Harry Douglas McIntyre, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Clifford Balentine and East-West Motor Freight, Inc…

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court granted permission to appeal to decide whether to replace contributory negligence with comparative fault and whether the criminal presumption of intoxication is admissible in a civil case. The court abolished the all-or-nothing contributory negligence bar and adopted modified comparative fault (the '49 percent rule'), under which a plaintiff may recover so long as his negligence is less than the defendant's, with damages reduced in proportion to his share of fault. It further held that the criminal presumption of intoxication created by T.C.A. § 55-10-408(b) is admissible evidence in a civil case and that penal-statute violations are negligence per se subject to a proximate-cause limitation. Because the jury apportioned fault equally without proper instructions, the Court of Appeals judgment was reversed in part, affirmed in part, and the case remanded for a new trial.