CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. W2023-00437-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 02, 2025

Sandra Easley v. City of Memphis

Plaintiff Sandra Easley was injured after being struck by a city-owned vehicle driven by a city employee while crossing a street outside a crosswalk. The trial court found the City of Memphis vicariously liable for employee negligence and directly liable for negligent hiring/retention, allocating 10% fault to Easley. This Court reversed, finding no proof of negligent hiring and concluding Easley was at least 50% at fault, barring recovery. The Tennessee Supreme Court vacated that judgment, citing a lack of deference to the trial court's factual findings. On remand, this Court affirms the finding of employee negligence, reverses the finding of direct negligent hiring, vacates the allocation of fault and damages, and remands the case for re-allocation of fault based only on vicarious liability and recalculation of damages with more specific findings.

Comparative FaultVicarious LiabilityNegligent HiringPedestrian AccidentMotor Vehicle AccidentAllocation of FaultDamages AssessmentCredibility DeterminationsStandard of ReviewAppellate Procedure
References
44
Case No. M2017-00413-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 16, 2018

Edna Green v. St. George's Episcopal Church

This appeal concerns a personal injury action filed by Edna Green against St. George’s Episcopal Church. Ms. Green was injured during a church outing when a bus, owned by the church and driven by a parishioner, jolted over drainage berms at Green Door Gourmet. The church alleged the comparative fault of Green Door Gourmet, a nonparty, arguing potential immunity under Tennessee’s agritourism statute. The trial court permitted the jury to apportion fault to Green Door Gourmet despite arguments of immunity. The jury found St. George’s 15% at fault and Green Door Gourmet 85% at fault. Ms. Green appealed, contending the trial court erred in allowing fault allocation to an allegedly immune nonparty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, concluding that the agritourism statute limits liability but does not preclude the allocation of fault to an agritourism professional in a negligence action, thereby upholding the jury's apportionment.

Personal InjuryComparative FaultAgritourism StatuteStatutory ImmunityNonparty Fault AllocationNegligence ActionJury Verdict ReviewAppellate DecisionTennessee AgritourismImmunity from Liability
References
12
Case No. M2010-01924-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 19, 2012

James Johnson and wife, Elaine Johnson v. The Torrington Company

James Johnson, a heavy equipment operator, suffered severe injuries in a workplace accident involving a custom-made waste container at a Browning Ferris Industries (BFI) transfer station in Giles County. Johnson and his wife sued The Torrington Company, the owner of the container, and Wastequip Manufacturing Company, its fabricator, alleging negligence in design, manufacturing, inspection, and maintenance. Wastequip settled, and a first jury found BFI solely at fault. The trial court, acting as the thirteenth juror, granted a new trial. A second jury found Torrington 90% at fault and Johnson 10% at fault, awarding the plaintiffs $3.5 million, which was reduced to $2,925,000 after a remittitur for Mrs. Johnson's damages. Torrington appealed, challenging the vacating of the first verdict, the second jury's findings, the allocation of fault (specifically the exclusion of BFI due to workers' compensation immunity), and the amount of the verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the jury's verdict and the allocation of fault.

Workplace InjuryProduct LiabilityNegligenceComparative FaultWorkers' Compensation ImmunityJury VerdictNew TrialThirteenth Juror RuleDamages AwardLoss of Consortium
References
23
Case No. E2012-02411-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 10, 2013

Margie R. Huskey v. Rhea County, Tennessee

Margie R. Huskey sustained a severe left arm injury at the Rhea County Convenience Center due to a fall from an uneven cinder-block wall. The trial court found Rhea County 51% at fault for negligence and Ms. Huskey 49% at fault, awarding her $152,172.09 for personal injury and Norman Huskey $12,750.00 for loss of consortium. The County appealed, challenging its liability, the fault allocation, and the awarded damages. The Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Knoxville, affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence of the County's negligence in maintaining a dangerous condition, proper allocation of comparative fault, and appropriate compensatory damages for both plaintiffs, and remanded the case for enforcement.

NegligencePremises LiabilityGovernmental Tort Liability ActComparative FaultPersonal InjuryLoss of ConsortiumDamagesMedical ExpensesPain and SufferingPermanent Injury
References
44
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Biscan v. Brown

The provided text is a concurring and dissenting opinion by Justice FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C.J., in a case regarding the apportionment of fault in a comparative fault system. While agreeing with the majority on some points, Justice Drowota disagrees with the exclusion of Dana Biscan from fault apportionment, despite Tennessee Code Annotated section 57-10-101 precluding legal liability for furnishing alcohol. The opinion argues that disallowing fault to an "effectively immune" tortfeasor, like Dana Biscan, contradicts established Tennessee comparative fault jurisprudence, particularly McIntyre v. Balentine, Carroll v. Whitney, and Dotson v. Blake. Justice Drowota contends that the majority's approach undermines the principle of linking liability to fault, blinds the jury to relevant evidence, and imposes liability disproportionately, thereby injecting confusion into settled law.

