Skip to main content

Thompson v. Thompson

Citations

  • 749 S.W.2d 468
  • 1988 Tenn. App. LEXIS 73

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that an essential element in a dog bite claim is that plaintiffs “must prove that the defendants knew or should have known about the dog’s dangerous propensities.”
  • third element that a dog bite claimant must prove is “that the defendants knew or should have known about the dog’s dangerous propensities”
  • “[E]vidence of subsequent remedial measures becomes relevant only when the defendant has raised the issue of control and ownership.” (citing E. CLEARY, MCCORMICK’S HANDBOOK ON THE LAW OF EVIDENCE § 275, at 817 (3d ed. 1984)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cantrell, Koch, Todd

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.