Legal Opinion
Sutphin v. Platt
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided November 10, 1986PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FONES, Justice.
The issue presently before this Court is whether the requirement of Tennessee’s Medical Malpractice Review Board and Claims Act of 1975, T.C.A. § 29-26-101 et seq., that a medical expert witness be a licensed practitioner in Tennessee or a contiguous state violates the due process and/or equal protection rights of a party proferring a medical expert from a non-contiguous state. Because there is a conceivable rational basis for the contiguous state limitation upon the competency of medical expert witnesses, we uphold this requirement as reasonably related to legitimate…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- San Antonio Independent School District v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Harrison v. SchraderTennessee Supreme Court · 1978
- Bowman v. HenardTennessee Supreme Court · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Stovall v. ClarkeTennessee Supreme Court · 2003
- Donna Faye Shipley v. Robin WilliamsTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- Estate of Martha S. French v. Stratford HouseTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- Cardwell v. BechtolTennessee Supreme Court · 1987
- Annabelle Legg v. Dr. Ash Chopra, University Urology, P.C.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.