Comparative FaultTort LawAlcohol LiabilityStatutory ImmunityProximate CauseApportionment of FaultJudicial DissentTennessee LawMcIntyre v. BalentineCarroll v. Whitney
References
8
Case No. 304797, Appeal No. 01A01-9701-BC-00020
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 20, 1997

Dillon v. State

This appeal arises from a motor vehicle accident involving the Dilllons and a Tennessee Highway Patrol Cruiser. The State Claims Commission initially found the Trooper 85% at fault and Mr. Dillon 15% at fault for the collision. The Court of Appeals reviewed the findings, particularly Mr. Dillon's failure to ensure safety before making a turn and the Trooper's mistaken assumptions. The appellate court subsequently revised the allocation of fault, assigning 60% to the Trooper (representing the State) and 40% to Mr. Dillon. While affirming the total damages of $220,000.00, the net award was reduced to $132,000.00 due to the revised fault percentages. The case was then remanded to the Claims Commission for further appropriate procedure.

Motor Vehicle AccidentNegligenceComparative FaultEmergency VehicleHighway PatrolLeft Turn SignalDuty of CareClaims CommissionAppellate ReviewDamages
References
4
Case No. W2010-01825-COA-R3-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 21, 2011

Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. d/b/a AT&T (TN) v. Shundra Y. Young and Maureen F. Kinsella

Plaintiff Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. sued Shundra Y. Young and Maureen F. Kinsella for damages following a motor vehicle accident. The accident occurred when an unidentified white SUV caused Kinsella to swerve, leading Young to collide with Bellsouth's cross-connect box. Initially, the trial court struck defendants' attempts to assign comparative fault to the unidentified nonparty but later allowed references to the nonparty during trial for contextual purposes, though not for fault attribution by the jury. The jury ultimately found no fault with either defendant, prompting Bellsouth's appeal. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, citing precedent that allows for broad allocation of fault to all persons involved in an injury-causing event, even unidentified ones, to ensure fair apportionment of liability.

Comparative FaultUnidentified TortfeasorNonparty DefenseMotor Vehicle AccidentAppellate ReviewJury InstructionsProximate CauseJoint and Several LiabilitySudden EmergencyTennessee Law
References
11
Case No. W1998-00710-SC-R11-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2000

Dotson v. Blake

Chief Justice Anderson dissents from the majority's decision, which permits juries to allocate fault to tortfeasors who successfully assert a statute of repose defense, despite the plaintiff having no cause of action against them. This ruling follows Carroll v. Whitney and reverses established precedents like Ridings v. Ralph M. Parsons Co. The dissent argues that this approach deviates from McIntyre v. Balentine's balanced comparative fault principles, unfairly burdens plaintiffs with the entire risk of loss, and undermines judicial consistency and the doctrine of stare decisis. The Chief Justice criticizes the majority for prioritizing defendants' fairness without considering plaintiffs' interests or exploring alternative solutions like pure comparative fault or distributing fault among all parties. The dissent concludes that the change in policy lacks sufficient justification and threatens the reliability of the Supreme Court's decisions.

Comparative FaultStatute of ReposeTortfeasor LiabilityJudicial PrecedentStare DecisisAppellate ReviewImmunity DefensePlaintiff's Cause of ActionJury Allocation of FaultLegal Policy Change
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Arbitration between Williams

Amoco Oil appealed two judgments from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, concerning arbitration for uninsured motorist and no-fault benefits. The first judgment, dated January 6, 1977, granted New Hampshire Insurance Company's application to stay arbitration, deeming Amoco Oil's coverage primary and New Hampshire's secondary for uninsured motorist benefits. The second judgment, dated March 30, 1977, permanently stayed arbitration for no-fault benefits under New Hampshire's policy. The Appellate Division affirmed both judgments, concluding that the claimant was "occupying" the Amoco Oil vehicle, making Amoco Oil primarily liable for uninsured motorist benefits. However, the claimant was precluded from receiving these benefits due to already receiving workers' compensation benefits in excess of the maximum, and was also ineligible for no-fault benefits under the New Hampshire policy.

Insurance DisputeArbitration ProceedingsUninsured Motorist CoverageNo-Fault InsuranceWorkers' CompensationPrimary vs Secondary LiabilityAppellate DivisionNassau County Supreme CourtVehicle OccupancyBenefit Eligibility
References
3
Case No. W1997-00246-SC-R11-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 04, 2000

James Carroll v. Carolyn Whitney, M.D. - Dissenting

Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson dissents from the majority's decision, arguing it departs from settled principles of law by allowing a jury to allocate fault to an immune nonparty. He contends that this ruling wrongly overrules Ridings v. Ralph M. Parsons Co., which he asserts is consistent with McIntyre and subsequent comparative fault jurisprudence in Tennessee. Anderson emphasizes that Ridings held fault can only be attributed to those against whom a plaintiff has a cause of action, and that the majority's new policy undermines the doctrine of stare decisis, creates inconsistency, and unfairly shifts the risk of loss onto plaintiffs. He argues that the prior rulings were workable and that the current decision lacks sufficient justification for such a significant reversal of legal precedent.

Comparative FaultImmune NonpartyStare DecisisNegligence LawTort LiabilityWorkers' CompensationFault AllocationJudicial PrecedentTennessee Supreme CourtDissenting Opinion
References
21
Showing 1-10 of 799 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational