November 30, 2007

Testimony by plaintiff and expert helps case survive summary judgment for mold allegedly caused by runoff from construction site

HAROLD DENNIS HARDAWAY & wife, SONYA HARDAWAY, v. HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE BOARD OF EDUCATION, DERTHICK, HENLEY & WILKERSON, CONSTRUCTION & IMPROVEMENT SPECIALTY CO., and HBJ CORPORATION (Tenn.Ct.App. November 29, 2007).

In this action for damages allegedly due to water runoff from construction for a new school, the Trial Court granted defendants summary judgment. On appeal, we conclude there are disputed issues of material fact, and remand and vacate the summary judgment.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2007/hardawayh_112907.pdf

"Moreover, plaintiffs can offer their opinion of the cause of the mold growth. See Tenn. R. Evid. 701, and when plaintiffs’ testimony is coupled with the experts’ testimony, it is clear that an issue of disputed material fact has been established that precludes summary judgment. A causal connection may be established by expert opinion combined with lay testimony. White v. Werthan Industries, 824 S.W.2d 158 (Tenn. 1992)." Id.