College of Law Faculty Scholarship
Source Publication (e.g., journal title)
Tennessee Law Review
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
January 2016
Abstract
What must a defendant do to be granted summary judgment inTennessee? This question has given rise to a long, hotly contestedbattle over the proper role of summary judgment and, ultimately,who should bear the burden of producing evidence and when. Theevolution of Tennessee’s summary judgment standard—from theadoption of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure in 1971 to theTennessee Supreme Court’s most recent interpretation of Rule 56 in2015—is a story of competing visions of the benefits and burdensassociated with civil litigation. How much time should an aggrievedparty have to marshal evidence in support of its claim? How muchtime and money should an oppressed defendant have to expend inresisting a suit that may ultimately prove unfounded? Answers tothese questions have shaped the competing visions of summaryjudgment in Tennessee.This Article examines the development of Tennessee summaryjudgment law from its inception in 1971 to the present. It thenfocuses on the most recent summary judgment standard, adopted bythe Tennessee Supreme Court in Rye v. Women’s Care Center ofMemphis.1 Section I recounts the history of summary judgment inTennessee including the scholarly debate over whether Tennesseedid—or should—adopt the federal Celotex standard.2 Section II thenexamines Rye in detail. Section III discusses the aftermath of Rye,and suggests issues this case will likely raise for Tennessee courts inthe future.
Recommended Citation
Lyon, Matthew; Cornett, Judy; and Panter, T., "Comin' Through the Rye: A Requiem for the Tennessee Summary Judgment Standard" (2016). College of Law Faculty Scholarship. 201.
https://ir.law.utk.edu/utk_lawpubl/201