Turner v. Jordan,

957 S.W.2d 815 (1997)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was a psychiatrist, and P was a nurse at the same facility. One of D's patients had a known history of violence. D denied knowing of that history but admitted that the patient had attacked him. The patient then beat P and caused a severe head injury. The jury attributed fault to the psychiatrist, as he took no steps to protect those who might be attacked. The jury gave P an award of $1,186,000 and attributed all fault to D. After the completion of the proof, the trial court instructed the jury on the law of comparative fault, and it provided the jury with a verdict form indicating it could allocate the fault, if any, between the alleged negligence of D and the alleged intentional conduct of the patient. The jury returned a verdict for Ps allocating 100 percent of the fault to D. The trial court approved all of the jury's verdict except the allocation of fault. As a result, it granted the D's motion for new trial but thereafter granted an interlocutory appeal. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court of Tennessee heard the case and first determined that D owed P a duty of care and that duty of care had been breached.