Charlesan Woodgett v. John R. Vaughan, Jr.
M2016-00250-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Dec 13, 2016Background
- The Vaughans listed and vacated their Maury County home; a movable carpeted wooden step (9.5" high) provided access to a 16.5" raised attic landing.
- Reginald and Charlesan Woodgett (plaintiff Charlesan later substituted as administrator ad litem for Reginald) toured the house; Charlesan alleges she fell when the step "gave way," suffering long-term injuries.
- Plaintiffs sued for premises liability and alleged negligence (including violation of building codes); trial lasted two days and a jury found for the Vaughans (no fault).
- Plaintiff moved for JNOV/alter/amend or new trial; the trial court denied relief; plaintiff appealed raising multiple issues.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding several appellate issues waived for inadequate briefing and rejecting preserved challenges to evidence and counsel argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of surveillance video | Video was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial (portrayed plaintiff as well-off, driving fast) | Video was probative of plaintiff's claimed physical limitations and credibility | Admissible; trial court did not abuse discretion under Tenn. R. Evid. 401/403 |
| Closing argument ("protect Maury County") | Defense counsel improperly appealed to jury to "protect Maury County" and inflamed an all-white jury; racial undertone | Counsel's remarks framed jurors as decisionmakers for local standards; no racial comments were made | No reversible error; transcript did not contain the quoted inflammatory remark |
| Jury instruction on owner liability (notice requirement) | Trial instruction was erroneous (plaintiff argued broader owner responsibility) | Standard instruction requiring actual or constructive notice was correct | Issue waived for inadequate briefing; court declined to consider it on merits |
| Exclusion of expert testimony and county code evidence | Plaintiff argued exclusion deprived presentation of negligence per se and expert proof | Defendants relied on waiver and trial rulings | Waived: plaintiff failed to list these as issues on appeal per Tenn. R. App. P. 27; appellate court declined to review |
Key Cases Cited
- Hodge v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325 (Tenn. 2012) (explains importance of properly stating and briefing issues on appeal)
- Sneed v. Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility of Sup. Ct., 301 S.W.3d 603 (Tenn. 2010) (issues with undeveloped arguments are waived)
- State v. Davis, 466 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn. 2015) (standard of review for admissibility of evidence is abuse of discretion)
- West v. Shelby County Healthcare Corp., 459 S.W.3d 33 (Tenn. 2014) (addressed by plaintiff re: damages; court found argument pretermitted because no damages were awarded)