TDLA Award Nominations for 2025 are now open! To nominate a fellow TDLA member, please click here.

You may view TDLA past year's award winners by clicking here.

TDLA Emerging Leaders is a Leadership Development Program whereby lawyers in our organization have the opportunity to learn and develop leadership skills and be recognized for their participation in various TDLA activities. Anyone wishing to participate in the Emerging Leaders Program will be able fill out a Progress Tracker, which will have space for each participant to mark when a task is complete.

Any young lawyer members who have completed 6 of 8 tasks from either Level 1 or Level 2 by the time of the next TDLA Annual Meeting and may submit their form this year by August 8, 2025.

Each year, TDLA recognizes our emerging leaders at our Annual Meeting with the Nathan E. Shelby Emerging Leaders Award. The award honors Nathan Shelby (1979-2023), TDLA President-Elect 2022-2023, who was known for his strength in identifying and mentoring young lawyers to fulfill their potential as effective civil defense lawyers, and as emerging leaders in TDLA.

Click here to see the progress tracker and see if you qualify!

Send your progress tracker to office@tdla.net

TDLA has recently become involved in several issues that our Amicus Committee and TDLA Board found would be important for our civil defense community.

TDLA has recently participated/ approved participation as amicus in the following Tennessee appellate court cases:

· Denson v. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge, et. al., E.2023-00027-SC-R11-CV (case regarding the sufficiency of pre-suit notice under TN healthcare liability law).

· Castillo v. Rex, et. al., E2022-00322-COA-R9-CV (case regarding protective order addressing communications between defendant hospital and decedent’s family).

· Doe v. Bellevue Baptist Church, W2022-01350-COA-R3-CV (case addressing dismissal of parents’ claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress in relation to sexual abuse of their child, on the basis that the claims are not legally cognizable because the parents did not perceive any injury-producing event).

· Locke v. Aston, M2022-01820-COA-R9-CV (health care liability case involving issue of whether the defendant must produce surveillance videos of the plaintiff in discovery).

If you, or any of your friends/ colleagues/ firm members or associates, need additional assistance with dealing with the emotional impact of sad news, please consider contacting the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program (TLAP), which is available to support lawyers across the state of Tennessee, and can be reached at https://tlap.org/ or 615-741-3238 or toll free at 877-424-8527.  

TDLA Members Marty Phillips and Craig Sanders with Rainey, Kizer, Reviere & Bell have filed an Amicus Brief on behalf of TDLA in the Crotty v. Flora, MD case. The statement of issues is whether Tennessee Code Annotated § 29-26-119, which is part of the Health Care Liability Act, precludes plaintiffs in health care liability cases from recovering medical expenses that have been written off and that nobody paid or owes.

You may view the Amicus by clicking here.

TDLA is currently working on several Amicus Briefs. Below is an outline of those Amicus Briefs for our membership.

1. TDLA’s Professional Negligence and Healthcare Committee Co-Chair, Chris Vrettos: On April 7, 2021, the Supreme Court granted Defendants’ application for permission to appeal in Cooper v. Mandy, et al. Cooper involved claims of a negligently performed breast reduction surgery in which the patient maintained she never would have undergone the procedure but for the physician and his practice group’s alleged misrepresentation regarding his credentials. After Plaintiffs’ counsel failed to comply with pre-suit notice requirements on both filing and re-filing of the lawsuit, the Trial Court denied Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that all of Plaintiffs’ claims—including one for medical battery—flowed from the alleged initial misrepresentation. Consequently, Tennessee’s Health Care Liability Act did not apply. The Court of Appeals affirmed in November 2020. Brie Stewart of Spears, Moore, Rebman & Williams in Chattanooga will prepare an amicus brief on behalf of the Tennessee Defense Lawyers Association.
   
