New Health Care Liability Action Opinion: Trial Court's Denial of Dismissal with Prejudice of Complaint for Failure to File a Certificate of Good Faith Upheld on Appeal Due to the Application of the Common Knowledge Exception to the General Requirement of Expert Testimony to Prove Elements of Such a Claim

The Tennessee Court of Appeals has issued its opinion in Mears v. Nashville Center for Rehabilitation and Healing, LLC, No. M2022-00490-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 29, 2023). The syllabus from the opinion reads:

Plaintiff alleges she was injured from a fall at a skilled nursing facility while using a defective shower chair with a broken lock and torn netting. The circuit court concluded the Plaintiff did not need to file a certificate of good faith under the Tennessee Health Care Liability Act because the common knowledge exception is applicable and the complaint’s negligence allegations do not require expert testimony. The nursing facility appeals, arguing expert testimony is required to establish both the standard of care and proximate causation; therefore, a certificate of good faith must be filed. Because the allegations set forth in the complaint do not require expert testimony to maintain the Plaintiff’s claim, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment.

Here is a link to the slip opinion: Majority Opinion 2022-490-COA.pdf (tncourts.gov).

NOTE: This is a health care liability action (HCLA), formerly known as a "medical malpractice case." The plaintiff failed to serve the defendant with the required presuit notice under Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-26-121, which required that the suit be dismissed without prejudice. (It is noteworthy that the opinion makes no mention of when the complaint was filed relative to the date of the alleged injury, which matters; that was not an issue in this appeal, however, and as a result I will not address it here.) Plaintiff also did not file a certificate of good faith (CGF) with the complaint as is generally required under section 29-26-122. Under -122m the defense sought dismissal with prejudice due to the lack of a CGF. A CGF is only required, however, when expert testimony under section 29-26-115 is required; one is not required when a case falls within the common knowledge exception (CKE) to the general requirement of expert testimony to prove the elements of a HCLA (under section 29-16-115(a)). This opinion does an excellent job of describing when the CKE applies in a HCLA. Here is an excerpt from the opinion, which is pure gold, to wit: 

Accordingly, Ms. Mears’s negligence claim can be established by lay testimony alone. Like an electrical circuit sending current to illuminate a light, the bulb in Ms. Mears’s case has turned on as a result of current flowing all the way through standard of care, breach, and proximate causation, without need of expert testimony. Though expert testimony in connection with damages may make the bulb burn brighter through increased damages, it has been illuminated already. It has been illuminated already through setting forth a claim which can be supported by lay testimony, thereby demonstrating her claim possesses some merit and is non-frivolous.

Mears, supra, slip op. at 13 (emphasis added).

This, again, is an excellent opinion on the CKE in a HCLA.