Close

§47.8 Common Knowledge Exception

The Case : Baldwin v. Knight, 569 S.W.2d 450 (Tenn. 1978).

The Basic Facts : Plaintiff sought treatment at an emergency room after a piece of wire which was struck by the lawnmower he had been operating struck him in the leg and became embedded. The Defendant emergency room physician failed to discover the wire in Plaintiff's leg. Plaintiff sued an emergency room physician after the physician failed to discover a wire embedded in his leg as a result of a lawnmower accident.

The Bottom Line:

  • "Where the act of alleged malpractice lies within the common knowledge of a layman, expert testimony is not required. Bowman v. Henard, [547 S.W.2d 527 (Tenn. 1977)]; Rural Educ. Ass'n. v. Bush, [298 S.W.2d 761 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1956)]; Vaughn v. Shelton, [514 S.W.2d 870 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1974)] where it was held that expert medical evidence was not required to prove that if both of the fallopian tubes are severed and closed, the patient would thereby be rendered immune from pregnancy." 569 S.W.2d at 456.
  • "Floyd v. Walls, [168 S.W.2d 602 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1942)]; and Gresham v. Ford, [241 S.W.2d 408 (Tenn. 1951)], are relied upon by defendants as requiring expert testimony to determine whether or not a doctor's decision not to x-ray constitutes malpractice. Those cases are inapposite for the reason that this case does not involve the alleged negligent act of failure to x-ray. The alleged negligent act here was the failure to ascertain, from history and inspection, that the wound was caused by a flying object and possibly contained a foreign body. All the experts agreed that if the true facts had been ascertained, x-rays were indicated and would have been taken." Id.

Other Sources of Note: Runnells v. Rogers, 596 S.W.2d 87 (Tenn. 1980) (holding that in factual circumstances very similar to Baldwin it was within common knowledge that wire embedded in plaintiff's foot should have been taken out by the physician and that expert testimony was not necessary for Plaintiff to prevail); Seavers v. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge, 9 S.W.3d 86, 92 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999) (court references several cases where the common knowledge exception was applied).


Client Reviews
★★★★★
Everything was great. You guys are a great representative. I was satisfied with everything. Truly appreciate John Day and his hard-working staff. Jamar Gibson
★★★★★
We thought that you did an excellent job in representing us in our lawsuit. We would recommend you to anyone. Mitch Deese
★★★★★
The Law Offices of John Day, P.C. is, without a doubt, the best in Nashville! They treated me with the utmost respect and tended to my every need. No question went unanswered. I was always kept informed of every step in the process. I received phenomenal results; I couldn't ask for more. I would definitely hire The Law Offices of John Day, P.C. again. Anthony Santiago
★★★★★
I would definitely recommend to anyone to hire John Day's law firm because everyone was helpful, made everything clear and got the job done. I am satisfied with how my case was handled. June Keomahavong
★★★★★
It's been a long battle but this firm has been very efficient and has done a remarkable job for me! I highly recommend them to anyone needing legal assistance. Everyone has always been very kind and kept me informed of all actions promptly. Linda Bush
★★★★★
I had a great experience with the Law Offices of John Day. The staff was very accommodating, and my phone calls/emails were always responded to in a timely manner. They made the entire process very easy and stress-free for me, and I had confidence that my case was in good hands. I am very happy with the results, and I highly recommend! Casey Hutchinson
Contact Us
Live Chat