§5.2 Contractual Waiver of Liability
1. Underwood v. National Alarm Services, Inc., 2007 WL 1412040 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 14, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"Ms. Underwood and four children were injured when her home caught fire in the early morning hours of July 21, 1999; two of the children died shortly after being transported to the hospital. Ms. Underwood sued the alarm company that provided emergency monitoring services for the home, alleging several theories of negligence. The contract between the parties contained a limitation of liability/liquidated damages clause, which limited the recovery of Ms. Underwood to $250. The trial court granted summary judgment to the alarm company, finding that: (1) the alarm company did not owe a duty to Ms. Underwood because she had failed to pay monthly monitoring fees due under the contract; (2) the exculpatory and limitation of liability clauses in the contract were valid; and (3) the alarm company established that it was not negligent, and Ms. Underwood failed to present evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact for trial. We hold that the alarm company did owe a duty to Ms. Underwood, despite her failure to pay fees, and that the limitation of liability clause at issue in the contract is valid and limits Ms. Underwood’s recovery to $250. We also find that there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude the granting of summary judgment. Therefore, we affirm in part and reverse in part." View opinion.
2. Maggart v. Almany Realtor's, Inc., 2007 WL 2198204 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 26, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"In this personal injury action, wherein the small office employer was not subject to the Workers’ Compensation Act, the employee sought damages against her employer for injuries she sustained at work when a filing cabinet fell on her. The employer denied liability contending the claim was barred based upon a prospective and unconditional “release of liability” the employee had signed prior to the injury. The trial court summarily dismissed the claim finding the release barred the employee’s claim. We have concluded that the prospective release of the employer’s liability for any injuries the employee might sustain in the course of her employment is void as against public policy and, therefore, vacate the order of dismissal and remand for further proceedings." View opinion. The Tennessee Supreme Court reviewed this case and affirmed on the grounds that the contract did not bar a claim such as that asserted by the plaintiff. Therefore, it declined to reach the public policy issue. View Tennessee Supreme Court opinion.
3. Jones v. Tennessee Riders Instruction Program, Inc., 2007 WL 393630 (Tenn. Ct. App., Feb. 5, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff, a wholly inexperienced motorcycle rider, sued Tennessee Riders Instruction Program, Inc., for injuries sustained when she wrecked during the last day of a three-day motorcycle safety course. The plaintiff’s claim for gross negligence was dismissed by the trial court upon a finding there was nothing in the record which would allow a reasonable juror to conclude the defendant exercised a conscious neglect of duty or a callous indifference to consequences or such entire want of care as would raise a presumption of a conscious indifference to the consequences. The plaintiff appealed. We affirm." View opinion.
4. Patricia B. Stewart vs. Chalet Village Properties, Inc. E2007-01499-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 31, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"The issue presented in this case involves the validity of an exculpatory clause contained in a short-term lease of a vacation rental house. The plaintiff was injured when she fell on an allegedly dangerous and negligently maintained walkway at a vacation rental house in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. The trial court granted the rental agency summary judgment."
View opinion.
5. Holly Thrasher v. Riverbend Stables, LLC, Steven Daniel, and Michael Daniel, M2007-01237-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 21, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff appeals the summary dismissal of her complaint arising out of the death of her Tennessee Walking Horse while the horse was being trained at Riverbend Stables, LLC. Plaintiff filed suit claiming the horse died as a result of the defendants’ negligence and gross negligence. The trial court dismissed the complaint upon a finding that the claims of negligence were barred by the exculpatory provisions in the parties’ written agreement and Plaintiff had failed to make out a prima facie claim of gross negligence. Finding the exculpatory agreement enforceable and the evidence fails to establish a genuine issue of material fact concerning the claims for gross negligence or recklessness, we affirm." View opinion.
The Court's Summary:
"Ms. Underwood and four children were injured when her home caught fire in the early morning hours of July 21, 1999; two of the children died shortly after being transported to the hospital. Ms. Underwood sued the alarm company that provided emergency monitoring services for the home, alleging several theories of negligence. The contract between the parties contained a limitation of liability/liquidated damages clause, which limited the recovery of Ms. Underwood to $250. The trial court granted summary judgment to the alarm company, finding that: (1) the alarm company did not owe a duty to Ms. Underwood because she had failed to pay monthly monitoring fees due under the contract; (2) the exculpatory and limitation of liability clauses in the contract were valid; and (3) the alarm company established that it was not negligent, and Ms. Underwood failed to present evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact for trial. We hold that the alarm company did owe a duty to Ms. Underwood, despite her failure to pay fees, and that the limitation of liability clause at issue in the contract is valid and limits Ms. Underwood’s recovery to $250. We also find that there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude the granting of summary judgment. Therefore, we affirm in part and reverse in part." View opinion.
2. Maggart v. Almany Realtor's, Inc., 2007 WL 2198204 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 26, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"In this personal injury action, wherein the small office employer was not subject to the Workers’ Compensation Act, the employee sought damages against her employer for injuries she sustained at work when a filing cabinet fell on her. The employer denied liability contending the claim was barred based upon a prospective and unconditional “release of liability” the employee had signed prior to the injury. The trial court summarily dismissed the claim finding the release barred the employee’s claim. We have concluded that the prospective release of the employer’s liability for any injuries the employee might sustain in the course of her employment is void as against public policy and, therefore, vacate the order of dismissal and remand for further proceedings." View opinion. The Tennessee Supreme Court reviewed this case and affirmed on the grounds that the contract did not bar a claim such as that asserted by the plaintiff. Therefore, it declined to reach the public policy issue. View Tennessee Supreme Court opinion.
3. Jones v. Tennessee Riders Instruction Program, Inc., 2007 WL 393630 (Tenn. Ct. App., Feb. 5, 2007).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff, a wholly inexperienced motorcycle rider, sued Tennessee Riders Instruction Program, Inc., for injuries sustained when she wrecked during the last day of a three-day motorcycle safety course. The plaintiff’s claim for gross negligence was dismissed by the trial court upon a finding there was nothing in the record which would allow a reasonable juror to conclude the defendant exercised a conscious neglect of duty or a callous indifference to consequences or such entire want of care as would raise a presumption of a conscious indifference to the consequences. The plaintiff appealed. We affirm." View opinion.
4. Patricia B. Stewart vs. Chalet Village Properties, Inc. E2007-01499-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 31, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"The issue presented in this case involves the validity of an exculpatory clause contained in a short-term lease of a vacation rental house. The plaintiff was injured when she fell on an allegedly dangerous and negligently maintained walkway at a vacation rental house in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. The trial court granted the rental agency summary judgment."
View opinion.
5. Holly Thrasher v. Riverbend Stables, LLC, Steven Daniel, and Michael Daniel, M2007-01237-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. May 21, 2008).
The Court's Summary:
"Plaintiff appeals the summary dismissal of her complaint arising out of the death of her Tennessee Walking Horse while the horse was being trained at Riverbend Stables, LLC. Plaintiff filed suit claiming the horse died as a result of the defendants’ negligence and gross negligence. The trial court dismissed the complaint upon a finding that the claims of negligence were barred by the exculpatory provisions in the parties’ written agreement and Plaintiff had failed to make out a prima facie claim of gross negligence. Finding the exculpatory agreement enforceable and the evidence fails to establish a genuine issue of material fact concerning the claims for gross negligence or recklessness, we affirm." View opinion.