 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Spangler v. East Tennessee Baptist Hospital2/28/2000
andard of care, and there is no proof whatsoever in the record that would explain how the witness, a physician from Washington, D.C., would be familiar with the standard of care in Knoxville. It is clear the Trial Court has broad discretion in determining the qualifications for admissibility of testimony of expert witnesses. We find no abuse of that discretion in this case. Mabon v. Jackson-Madison County General Hosp., 968 S.W.2d 826 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). See also Osler v. Burnett, 1993 WL 90381 (Tenn. Ct. App. March 30, 1993); Bryant v. Bauguss, 1996 WL 465539 (Tenn. Ct. App. August 16, 1996); Swift v. Schoettle, 1996 WL 730286 (Tenn. Ct. App. December 20, 1996); Hopper v. Tabor, 1998 WL 498211 (Tenn. Ct. App. August 19, 1998).
Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.06 requires that " supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein." The rule further states that a response to a summary judgment motion must set forth "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Plaintiffs' response failed to meet the requirements of this Rule, and the Trial Court's grant of summary judgment was appropriate and we affirm.
This cause is remanded to the Trial Court with costs of the appeal assessed to the appellants.
Herschel P. Franks, J.
CONCUR:
Houston M. Goddard, P.J.
D. Michael Swiney, J.
Page 1 2 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|