Tennessee Supreme Court

Marvin McCarley and Ellyse McCarley, Plaintiffs/appellants v. West Quality Food Service D/b/a Kentucky Fried…

January 5, 19981998 Tenn. LEXIS 1

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed summary judgment for Kentucky Fried Chicken in a food poisoning case, holding that KFC failed to carry its initial summary judgment burden of negating an essential element of the McCarleys' negligence claim, so the plaintiffs' burden of production was never triggered. The court held that causation in negligent food contamination cases may be established by expert testimony alone or through a combination of expert and lay testimony, and that an expert's inability to exclude every alternative contamination source affects weight rather than admissibility. Applying those principles, the court found that the treating physician's testimony identifying chicken as the leading potential source of Campylobacter, combined with lay testimony about the chicken's odor, appearance and taste, created a genuine issue of material fact for the jury.

Holding

  • Whether the Court of Appeals properly applied the summary judgment standard and burden-shifting analysis.. No. The appellate court erred by bypassing the movant's initial burden and addressing only the sufficiency of the non-moving parties' opposing evidence; because KFC failed to negate a basis for the McCarleys' claim, the McCarleys' burden of production was never triggered and summary judgment should not have been granted.
  • What type and quantum of proof establishes causation in negligent food poisoning cases at the summary judgment stage.. Causation in negligent food contamination cases need not be established solely by expert testimony; it may be established by either expert testimony or through a combination of both expert and lay testimony.
  • Whether a treating physician's testimony is inadmissible speculation because he cannot exclude all other possible sources of contamination.. No. An expert's inability to exclude all other possible sources of contamination affects the weight of the testimony, not its admissibility; weight and credibility are issues for the jury.
  • Whether the McCarleys' combined expert and lay proof created a genuine issue of material fact on causation.. Yes. Dr. Young's testimony that Mr. McCarley suffered a Campylobacter illness consistent with improperly cooked poultry, with chicken at the top of the list of possible sources, combined with Mrs. McCarley's testimony that the chicken smelled funny, looked strange and didn't taste right, certainly supports an inference that the chicken was the source of the Campylobacter causing the illness; resolution of these issues is for the jury and inappropriate for summary dismissal.

Docket 02S01-9610-CV-00085

Cited authorities

  • Rule 56.06

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF