Tennessee Injury Lawyer BlogIn the rush of home design and construction, defects are often a common reality, even if they are not discovered for months or years down the road. In between the time where a defect occurs, or an error is made, and when that defect is discovered, a home may pass through countless hands. For instance, a contractor or subcontractor may be involved in the work, inspectors or appraisers may examine the work, and the home itself may change hands from one buyer to the next. In these situations, who is liable for the defect when it ultimately causes an injury? A recent case before the Tennessee Court of Appeals addresses this issue.
Articles Posted in Personal Injury
Evaluating the Impact of Recent Tennessee Case Law on Health Care Personal Injury Claims
As previously discussed on this blog, earlier in 2015 the Tennessee Supreme Court handed down a decision that appeared likely to change the landscape of personal injury claims that arise in a health care context. Contrary to prior precedent on the issue, the Court held that new changes to the Tennessee Health Care Liability Act (THCLA) required personal injury plaintiffs who alleged an injury or another type of civil claim against a health care provider or its employees to meet the strict requirements of the THCLA. While previously plaintiffs could allege ordinary negligence claims distinct from claims under the THCLA, the Court’s decision in Ellithorpe v. Weismark suggested that the new language of the statute would make it difficult for plaintiffs to circumvent the THCLA’s requirements. In a recent Tennessee decision, the far-reaching impact of the Ellithorpe decision is apparent.
Evaluating Dangerous Road Conditions in Tennessee – When Is Notice of Risk Enough?
When can a change in road conditions and navigation constitute a danger to drivers? The Tennessee Court of Appeals recently weighed in on this question when it considered, and reversed, a lower court decision finding that the recent creation of a new intersection was sufficiently dangerous to constitute negligence on the part of the State. The decision sheds lights on the high standards required to bring such a claim against Tennessee authorities.
Taking Legal Measures to Protect Auto Accident Victims
The aftermath of an automobile accident, no matter how minor, can be unnerving and overwhelming to victims. Contact information must exchanged, police reports often need to be filled out, and insurance companies must be notified. In the midst of such frenzy, auto accident victims are particularly susceptible to exploitation and fraud by those who would purport to offer them assistance and make it “all better.” A new Kentucky law aims to protect accident victims in these situations by implementing waiting periods before they can be solicited for medical treatment.
Tennessee Supreme Court Reverses Course on Damages Caps
In a decision handed down in October from the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Court has vacated a prior decision by Hamilton County Circuit Judge Thomas, holding that the damages caps imposed through Tennessee’s tort reforms were unconstitutional. Despite support for Judge Thomas’ decision among the Tennessee legal community and tort reform opponents across the country, the Tennessee Supreme Court ultimately determined that Judge Thomas’ opinion prematurely addressed the issue of the cap on tort damages and that the decision should be vacated.As previously discussed on this blog, in March of this year, Judge Thomas issued a stunning decision, determining that damages caps imposed on plaintiffs claiming non-economic damages in personal injury cases were unconstitutional. The limit – $750,000 – was statutorily imposed by the Tennessee legislature through the 2011 tort reform initiative known as the Tennessee Civil Justice Act. Judge Thomas held that since plaintiffs are entitled to a right to trial by jury, and one aspect of the jury’s determination is the question of the amount and nature of damages, the damages cap unconstitutionally limited the jury’s authority. Accordingly, he struck down the cap.
Alleging Personal Injury in the Health Care Context – Abiding by the Tennessee Health Care Liability Act
In Tennessee, when a personal injury claim arises in the health care context, it may be subject to the particular requirements and restrictions of the Tennessee Health Care Liability Act (“THCLA”). The THCLA was enacted in order to reduce the number of frivolous and time- consuming medical malpractice claims brought in the state, and it imposes stricter requirements on plaintiffs asserting personal injury claims against hospitals and medical providers. How does a personal injury victim determine if the THCLA applies to his or her claims? A recent decision by the Tennessee Supreme Court has answered this question, suggesting that virtually all personal injury claims in the health care context may need to meet the requirements of the THCLA.
The case, Ellithorpe v. Weismark, No. M2014-00279-SC-R11-CV (Tenn. Oct. 8, 2015), considers when a claim “sound[s] in health care liability,” as opposed to being only a basic negligence claim, and is thus subject to the THCLA. In Ellithorpe, the estranged parents of a minor child, M.L., sued a social worker who was providing counseling to M.L on a regular basis. The parents contended that they had not been informed of the counseling and that it was being provided without their consent. They further alleged that this “secret” counseling had caused harm to their child in the form of emotional distress. They filed a complaint for damages against the social worker without abiding by the pre-suit notice and certificate of good faith requirements of the THCLA. In response, the social worker filed a motion to dismiss the parents’ complaint because of their failure to comply with these procedural requirements.
Making the Case for Punitive Damages in Tennessee – What’s Required Under the Law?
Punitive damages are a type of damages meant to punish an individual for particularly egregious conduct and deter others from acting in a similar manner. In Tennessee, punitive damages are available if a plaintiff can show that a defendant acted intentionally, fraudulently, maliciously, or recklessly. If successful, a plaintiff can easily be entitled to tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of additional dollars in payments. For this reason, punitive damages is a claim that should be considered by any individual who has been harmed in an auto accident or other personal injury incident.
One of the chief difficulties in bringing a punitive damages claim is determining what constitutes “malicious” or “reckless” conduct. Courts have been notoriously reluctant to discuss the differences between liability for an action or accident itself, and punitive damages liability for the intentional or malicious nature of the action. Recently, however, the Kentucky Supreme Court issued just such an opinion.
Tennessee Personal Injury Claims Increase Despite Reduction in Auto Accidents
According to the results of a recently published study by the Insurance Research Council, the cost and severity of personal injury claims arising out of automobile accidents continue to rise, despite an overall decrease in the number of auto accidents in Tennessee and other states throughout the country.
The study, Trends in Auto Injury Claims, 2015 Edition, was published earlier this month by the Insurance Research Council and evaluates the incidents of personal injury claims over the past year, as well as state-by-state statistics concerning automobile injuries and fatalities recorded on America’s roadways.
Questioning the Constitutionality of Tennessee’s Cap on Pain and Suffering Damages After an Automobile Accident
Tennessee’s cap on damages for pain and suffering, also known as “non-economic damages,” is unconstitutional according to a recent decision from Judge W. Neil Thomas of the Hamilton County Circuit Court. The decision is one in a line of several recent rulings to question the constitutionality of many of the provisions enacted under the Tennessee Civil Justice Act of 2011, and to cast doubt on the viability of Tennessee’s legislative efforts at tort reform.Under the statute at issue, plaintiffs seeking damages for pain and suffering as a result of an injury cannot receive more than $750,000 from a jury verdict. In this case, the two plaintiffs, victims of an automobile accident, sought non-economic damages for pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life in the amount of $22,500,000. The defendants, AT&T Corp and Amiee L. Cain, sought to dismiss this claim for damages in excess of the $750,000 cap.
How to Find a Personal Injury Attorney in Tennessee
Before you can find a personal injury attorney in Tennessee, you need to determine which type of attorney you need. Personal injury, or tort law, encompasses a lot legal issues including dog bites, car accidents, assaults and slip and falls. Not every personal injury attorney in Tennessee may specialize in the area of law you need. So it’s important you start your search knowing what type of attorney you need.
Ask for Referrals
Talk to family members, friends and co-workers who have recently hired personal injury attorneys. Ask questions pertaining to the attorney’s legal experience and communication style. You will want to compile at a list of at least four to five attorneys.