   
2. TDLA’s Tort Committee Co-Chair, Sean Martin: Younger v. Okbahhanes is an action for personal injury arising out of a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant more than 1 year after the accident. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiff’s action was untimely. Plaintiff argued in response that T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2) operated to extend the statute of limitations to two years because Defendant was issued a traffic citation for failure to exercise due care in violation of § 55-8-136. T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2) extends the statute of limitations to two years if “(A) Criminal charges are brought against any person alleged to have caused or contributed to the injury; (B) 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: (i) A law enforcement officer; (ii) A district attorney general; or (iii) A grand jury; and (C) The cause of action is brought by the person injured by the criminal conduct against the party prosecuted for such conduct.” The trial court found that T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2) extended the statute of limitations to two years because Defendant was charged with a criminal offense and a criminal prosecution had been commenced against him. Addressing this as a matter of first impression, the Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that “the traffic citation issued to Defendant for failure to exercise due care, which had been prepared, accepted, and the original citation filed with the court, [wa]s a criminal charge and a criminal prosecution by a law enforcement officer, such that [T.C.A. § 28-3-104(a)(2)] was applicable to extend the statute of limitations to two years.” Therefore, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s denial of summary judgment to Defendant. Defendant filed a Rule 11 Application for Permission to Appeal with the Tennessee Supreme Court at the end of March 2021. Plaintiff filed a timely response in opposition in April 2021. We are currently waiting for the Tennessee Supreme Court to decide whether to grant permission to appeal. Hannah Lowe of Trammell Adkins & Ward in Knoxville is working on an amicus brief that will be ready to be filed on behalf of TDLA should the Tennessee Supreme Court accept the application and grant permission for the appeal.
   
   
3. Todd Presnell with Bradley’s Nashville office is drafting an Amicus Brief on behalf of TDLA. This brief will be in support of Nashville Ready Mix’s Rule 11 Application in Story v. Meadows, Court of Appeals No. M2019-01011-COA-R3-CV. This submission is also being considered in partnership with DRI's national Amicus Committee. 

On January 28, 2021, the Court of Appeals for the Eastern Section, in a case of first impression, interpreted Tennessee Code Annotated §28-3-104(a)(2) to extend the statute of limitations to two years when a traffic citation for failure to exercise due care was issued at the scene of the accident.  See Younger vs. Okbahhanes, 2011 Tenn. App. Lexis 33 (January 28, 2021). 

            TDLA member Sean Martin with Carr Allison in Chattanooga is the attorney for the appellant. To aid in his application to the Tennessee Supreme Court, he would like to know whether you have had or currently have a case involving Tennessee Code Annotated section 28-3-104 (a)(2).  He is also interested in learning if you have received a new lawsuit since January 28, 2021 that attempts to revive a case thought to have been barred by the one year statute of limitations but now has a two year statute based on this holding.

            Please forward any information or comments to swmartin@carrallison.com.

Thank you to the TDLA Professional Negligence & Healthcare section chair Chris Vrettos with Gideon, Cooper, and Essary PLC for the TDLA Amicus Brief on this case culminating in a favorable result. Please see summary and opinions below.

The Supreme Court just released its opinion in Martin v. Rolling Hills Hospital, a pre-suit notice case involving deficiencies in the HIPAA authorization.  The Supreme Court’s decision resulted in a reinstatement of the dismissal originally granted to the Defendants by the trial court.

Just as importantly, the Supreme Court addressed some questions—particular to HIPAA authorization deficiency cases—that up until now had been answered inconsistently by various Courts.  In summary:

• Defendants wishing to challenge a Plaintiff’s compliance with the pre-suit notice statute should show how Plaintiff’s noncompliance frustrated the purpose of the statute, or denied the defendants a benefit conferred by the statute.
• One way to do this is to show that the HIPAA authorization accompanying the notice lacked one or more of the 6 core elements required by federal regulations.
• While Defendants must still explain how they were prejudiced by Plaintiff’s noncompliance, they need not attempt to “test” a deficient HIPAA authorization.
• Once Defendants have met the burden described above, the burden shifts back to Plaintiffs to show substantial compliance with, or extraordinary cause for failure to comply with, pre-suit notice requirements.
• Notably, prejudice is relevant to the question of substantial compliance, but it is not its own analytical element in ruling upon a Rule 12.06 motion regarding Plaintiff’s failure to comply with pre-suit notice requirements.

Majority Opinion: click here

Separate Opinion: click here

TDLA members Ashley Cleek and Brandon Stout with Rainey, Kizer, Reviere & Bell in Jackson, TN were attorneys for the appellants, Rolling Hills Hospital, LLC, and Universal Health Services, Inc.

TDLA Members: If you would like to submit a request for TDLA Amicus Brief consideration, please email office@tdla.net

Update from Chris Vrettos and Drew Reynolds, chairs of the TDLA Healthcare & Professional Negligence Section:

More info: click here and here

Please see the link below regarding the Tennessee Supreme Court decision holding that statutory caps on noneconomic damages does not violate the Tennessee constitution.

Thanks to Sean Martin with Carr Allison and his team for providing the TDLA Amicus Brief on this issue to the court.

TN Supreme Court Majority Opinion may be seen by clicking here.

Summary of the decision: click here