Ronald Stephen Satterfield, Sr. v. Gary Long & Richard Smith ( 1999 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
RONALD STEPHEN SATTERFIELD, ) C/A NO. 03A01-9805-CV-00162
FILED
October 13, 1999
Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Appellate Court Clerk
SR., )
)
Plaintiff-Appellee, )
)
)
v. ) APPEAL AS OF RIGHT FROM THE
) KNOX COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
)
)
)
)
GARY LONG and )
RICHARD M. SMITH, )
) HONORABLE DALE C. WORKMAN,
Defendants-Appellants.) JUDGE
CONCURRING OPINION
I concur in the majority opinion authored by Judge
Goddard. I write separately to disassociate myself from the
following statement in the opinion: “It is
well-settled...that expert opinions must be based upon a
reasonable degree of certainty.” I adhere to the position
expressed by me in the case of Reel v. Crawley, C/A No.
03A01-9402-CV-00071, 1994 WL 399566 (Tenn.App. E.S., filed at
Page 1
Knoxville August 2, 1994) (Susano, concurring opinion). In
that case, I opined that an “expert’s testimony that the nexus
between an event and an injury is probable or, stated a
different way, more likely than not, is all that is or should
be required.” Having said this, I hasten to add that I agree
with the majority’s conclusion that Dr. Justice’s testimony
was speculative and that the trial court acted within its
discretion in refusing to allow it into evidence.
_____________________________
Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.
Page 2