Jed Emert v. Millennium Taxi Service, LLC - dissenting opinion ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                           05/29/2019
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT KNOXVILLE
    April 15, 2019 Session
    JED EMERT v. MILLENNIUM TAXI SERVICE, LLC, ET AL.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradley County
    No. V-16-558      Lawrence Howard Puckett, Judge
    ___________________________________
    No. E2018-01450-COA-R3-CV
    ___________________________________
    CHARLES D. SUSANO, JR., J., dissenting.
    I would affirm the trial court’s holding that plaintiff failed to produce evidence
    sufficient to enable a reasonable trier of fact, without speculation, to find that the
    defendant driver caused the door to close on plaintiff as he exited the taxi.
    As stated by the Supreme Court, “[t]he nonmoving party ‘must do more than
    simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.’ ” Rye v.
    Women's Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 
    477 S.W.3d 235
    , 265 (Tenn. 2015)
    (citing Matsushita Elec. Indus. 
    Co., 475 U.S. at 586
    , 
    106 S. Ct. 1348
    ). The nonmoving
    party must demonstrate the existence of specific facts in the record which could lead a
    rational trier of fact to find in favor of the nonmoving party. 
    Id. (emphasis added).
    Plaintiff has no knowledge of how the door closed; he says it closed automatically.
    He did not observe the driver operate the door. It is undisputed for purposes of this
    motion that the door does not have a known mechanical defect. The majority states that it
    “is undisputed that there are two buttons that control the door: one near the driver, and
    the other on a post in the passenger area of the van.” It then notes that both parties deny
    pressing a button and asserts that this creates a disputed issue and a credibility
    determination “may be warranted.” I disagree. The undisputed presence of two door-
    operating buttons is insufficient to withstand the present motion. The closing of the door
    remains entirely unexplained. Plaintiff is unable to prove that it is more probable than any
    other conclusion that the actions of the defendant driver caused the door to close on him
    as he was exiting the taxi. We, like the future trier of fact, are left to speculate.
    Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
    _______________________________
    CHARLES D. SUSANO, JR., JUDGE
    

Document Info

Docket Number: E2018-01450-COA-R3-CV

Judges: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.

Filed Date: 5/29/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/29/2019