This is the last of 22 posts in our series of the new laws of interest to tort lawyers. If you missed any of these posts all of them are collected in the "Legislation 2009" category.
The last post concerns the changes to the rules of civil procedure, evidence, and appellate procedure, as well as a host of changes to the rules dealing with electronic evidence. I have authored a previous post on this subject, but wanted to round out the series with one more link to these new rules. Here they are
Post 21 of this series re-designates the current language of existing T.C.A. Section 70-7-104 (the Recreational Use Statute) as subsection (a) and then adds a subsection (b). Thus, as of July 1, the new statute reads as follows:
(a) This part does not limit the liability that otherwise exists for:
(1) Gross negligence, willful or wanton conduct that results in a failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity; or
A reader sent me an article in September – October 2009 issue of Harvard Magazine that discusses the work of Dr. Atul Gawande. Dr. Gawande is very interested in patient safety. One of his interests is the use of medical checklists, a subject I have addressed in a previous post.
Apparently, Gawande and his colleagues developed a checklist for surgery patients. The list, described in the article as addressing "rudimentary tasks" (e.g. confirming the patient’s identity), had some amazing results. In one year of use in 8 different hospitals around the world, the rate of complications had dropped one-third; surgicial-site infections by half, and deaths of surgical patients by nearly half.
Seven countries and more than two dozen states require the use of surgical checklists. One wonders why every state in the Union does not require them.
Post 20 (we are almost finished with this series folks, I promise) concerns judicial selection and evaluation. So much has been written about this subject the last four years. The bill is 16 pages in lengh and cannot be summarized here. If you are truly interest in reading this legislation, click on the link to read Public Chapter 517.
Last week I filed a post on the new members of the Judicial Selection Commission. Today, the appointees to the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission were announced.
The Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission, which replaces the Judicial Evaluation Commission, evaluates the performance of the appellate level judges who are up for re-election. Prior to the election, the commission will complete a thorough review of each judge’s performance and make a recommendation to either retain or replace each judge. These recommendations are placed in newspapers throughout the state to inform voters prior to the election.
The appointees:
Post 19 addresses the liability of "agritourism professionals." What, in heaven’s name, is a agritourism professional? A person involved in agritourism, of course. And what is that? Agritourism is
any activity carried out on a farm or ranch, eligible for greenbelt classification under Title 67, Chapter 5, Part 10, that allows members of the general public, for recreational, entertainment, or educational purposes, to view or enjoy rural activities, including farming, ranching, historic, cultural, or harvest-your-own activities, or natural activities and attractions. An activity is an agritourism activity whether or not a participant provides compensation in money or other valuable compensation to participate in the activity. Agritourism activity includes an activity involving any animal
exhibition at an agricultural fair, regardless of the location of the fair.
Here is a brief description of what the bill does:
The September 2009 edition of the Tennessee Trial Law Report is in the mail.
The lazy days of summer are upon us – this edition includes a summary of just 10 different cases addressing various aspects of the law of torts, civil procedure, evidence and trial as decided by Tennessee appellate courts between July 15 and August 15, 2009. (This is about 1/2 of the normal volume of decisions released in a given month.) The newsletter totals 34 pages, including 16 pages containing the full-text (in addition to our summary) of the most important opinions issued last month.
The newsletter also includes (a) my continuing series on The Law of Trial (this month’s article is “Opening Statements and Closing Arguments;” and (b) a summary of the status of 12 cases of interest to tort lawyers that are pending before the Supreme Court of Tennessee.
New Chrysler (Chrysler Group LLC) has announced that it will be accepting product liability claims on vehicles manufactured by its predecessor, now known as Old Carco, but only for accidents occurring after June 10, 2009. Chrysler yielded to pressure from consumer groups that aggressively lobbied for a law requiring warning stickers on used Chrysler vehicles, an effort which would have reduced the value of the vehicles.
From the New Chrysler Press Release:
"We know a lot more about the viability of our business today than when we purchased Old Carco’s assets in its bankruptcy proceedings several months ago," said John Bozzella, Senior Vice President, External Affairs & Public Policy, Chrysler Group LLC. "While Chrysler Group still faces challenges, we are confident that the future viability of the company will not be threatened if we accept these claims."
Post 18 of this series brings to your attention a change in the law concerning the licensing of lawyers and pro hac vice admission of lawyers to practice in Tennessee. The language of T.C.A. Sec. 23-1-108 has been deleted and replaced with the following language:
No person shall practice law in this state without first receiving a license
issued by the Tennessee supreme court and complying with the provisions of
Rule 6 of the Rules of the Tennessee supreme court concerning admission to the
practice of law, except that nothing in this statute precludes the pro hac vice
admission of persons licensed in other jurisdictions in accordance with
Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 19.
Here is a the text of Public Chapter 485. Here is the text of Rule 19 of the T.S.C.R.
Post 17 of this series also addresses the subject of court reporting. This bill establishes: (1) licensure requirements for court reporters; (2) the Tennessee Board of Court Reporting; and (3) the Tennessee board of Court Reporting Fund. This bill prohibits any person from practicing court reporting or holding the person out as a court reporter unless the person is a licensed court reporter, except as otherwise provided by law.
The licensure requirements go into effect July 1, 2010.
Click at the link to see a complete copy of Public Acts,2009 Public Chapter 450.
