Affirmative Defenses in Tennessee

A new decision of the Tennessee Court of Appeals makes it clear that Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 8.03 means what it says.  In Allgood v. Gateway Health Systems,  No. MC-CC-CV-MA-06-391 (Tenn. Ct. App. Sept. 22, 2009), the Court held that a defendant who asserted an insufficiency of process defense that was lacking in any supporting facts could not use that defense to seek dismissal of the case after the plaintiff could no longer cure the deficiency.

In Tennessee, unlike in federal court, a defendant who pleads an affirmative defense must set forth facts that form the basis of the defense.

Tennessee Supreme Court Issues New Comparative Fault Opinion

The Tennessee Supreme Court has ruled that a plaintiff who lost a medical malpractice case in federal court was not prevented from bringing another lawsuit against a doctor employed by the state, even though the jury in federal court assigned no fault to the non-party physician in the federal court case.

The Court held:

We have determined that the proceeding in federal court did not provide Ms. Mullins with a full and fair opportunity to litigate her medical negligence claims against Dr. Mejia. It is undisputed that Ms. Mullins could not, as a matter of law, recover monetary damages from either Dr. Mejia or the State in the federal proceedings. Common sense also dictates that it would have been foolhardy for Ms. Mullins to press her claim that Dr. Mejia had been negligent in the federal proceeding because doing so would have diluted the strength of her claims against the remaining defendants and would have profited her little in later proceedings against Dr. Mejia. [Footnotes omitted.]

You can read the entire opinion of Mullins v. State of Tennessee by clicking [HERE].

This opinion provides new guidance in a world where litigation against doctors is being constricted daily. It is nice to see a family afforded a chance to litigate and receive their day in court.