Hammock v. Sumner Co.

Court of Appeals of Tennessee·Decided December 30, 1997·No. 01A01-9710-CV-00600·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE

FILED JERRY HAMMOCK and wife ) December 30, 1997 RUBY HAMMOCK, et al., ) Cecil W. Crowson ) Appellate Court Clerk Plaintiffs/Appellants, ) ) Sumner Circuit ) No. 15861-C VS. ) ) Appeal No. ) 01A01-9710-CV-00600 SUMNER COUNTY, TENNESSEE, ) ) Defendant/Appellee. )

OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

Sumner County has filed a timely petition for rehearing in accordance with Tenn. R. App. P. 39 requesting this court to reconsider its December 5, 1997 opinion because it misapprehends the application of Tenn. R. Civ. P. 26.02(3) and 26.02(4). Citing Taylor v. Anderson-Tully Co., 151 F.R.D. 295, 296 (W.D. Tenn. 1993), the County asserts that the routine disclosure of an expert’s report prior to deposing the expert is “not a practice to be encouraged.” We respectfully disagree. Accordingly, the petition for rehearing is denied.

___________________________________ HENRY F. TODD, PRESIDING JUDGE MIDDLE SECTION

___________________________________ BEN H. CANTRELL, JUDGE

___________________________________ WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hammock v. Sumner Co., (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).

Hammock v. Sumner Co. (Hammock v. Sumner Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. Anderson-Tully Co.
151 F.R.D. 295 (W.D. Tennessee, 1993)