Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Latham Trucking Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 13, 1987PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FONES, Justice.

We limited the grant of plaintiff’s Rule Eleven application to the issue of whether evidence of a defendant’s financial condition is necessary or essential to sustain an award of punitive damages.

On 27 November 1983, plaintiff was preparing to move her disabled vehicle from the shoulder of Highway 27 in Scott County, Tennessee. Although plaintiff’s automobile was completely outside the white line demarking the outer edge of the highway, a tractor-trailer, which was passing another vehicle, struck plaintiff’s car. Plaintiff suffered personal injuries and incurred $3500 in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Breault v. FriedliCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1980
  2. Herstein v. KemkerCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1936
  3. Odom v. GrayTennessee Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Suzore v. RutherfordCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1952
  5. Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. ShawTennessee Supreme Court · 1899

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Adams v. MurakamiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Darcars Motors of Silver Spring, Inc. v. BorzymCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  3. Keith v. Murfreesboro Livestock Market, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1989
  4. Harry Barnett and Elizabeth Barnett v. Gary L. Lane and Donna L. LaneCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2000
  5. Con-Tech, Inc. v. SparksCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1990

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API