In a recent trial, Graham Thompson obtained a complete dismissal of all claims on behalf of a Tennessee limited liability company. The Plaintiffs alleged breach of contract, misrepresentation, and fraud. After hearing the Plaintiffs’ evidence, testimony of the Defendant’s corporate representative, and closing arguments, the Court held that the Plaintiffs failed to carry the burden of proof and dismissed all claims with prejudice.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Angela Kopet and Graham Thompson were able to get their corporate clients dismissed from the Middle District Court of Tennessee.  Plaintiff filed a lawsuit requesting over $750,000 in damages, including medical expenses, property damages, and lost wages.  Ms. Kopet and Mr. Thompson were able to argue that Plaintiff’s claims should be dismissed from federal court because (1) Plaintiff missed the statute of limitations and (2) Plaintiff sued the wrong parties.  The court agreed and dismissed both Defendants from the case.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Copeland, Stair, Kingma & Lovell's Annual Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar was held on Thursday September 12, 2019.  Located at the beautiful Atlanta Botanical Gardens, this two-track format addressed the emerging issues that keep you up at night.  Some session topics included: the rise in tort litigation, putting together the pieces of the wrongful death case, effective use of recorded statements and the material misrepresentation defense, liability exposure in the age of active shooters and the impact bias has on case evaluation and jury deliberations. For more information on this seminar, please contact Michelle Mattox.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair hosted their annual Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Seminar on August 24 at the Atlanta Botanical Garden. Presentations and Presenters: Have Traditional Rules Gone Up in Smoke?  Impact of Growing Legalization of Medical Marijuana - Dave Root and Abby Grozine. Best Practices for Maintaining Your Claims File - Ryan Wilhelm, Jennifer Guerra, and Claire Sumner. Defending the Institutional Bad Faith Claim - Charlie McDaniel and Kathy Carlsten. New Technology, Old Policies:  Are Aging Policies Equipped to Handle the Consumer Technology Boom? - Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey. Apportionment:  Has It Gotten Insurers Where They Want To Go?  - Charlie McDaniel, Graham Thompson, and Kristen Thompson. Additional Insured Jeopardy - Alex Davis, Laura Paton, Sarah Wetmore, Sally Bright and Nick Stewart. Why the Involvement of a Tractor Trailer Escalates a Case - Gary Lovell. Risk-Averse Insurers and the New Juror:  Exploring Possible Links Between Fewer Trials, Millennial Jurors, and Seemingly Bigger Verdicts - Doug Smith and Lee Weatherly. Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@cskl.law if you would like our attorneys to present in-house lunch & learn sessions or webinars.  

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP recently added new attorneys to the Atlanta, Georgia, Charleston, South Carolina and Chattanooga, Tennessee offices.

To read the complete Press Release, please click here.

Insurance Coverage Corner Blog Post by Graham Thompson. On January 28, 2021, the Tennessee Court of Appeals issued a ruling in the case of Reginald M. Younger v. Kibreab Kidane Okbahhanes, No. E202000429COAR10CV, 2021 WL 289332 (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2021). The Court held the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) can be extended to two years pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a) reads as follows: (a)(1) Except as provided in subdivision (a)(2), the following actions shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued:

1. 1.  Actions for libel, injuries to the person, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, or breach of marriage promise;
   2. Civil actions for compensatory or punitive damages, or both, brought under the federal civil rights statutes; and
   3. Actions for statutory penalties.

(2) A cause of action listed in subdivision (a)(1) shall be commenced within two (2) years after the cause of action accrued, if:

1. 1. Criminal charges are brought against any person alleged to have caused or contributed to the injury;
   2. The conduct, transaction, or occurrence that gives rise to the cause of action for civil damages is the subject of a criminal prosecution commenced within one (1) year by:
      1. A law enforcement officer;
      2. A district attorney general; or
      3. A grand jury; and
   3. The cause of action is brought by the person injured by the criminal conduct against the party prosecuted for such conduct.

