods of time came into close contact with the asbestos-contaminated work clothes of its employees to prevent them from being exposed to a foreseeable and unreasonable risk of harm." View opinion. View concurring and dissenting opinion.
2. Adams v. Hendersonville Hospital Corp., 2007 WL 1462245 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"Patient presented to hospital emergency department with complaints of high fever, body aches (specifically in her right knee and calf), vomiting, nausea, and diarrhea. Approximately four and a half hours later, patient was discharged from the emergency room with a diagnosis of flu and dehydration. The patient died three days later, and an autopsy revealed that the cause of death was septic shock, secondary to a bacterial infection. In the suit against the hospital and treating physician, Appellant submitted three suggested jury instructions to the trial court, all three of which were denied. Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of the three jury instructions, as well as a specific portion of the instructions given to the jury. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case remanded for a new trial." View opinion.
3. Daniel Pantoja Garcia vs. Norfolk Southern Railway Company,
E2006-02674-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"In this appeal of a directed verdict in a wrongful death case, Daniel Pantoja Garcia (“Husband”) claims that Norfolk Southern Railway Company (“Norfolk Southern”) was negligent in failing to warn his now-deceased wife, Lydia Garcia (“Wife”), of the presence of diesel fuel inside a fuel tank that Wife, as an employee of Progress Rail Services Corporation (“Progress Rail”), was assigned to dismantle. As Wife was cutting the tank with a torch-cutter on Norfolk Southern’s property, the tank exploded, killing Wife. The trial court granted a directed verdict because it found no evidence that Norfolk Southern owed any duty in this case. We affirm." View opinion.
4. Robert A. Ward and wife, Sally Ward v. City of Lebanon, Tennessee; City of Lebanon Gas Department; James N. Bush Construction, Inc.; Foster Engineering & Energy, Inc. & Water Management Services, LLC, M2006-02520-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. April 25, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff, while excavating, struck a gas line which resulted in an explosion and fire, seriously injuring plaintiff. Plaintiffs brought this action against several defendants and the case went to trial against the City of Lebanon and Bush Construction Company, Inc. A jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs and allocated percentages of fault as to both defendants and the plaintiff. The Trial Court entered Judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and defendants appealed. We reverse the Trial Court Judgment and remand for a new trial on the grounds that a part of the charge to the jury was erroneous."
View opinion.
5. Downs v. Bush, M2005-01498-SC-R11-CV (Tenn. Sept. 10, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"We granted the plaintiff’s application for permission to appeal in this wrongful death case to determine whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment to each of the defendants. The Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment. Although the parties have raised several issues in this appeal, the central issue is the nature of the legal duty, if any, owed by the defendants to the plaintiff’s decedent. The decedent was socializing and consuming alcohol with the defendants. While riding in a four-door pick-up truck with the defendants, he became ill. The defendants stopped the truck on the side of an interstate highway so the decedent could vomit. After resuming the trip, the decedent rode in the bed of the truck and, for reasons unknown, exited it. After exiting the truck, he was struck by two vehicles and subsequently died. Upon careful review of the record and applicable authority, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendants placed the decedent in the bed of the truck. Similarly, we conclude that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the decedent was helpless and whether the defendants took charge of him. Lastly, we hold that none of the defendants stood in any special relationship with the plaintiff’s decedent and consequently they did not assume any affirmative duty to aid or protect him. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings." View opinion. View concurring and dissenting opinion.
7. Burgess v. Kone, Inc., M2007-02529-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 18, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"A state maintenance worker was injured while cleaning water out of an elevator pit in the Legislative Plaza. The worker sued the contractor that provided elevator maintenance and repair services to the state. He claimed that the contractor was responsible for his injuries because the contractor violated its contract with the state by refusing to remove the water from the elevator pit and because it was negligent in not locking down the elevator when its employee knew people would be working in the pit. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the contractor. The worker appealed. We affirm." View opinion.