Hannah v. Gregg, Bland & Berry, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiff created a genuine issue of material fact by presenting expert testimony that a defendant should have noticed the lack of a safety feature and suggested that it be corrected
• holding that when the record does not indicate that the trial court ruled upon a motion to strike expert testimony, an appellate court must assume that the trial court considered the expert testimony
• recognizing that, in order to be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law based on contributory negligence at the summary-judgment stage of an action, the movant must establish by undisputed evidence that the plaintiff consciously appreciated the danger he faced at the time of his death
• recognizing that, in order to be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law based on contributory negligence at the summary-judgment stage of an action, the movant must establish by undisputed evidence that the plaintiff consciously appreciated the danger he faced at the time of his death
• finding genuine issue of material fact on alternative design based on testimony of three experts
• holding “we do not agree…that one statement by an expert witness explaining a legal standard in the industry as to which that witness is an expert invalidates that portion of the expert's testimony that does not pertain to that legal standard.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).