Calvin Gray Mills, Jr. v. Fulmarque, Inc.
2012 Tenn. LEXIS 142
| Tenn. | 2012Background
- Millses sued after Calvin Mills Jr. injury from chair; original federal complaint named N & M Investment, L.P. and The Royal Group.
- The Royal Group amended pleadings to name Aaron Rents; Millses added Aaron Rents within 90 days of that amended answer under § 20-1-119(a).
- Fulmarque manufactured the chair; Aaron Rents later alleged Fulmarque fault; Millses amended to add Fulmarque.
- Federal suit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; Millses refiled in Tennessee state court naming Aaron Rents and Fulmarque.
- Fulmarque raised statute of limitations as an affirmative defense; trial court granted summary judgment granting Fulmarque relief.
- Court of Appeals reversed; Tennessee Supreme Court held that § 20-1-119(a) does not create successive 90-day windows.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 'applicable statute of limitations' includes the 90-day window | Millses: includes successive windows within 90 days. | Fulmarque: refers only to the underlying one-year period. | Excludes successive 90-day windows; only the original statute applies. |
| Whether § 20-1-119(a) permits a second 90-day amendment period | Millses: second window applies if timely asserted fault exists. | Fulmarque: no second window via amendment after expiration. | Not allowed; no successive 90-day amendment windows. |
| Nature of the 90-day window (tolling/extension vs. grace period) and its impact | Millses: tolls/extends the statute to allow adding Fulmarque. | Fulmarque: treats 90 days as a separate grace window only when timely. | 90-day period tolls extension of the underlying statute but not successive windows. |
Key Cases Cited
- McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992) (comparative fault framework for apportioning fault)
- Owens v. Truckstops of Am., 915 S.W.2d 420 (Tenn. 1996) (purpose of § 20-1-119; continuity of liability)
- Browder v. Morris, 975 S.W.2d 308 (Tenn. 1998) (predicament of adding nonparties after limitations; fairness)
- Graves v. Grady's, Inc., 906 S.W.2d 463 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995) (treatment of § 20-1-119 as a special statute)
- Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn. 2010) (statutory construction and plain meaning rule)
- Townes v. Sunbeam Oster Co., 50 S.W.3d 446 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001) (purpose of comparative fault regime)