Tennessee Supreme Court: Love at First Cite

“The quality of mercy is not strain’d, it dropeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath….”

The Merchant of Venice IV, 1

          The Tennessee Supreme Court has reinforced Tennessee’s longstanding policy favoring resolution of cases on the merits.

          Michael DiNovo brought a tort action seeking compensation for injuries incurred in an explosion at a biodiesel facility owned by Southern Energy Company, Inc. The Davidson County Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of Southern on the grounds that DiNovo had entered into a workers’ compensation settlement agreement, which provided him an exclusive remedy for his injuries and estopped him from claiming that he was an independent contractor. DiNovo appealed, arguing that genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether Southern had fraudulently induced him into thinking he was an employee, rather than an independent contractor.

             The Court of Appeals declined to consider DiNovo’s arguments on the merits because he had not repeated record citations, used in his statements of the case and facts, in the argument section of his brief. The appellate court held that DiNovo had, therefore, waived the issue that Southern had defrauded him.

            The Supreme Court granted DiNovo an appeal and held that the Court of Appeals had improperly exercised its discretion by prioritizing technical deficiency over arguments on the merits. The Court of Appeals’ decision was vacated, and the case was remanded for consideration on the merits.

          While appellate practitioners should strive to adhere to all technicalities regarding their briefs, the Tennessee Supreme Court has made it clear that an argument on the merits is worth love at first cite.