I did not watch the State of The Union Address last night but I read the speech that he was supposed to have delivered.

It was to contain this line: “And because lawsuits are driving many good doctors out of practice – leaving women in nearly 1,500 American counties without a single OB-GYN – I ask the Congress to pass medical liability reform this year.”

How can anyone with a lick of sense suggest that OB-GYNs do not practice in rural American because of medical negligence lawsuits? Doctors practice medicine where there are patients and where there are hospitals. Hospitals need enough patients to establish and maintain a maternity ward. America does not need and cannot afford a hospital in every county with a maternity ward (which must be staffed 24/7).

The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that “[a]s a matter of law … a physician’s raw success rates do not constitute risk information reasonably related to a patient’s medical procedure.”

There apparently was no (or little) evidence of affirmative misrepresentation on the issue.

A verdict for the plaintiff was reversed and the case remanded for trial.

Why no posts this weekend? Am I getting lazy?

I had to be in court in Nashville Friday morning to argue a motion in a products liability case and then went immediately to the airport to catch a flight to Boston. I had a great dinner at The Federalist on Beacon Hill Friday night. Work started Saturday morning at 7:30 and was finished at 2:00. I was staying on Arlington Street and walked down to the Wharf to meet an old friend for a cup of coffee. It was 55 degrees in Boston and the people of the city – thrilled at the warm weather – were out in droves.

I went back to the hotel to have a cocktail and then walked back to the North End to have dinner on Hanover Street I love walking in Boston, so I walked back to the hotel about 10:00.

I graduated from the University of North Carolina School of Law, and I can tell you that the home state of Jesse Helms does not share the political philosophy of, say, Seattle.

So, imagine my surprise when I read this article from Business North Carolina.

I will save the details for you, but you get a good feel for the story from this ending: “On a gray late-November day at her home in Raleigh, Sandy Lakey considers that. Twelve summers have passed since her daughter’s life was forever altered by a product that a jury decided the manufacturer had sold knowing that it had maimed other children. “How lucky a lot of people will be,” she says, “to never find out whether they really need a lawyer.”

Many tort lawyers in Tennessee also handle worker’s compensation cases. Here, for your reading pleasure, is a summary of the significant worker’s compensation opinions issued by the Tennessee Supreme Court in 2005 as prepared by the Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Advisory Panel.

Justice Birch resigned yesterday; the effective date of the resignation is August 31, 2006.

Justice Birch has served the State of Tennessee as a judge for 43 years, beginning as a General Sessions Judge, then serving 9 years as a trial judge and 19 years as an appellate judge. [Bio] His service on the Tennessee Supreme Court will be best remembered for his insistence that citizens accused of crimes receive a fair shake in the criminal justice system and his steady opposition to imposition of the death penalty given the current circumstances that give rise to its imposition. He is a man of courage and conviction. His leadership will be missed.

This resignation follows that of Justice Anderson earlier this week.
We now have two openings on our five member court. The Governor will be able to select two judges from panels provided to him by the Judicial Selection Commission. Under our rules, no more than two judges can come from any one Grand Division. Chief Justice Barker is an East Tennessean, Justice Holder is a West Tennessean, and Justice Clark is a Middle Tennessean. Therefore, one of the appointees can come from any Grand Division but both cannot come from the same Grand Division.

The State of Tennessee suffered a blow yesterday when Justice E. Riley Anderson announced that he was stepping down effective August 31, 2006.

Justice Anderson, from Oak Ridge, has served on the Supreme Court for over 15 years and, earlier, served on the Court of Appeals for 3 years. [Bio] He is a compassionate man who understands his responsibility to the people of this State and who fulfilled that responsibility with honor and distinction.

I love his dissent in Carroll v. Whitney, 29 S.W.3d 14, 22 (Tenn. 2000) and Dotson v. Blake, 29 S.W.3d 26, 31 (Tenn. 2000). His opinion in Hunter v. Ura just one year ago helped bring justice and reason to the resolution of medical negligence cases. I could go on and on, but the bottom line is this: Justice Anderson will be sorely missed as a member of our Court.

Here is an interesting decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals that discusses the liability of a property appraiser who told the plaintiff that “‘he could not himself perform the appraisal’ but [said] that ‘he would find another appraiser and would supervise and review that appraiser’s work.'” Well, the appraisal was wrong and the “supervising appraiser,” who did not charge for his work, was sued.

The Court reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of the “supervising appraiser,” holding that there was a jury issue on the nature of the relationship between the parties and the extent of the movant’s role in the transaction.

Although this case was decided under Massachusetts law, I bring it to your attention because Tennessee has a number of recent decisions on the issue of “gratuitious undertaking.” (For example, see Biscan v. Brown here and cases cited therein.) Massachusetts law on the subject is a little different than Tennessee law, but the opinion is a nice refresher on the topic.

Here is a proposed resolution that has been introduced in the General Assembly by Senator Finney, Republican from Maryville:

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 523
By Finney
A RESOLUTION relative to medical malpractice reform.

WHEREAS, a fair and efficient legal system free of frivolous and abusive litigation is necessary for a vibrant economy and access to affordable health care; and

WHEREAS, rapidly increasing medical malpractice awards are driving up medical liability insurance premiums, which costs are ultimately paid by the consumers of health care services, namely patients; and

Contact Information