Information is now available on the number of tort trials and jury verdicts in Rutherford County, Tennessee (county seat – Murfreesboro) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.  The data is some of the most shocking data that comes from the recently released Tennessee case filing statitics

There were 69 tort cases closed in Rutherford County (not including health care liability act cases) and 1 (that is correct – 1) tort trial.

rutherford1-1024x614
As the graph below demonstrates, that one trial was a jury trial, and it was lost by the plaintiff:

Information is now available on the number of tort trials and jury verdicts in Putnam County, Tennessee (county seat: Cookeville) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.

There were 93 personal injury and wrongful death cases closed in Putnam County (not including health care liability act cases) and not a single trial.  Here is how that compares with prior years:

putnam1-1024x612
Is it possible that this is correct?  That Putnam County, home to 80,000 people that is the home of miles and miles of Interstate 40, has not have a single personal injury or wrongful death trial in the last six fiscal years?

Information is now available on the number of tort trials and jury verdicts in Williamson County, Tennessee (county seat – Franklin) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.

There were 255 tort cases closed in Williamson County (not including health care liability act cases) and 4 tort trials.  Here is how that compares with prior years:

williamson1-1024x625
A couple observations.  First, note that despite huge increases in population (and traffic volume) Williamson County personal injury and wrongful death filings are less than they were five years ago.

Information is now available on the number of personal injury and wrongful death trials and jury verdicts in Maury County, Tennessee for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.

There were 157 personal injury and wrongful death cases closed in Maury County (not including health care liability act cases) and no personal injury or wrongful death trials.  Here is how that compares with prior years:

maury1-1024x614
Over the years, about 1% of closed cases result in a trial  When your client asks you “what are the odds my Maury County personal injury case will go to trial” you can say that, on average, 99% of filed cases are resolved (through voluntary dismissal, dismissal on motion, or settlement) before a jury verdict or judgment is announced.

Where defendant moved to dismiss a defamation suit under the Tennessee Public Participation Act (“TPPA”), and the trial court failed to take into account the third step of the TPPA burden-shifting framework which considers whether a defendant can establish a valid defense to the claims, the case was remanded for further consideration of the third step in the analysis.

In Pragnell v. Franklin, No. E2022-00524-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. April 18, 2023), plaintiffs filed a defamation suit against defendants, who were plaintiffs’ former employer. Plaintiffs were financial advisors, and when they left defendants’ company, SEC regulations required defendants to file a U5 form online as to plaintiffs’ departure. Plaintiffs asserted that the U5 forms initially filed by defendants stated that plaintiffs left the company voluntarily, but that after a dispute arose and plaintiffs filed suit against defendants in chancery court, defendants changed the U5 forms to state that plaintiffs were discharged for violating “client privacy rights, misrepresentation, and selling away.” Plaintiffs thus filed this defamation suit based on the statements in the revised U5 forms.

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss based on the TPPA, Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-17-101, et seq. Defendants argued that they were required to file the amended U5 forms upon discovering additional information about plaintiffs’ employment, that the statements contained therein were true, and that the case was subject to dismissal under the TPPA.

Information is now available on the number of tort trials and jury verdicts in Sumner County, Tennessee (county seat: Gallatin) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.

There were 236 personal injury and wrongful death cases closed in Sumner County (not including health care liability act cases) and 5 trials.  Here is how that compares with prior years:

Of the five cases that were tried, two were jury trials and three were nonjury trials.   . The plaintiff made a financial recovery in two of the five trials cases.  Note:  the fact that the plaintiff recovered in about 60% of the cases does not mean the plaintiff “won” about 40% of the cases.  Why?  Because we do not know whether the plaintiff’s recovery exceeded the pretrial offer.  We can say that in Shelby County last year defendants received a defense judgment in about 60% of the cases that were tried.  Here is the data in a graph:

BirdDog Law is a website that provide access to legal information that Tennessee lawyers and paralegals need to better serve their clients.  It is filled with free resources that will save you time and money.  Interested in knowing the fax number for the Circuit Court Clerk in Henry County?  Use our “Counties” pages, click on Henry County, and you find it – and lots more information about the functioning of the civil and criminal courts in Henry County.

Need free, user-friendly, and searchable access to the rules of civil procedure in your office or in the courtroom?  BirdDog has it.

And much, much more.

Information is now available on the number of tort trials and jury verdicts in Knox County, Tennessee for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022.

There were 2164 tort cases closed in Knox County (not including health care liability act cases) and 40 tort trials.  Here is how that compares with prior years:

knox1-1024x612
The number of trials – 40 – tells only part of the story, however.   Some 29 of those trials were jury trials – the other 11 were tried to the court. The plaintiff made a financial recovery in 9 of those cases that were tried to a judge or jury.  Note:  the fact that the plaintiff recovered in about 25% of the cases does not mean the plaintiff “won” about 25% of the cases.  Why?  Because we do not know whether the plaintiff’s recovery exceeded the pretrial offer.  We can say that in Knox County last year defendants received a defense judgment in about 75% of the cases that were tried.  Here is the data in a graph:

The State of Tennessee has released information about the number of health care liability (HCL, formerly known as medical malpractice) claims filed in Tennessee in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022 and the resolution of pending HCL cases in the same year.

In the FY2021-22, 355 HCL claims were filed in Tennessee and 349 cases were resolved. The total number of cases resolved is consistent with experience in the prior eight years, which say a high of 382 cases resolved in FY 2018-20 and a low of 330 cases resolved in FY 2020-21.

Eleven (11) HCL cases went to trial in FY2021-22, down from 31 in FY 2015-16 and a low of 8 in FY 2020-21. (Number of trials available for last eight years only).  There is no publicly available data on how the other 344 cases were resolved, but of course the possibilities are voluntary dismissal, summary judgment, or settlement.

The statute of repose for defective improvements to real property did not apply where defendants were the property owners of the pipe culvert at issue in the case.

In Clayton v. Dixon, No. M2021-00521-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 23, 2023), plaintiff property owner sued defendants, who owned the adjacent property, “for damages allegedly caused by the installation of a pipe culvert.” Plaintiff asserted that the pipe culvert was improperly installed in 2011 and caused flooding on his property.

Plaintiff filed suit in 2019 for negligence, nuisance, and trespass. The parties entered into a settlement agreement whereby defendants installed a larger pipe, but plaintiff refused to dismiss the suit after this pipe installation. Defendants then filed a motion to dismiss as well as a counterclaim seeking specific enforcement of the settlement agreement. The parties then filed cross-motions for summary judgment, with plaintiff arguing that he was entitled to summary judgment because defendants had “violated the codes when they installed the pipe culvert,” and defendants asserting that plaintiff’s claim was barred by the statute of repose. The trial court found that “the statute of repose for defective improvements to real estate barred [plaintiff’s] action” and granted summary judgment to defendants. On appeal, summary judgment was reversed.

Contact Information