Perez v. McConkey
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ANDERSON, Justice.
In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether and to what extent the common-law doctrine of assumption of risk retains its vitality in view of our recent decision in McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn.1992). There, we held that contributory negligence no longer serves as a complete bar to a plaintiffs recovery, but is to be considered in apportioning damages according to the principles of modified comparative fault so long as the plaintiffs negligence remains less than the defendant’s negligence. For the reasons stated herein, we conclude that the doctrine of…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- McIntyre v. BalentineTennessee Supreme Court · 1992
- Farley v. MM Cattle CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1975
- Knight v. JewettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Bradshaw v. DanielTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by74 opinions
- Staples v. CBL & Associates, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2000
- Eaton v. McLainTennessee Supreme Court · 1994
- McClung v. Delta Square Ltd. PartnershipTennessee Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. GomezTennessee Supreme Court · 2005
- Coln v. City of SavannahTennessee Supreme Court · 1998
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.