G.C. ex rel. Johnson v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, LLC
829 F. Supp. 2d 609
M.D. Tenn.2011Background
- Two-year-old G.C. ingested pesticide (Terro Ant Killer II) in Wyndham Resort condo during a family vacation.
- Tubes of pesticide were present on nightstands; paramedics and ambulance were called to the scene.
- G.C. was monitored at the hospital; she developed a rash en route, with breathing difficulties per Johnson’s account.
- Defendants’ expert witness contends sodium borate is nontoxic in toddler-ingested amounts; no counterexpert testimony offered.
- Plaintiffs assert negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress; defendants remove to federal court on diversity grounds.
- The court grants in part and denies in part the defendants’ motion for summary judgment; NIED claim is dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Causation without expert testimony | G.C. symptoms shortly after ingestion show causation by pesticide. | Seger’s affidavit negates injury; expert needed to prove causation. | Causation shown; negligence claim survives. |
| Reasonableness of medical expenses | Medical costs were necessary and reasonable. | Need expert testimony to prove reasonableness. | Claim not dismissed; may proceed on record. |
| Negligent infliction of emotional distress | NIED should be viable against hotel for pesticide exposure. | NIED should be dismissed; no long-term harm shown. | NIED claim dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gass v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc., 558 F.3d 419 (6th Cir.2009) (no expert required where symptoms appear soon after exposure)
- Moldowan v. City of Waren, 578 F.3d 351 (6th Cir.2009) (summary judgment standard; burden-shifting framework)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment burden shifting)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (genuine issue of material fact must be present)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) (evidence must create reasonable inferences in plaintiff's favor)
- Giggers v. Memphis Hous. Auth., 277 S.W.3d 359 (Tenn.2009) (elements of negligence; duty, breach, causation, damages)
- Borner v. Autry, 284 S.W.3d 216 (Tenn.2009) (medical expenses must be shown to be reasonable and necessary)