CompFox AI Summary
Pamela Smith, as conservator for Everett A. Smith, initiated a products liability and negligence lawsuit against Grumman-Olsen Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Sam Hill Automotive Repair, and Highland Plaza Exxon. The case, originally filed in Tennessee state court, was removed to federal court. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the one-year statute of limitations had expired since the alleged carbon monoxide exposure on February 24, 1993. Plaintiff countered that the statute was tolled because Smith was of unsound mind from the date of injury. The Court denied the summary judgment motions for Grumman-Olsen, General Motors, and Sam Hill Automotive, citing sufficient evidence to create a factual dispute regarding Smith's mental state. However, Highland Plaza Exxon's motion for summary judgment was granted due to a lack of evidence on causation. The Court proposed a separate trial to determine the statute of limitations issue.
Smith v. Grumman-Olsen Corp. is a workers' compensation case decided in District Court, E.D. Tennessee. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in District Court, E.D. Tennessee.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Pamela Smith, as conservator for Everett A. Smith, initiated a products liability and negligence lawsuit against Grumman-Olsen Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Sam Hill Automotive Repair, and Highland Plaza Exxon. The case, originally filed in Tennessee state court, was removed to federal court. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the one-year statute of limitations had expired since the alleged carbon monoxide exposure on February 24, 1993. Plaintiff countered that the statute was tolled because Smith was of "unsound mind" from the date of injury. The Court denied the summary judgment motions for Grumman-Olsen, General Motors, and Sam Hill Automotive, citing sufficient evidence to create a factual dispute regarding Smith's mental state. However, Highland Plaza Exxon's motion for summary judgment was granted due to a lack of evidence on causation. The Court proposed a separate trial to determine the statute of limitations issue.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.