The Eastern Section of the Tennessee Court of Appeals just issued its opinion in Lane v. McCartney, No. E2008-02640-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 30, 2009). The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling, which held that the plaintiff's expert had not demonstrated that the community he practiced in when the alleged tort occurred and the defendants' community were similar (which is required under the locality rule).
The opinion offers a good analysis of what is sufficient to qualify an expert under the locality rule. The Court of Appeals also mentions how similar this case is to Nabors v. Adams, which is the subject of my July 23, 2009 post. See infra.
Here's a link to the opinion:
No comments:
Post a Comment