(3) This subsection (a) shall be strictly construed. Younger relates to a traffic collision that occurred in September 2017 in Roane County, Tennessee. Defendant Okbahhanes was issued a traffic citation for (1) failure to exercise due care, (2) violation of financial responsibility law [i.e., proof of insurance], and (2) failure to carry registration documents. In October 2017 Okbahhanes paid a fine relating to the charge of failure to exercise due care; the remaining charges were dismissed in November 2017. In April 2019, Younger filed an action against Okbahhanes, alleging that the action was timely pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). Okbahhanes filed an answer denying the allegations against him and pleading an affirmative defense that the action was time-barred. Okbahhanes later filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the one-year statute of limitations under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) applied. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment, finding that the traffic citation for failure to exercise due care was related to the conduct that gave rise to the action; that the citation was a criminal charge; that the citation commenced a prosecution; and that Younger was allegedly injured by Okbahhanes’ criminal conduct. Okbahhanes appealed the trial court’s order to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The Court of Appeals held that in construing Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), the plain meaning of a statute’s words must be applied. Baker v. State, 417 S.W.3d 428, 433 (Tenn. 2013). When a statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, the statute is enforced as written. Frazier v. State, 495 S.W.3d 246, 249 (Tenn. 2016). Tennessee law is clear that a violation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-136 for failure to exercise due care is a Class C misdemeanor and, therefore, a crime. The Court of Appeals held that the language of Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) is clear and ambiguous. As such, the Court of Appeals held that the traffic citation issued to Okbahhanes for failure to exercise due care is a criminal charge, and a criminal prosecution by a law enforcement officer, such that Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2) acted to extend the statute of limitations to two years. The statutes contained in Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-101 et seq. constitute the Rules of the Road when it comes to operating motor vehicles in the State of Tennessee. Such violations include obeying stop signs and traffic lights, driving on the wrong side of the road, maintaining a safe distance, signaling, etc. Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-103 states that it is a Class C misdemeanor for any person to violate the Rules of the Road. Violation of the financial responsibility and registration laws contained in Younger are also Class C misdemeanors. A number of questions remain unanswered with regard to Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2), and it may yet come before the Court of Appeals again under different facts. The Court of Appeals did not discuss in detail Okbahhanes’ violation of the financial responsibility and vehicle registration laws, which were dismissed prior to the lawsuit being filed. Although they are Class C misdemeanors, it stands to reason that violation of those laws was not conduct, a transaction, or an occurrence that caused the underlying collision or gave rise to Younger’s cause of action. If Okbahhanes had been cited with those paperwork violations, but not failure to exercise due care, would the statute of limitations have been extended to two years? Other questions arise in the area of premises liability. Violation of a state building code is a Class B misdemeanor. Tenn. Code Ann. 68-120-108. Violation of county building codes is a Class C misdemeanor. Tenn. Code Ann. 5-20-105(b)(1). Suppose, for example, that a person is injured due to alleged improper design or construction in violation of a building code or ordinance. If the person responsible for the violation is later cited by the authorities and sued by the injured person, would the statute of limitations be extended to two years under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(2). Okbahhanes has until March 1, 2021, to appeal the Order of the Court of Appeals. The case is Reginald M. Younger v. Kibreab Kidane Okbahhanes, No. E202000429COAR10CV, 2021 WL 289332 (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2021) For read similar articles or to subscribe to our Insurance Coverage Corner Blog, please click here.

Fred Valz, Claire Sumner, Graham Thompson and Lacey Houghton educated attendees on important features to think about that will ensure a case is resolved, and to focus on more than just the actual settlement sum.  During the course of litigation, the Plaintiff is often continuing to receive significant medical treatment.  With respect to varied guidelines to medical liens and claims for medical reimbursement, presenters focused on the rules within Georgia, Tennessee and South Carolina.  The goal of this presentation was to arm attendees with the knowledge and information to successfully negotiate a settlement that also includes resolution of all claims arising from the treatment given to the Plaintiff. For more information on this presentation and firm seminars, please contact Michelle Mattox.