 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Goot v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County11/9/2005
orts § 7.1, at 381 (2d ed. 1986); Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 107, at 740. The concept of misrepresentation which can be traced to the common-law action of deceit, Restatement (Second) of Torts Chapter 22 Scope Note, at 54 (1977); First Nat'l Bank v. Brooks Farms, 821 S.W.2d 925, 927 (Tenn. 1991), is a broader concept than deceit. Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 105, at 727.
Every one of the tort claims included in the five surviving spouses' complaints contain allegations involving "concealing and failing to inform," "intentionally lying," and "fraud, fraudulent concealment, deceit and fraudulent misrepresentation by concealing information . . . and by providing false and incorrect information known by the efendants to be false." Each of these claims easily fits within the scope of the Governmental Tort Liability Act's exclusion of claims based on "deceit" and "misrepresentation." Therefore, the trial court properly granted the Metropolitan Government's motion to dismiss the surviving spouses' tort claims.
IV. Ms. Jackson's Breach of Contract Claim
Ms. Jackson takes issue with the trial court's decision to grant the Metropolitan Government's summary judgment motion based on the statute of limitations. She insists that the discovery rule should apply to her breach of contract claim. We agree.
A.
Ms. Jackson's breach of contract claim, like the claims of the other surviving spouses, arises from the employment relationship between the Metropolitan Government and her deceased spouse. Her complaint embodies essentially two theories. First, she asserts that the Metropolitan Government breached its specific obligation to explain the benefit system and infringed upon her husband's rights by failing to inform him of the existence of the waiver of premium benefit. Second, she asserts that the Metropolitan Government's failure to inform her husband of this benefit also violated its obligation of good faith and fair dealing.
The relationship of employer and employee arises out of contract. Vargo v. Lincoln Brass Works, Inc., 115 S.W.3d 487, 491 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). It is based on the mutual assent of the parties, and it is the product of an agreement or series of agreements between the employer and employee regarding the scope and nature of the work to be performed, the duration, terms, and conditions of employment, and the compensation for performing the work. Hamby v. Genesco, Inc., 627 S.W.2d 373, 375 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1981). An employment agreement may be written, oral, or a combination of the two, and the terms of the agreement may either be specifically bargained for or may be supplied by applicable legal requirements.
1. The Metropolitan Government's Contractual Obligations With Regard To Providing Its Employees with Life Insurance Coverage Containing a Waiver of Premium Provision
The Metropolitan Government is required to provide its employees with a "program of benefits . . . to provide for specific kinds of needs upon death, upon hospitalization and sickness and upon retirement because of disability or old age." Included among these benefits are "benefits payable upon the death of the employee which are not inconsistent with group life insurance plans in general use by businesses and industries in Davidson County. . . ." Accordingly, employees who are members of the Metropolitan Employee Benefit System are entitled to be "covered for life insurance benefits during all times that he [or she] is an eligible employee. . . ." In order to provide this benefit, the Metropolitan Employee Benefit Board is required to enter into a group contract with a life insurance company to "underwrite" the requi
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|