Articles Tagged with Tennessee wrongful death lawyer

The government of Thailand wants to have a scheme to compensate victims of medical malpractice. Many Thai doctors are opposed to the law.  Here is an argument made by the physicians, as reported in Taiwan News:

It means our staff would have to be extra careful during work, which would decrease efficiency," said Somkid Auapisithwong of Thai Federation of Doctors, Main Hospitals and General Hospitals, which looks after the interests of medical practitioners in state hospitals. "We’re already very stretched. Some of our nurses have to work almost 365 days. This would add more stress to our staff. They would have to be extra careful with all sorts of risks  and this will hinder their work.

Thanks to Torts Prof for informing me about this article.

A recent study gives yet another reason of why it is difficult for a plaintiff to win a medical malpractice case in Nashville.

MTSU’s Business and Economic Research Center has released a study that states that puts health care industry’s annual economic impact in Nashville at $30 billion. That represents  an increase of 60 percent since 2004.  The number of jobs in teh Nashville MSA directly tied to the health care industry has grown from 94,000 to more than 110,000.

The study reports that "[m]ore than 56 major health care companies (public and private) have chosen Nashville as their home, and seven of the nation’s 12 leading for-profit acute care hospital companies are located in Nashville, controlling more than one-third of the investor-owned hospitals in the United States."

Judge Susano and his colleagues on the Eastern Section of the Tennessee Court of Appeals issued an opinion yesterday in Usher v. Charles Blalock & Sons, Inc.   The opinion addresses some important issues of Tennessee law, but is mentioned here because it utlizies photographs scanned into the body of the opinion to help the reader understand how the wreck occurred.

 From time to time, I have seen drawings (and maybe even a photograph) appended to court opinions but I do not recall seeing a photograph inserted into the text of a Tennessee appellate opinion.  The photographs help tell the story in this case, and Judge Susano and his colleagues are to be congratulated for using them.

Usher has been assigned  Case No. E2009-00658-COA-R3-CV.   The opinion was released on June 30, 2010.

When a person dies as a result of someone else’s negligence, Tennessee law permits only certain people to assert a claim to recover damages for the death. This article does not discuss who receives the damages awarded by settlement or judgment of the case, but only who has the right to file suit.

 
Spouse

If the decedent was married, his or her spouse normally has the highest right to pursue the wrongful death claim. A court may deny the surviving spouse the right to bring a wrongful death claim only if the spouse is not legally competent (that is, has some sort of mental problem that would affect his or her ability to bring and pursue a lawsuit), has shown that he or she cannot be trusted to bring the claim (for example, the parties were in a bitter divorce fight at the time of the death), or some other factor (for example, the parties had not lived together for years at the time of the death but had never divorced).

The Federal Highway Administration has ruled that the 2009 Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices must be adopted by the states as their legal standard for traffic control devices within two years.   Here is an excerpt of the Federal Register discussing the rule change. 

The MUTCD contains all national design, application, and placement, standards, guidance, options, and support provisions for traffic control devices. The purpose of the MUTCD is to provide uniformity of these devices, which include signs, signals, and pavement markings, to promote highway safety and efficiency on the Nation’s streets and highways.  The MUTCD is adopted by reference in accordance with Title 23, United States Code, Section 109(d) and Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 655.603, and is the national standard for all traffic control devices installed on any street, highway, or bicycle trail open to public travel. 

The 2009 edition supersedes all previous editions and revisions of  the MUTCD.   Here is the PDF version.     There is already a change proposed to the 2009 edition.

The Governors Highway Safety Administration has released a preliminary report indicating the motorcycle deaths have decreased on our nation’s highways.  If the final numbers are substantially similar, deaths will have dropped for the first time in over a decade.

Based on preliminary data gathered for the first nine months of the year, GHSA is projecting that motorcycle fatalities declined from 5,290 in 2008 to 4,762 or less in 2009. The projection is based on data from 50 states and the District of Columbia. 

Tennessee had a substantial decrease in motorcycle deaths.  During the first nine months of 2008 the number of motorcycle deaths was 132.   In 2009, it was 101.

As I mentioned in three previous posts,  Shannon Ragland of the Tennessee Jury Verdict Reporter has graciously agreed to permit me to share some of the information he has gathered concerning jury trials in Tennessee.

This multi-part series will discuss some of the data contained in Shannon’s 359-page 2009 report.  You can buy the report yourself for $175.00.  It is well worth the money.  Click here to buy the report.  The same link will permit you to order Shannon’s monthly newsletter.

Shannon’s 2009 report gathers data about the most common retail defendants in premises cases, employment discrimination cases, dog bite cases, loss of consortium awards, soft tissue cases and more.   I think I have gone about far enough in giving away the data he collected and sells (at a reasonable price, I might add) but I will go a little bit further and talk about one more subject.

As I mentioned in two previous posts,  Shannon Ragland of the Tennessee Jury Verdict Reporter has graciously agreed to permit me to share some of the information he has gathered concerning jury trials in Tennessee.

This multi-part series will discuss some of the data contained in Shannon’s 359-page report.  You can buy the report yourself for $175.00.  It is well worth the money.  Click here to buy the report.  The same link will permit you to order Shannon’s monthly newsletter.

Today we look at medical malpractice verdicts.  There were 32 trials in Tennessee in 2009.  Plaintiffs won 9 of those cases, and the defense won 23.  Seven of those cases were tried in Nashville and  five were tried in Memphis.

As I mentioned in last Tuesday’s post, Shannon Ragland of the Tennessee Jury Verdict Reporter has graciously agreed to permit me to share some of the information he has gathered concerning jury trials in Tennessee.

This multi-part series will discuss some of the data contained in Shannon’s 359-page report.  You can buy the report yourself for $175.00.  It is well worth the money.  Click here to buy the report.  The same link will permit you to order Shannon’s monthly newsletter.

Today we look at wrongful death cases.  Total trials in Tennessee in 2009?  Just 14.  Only three verdicts were returned for the plaintiff and eleven came in for the defense.  Seven of those trials were in the medical malpractice area, and six of those were won by the defense.  The average verdict in the three successful cases was a little over $2.4 million.

What is the principle place of business for a corporation for purposes of determining whether a federal court has diversity jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1332(c)(1)?   Well, what you thought you knew is no longer the law.

The United States Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the phrase

"principal place of business’ is best read asreferring to the place where a corporation’s officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities. It is the place that Courts of Appeals have called the corporation’s “nerve center.” And in practice it should normally be the place where the corporation maintains its head-quarters—provided that the headquarters is the actual center of direction, control, and coordination, i.e., the “nerve center,” and not simply an office where the corpora-tion holds its board meetings (for example, attended by directors and officers who have traveled there for the occasion).