Cynthia E. Yebuah v. Center For Urological Treatment, PLC - Dissenting

Citation:

Court: Tennessee Supreme Court · Filed: 2021-06-02 · Docket: M2018-01652-SC-R11-CV
Published
Impact Score: 0/100 — Low impact: This case is narrowly focused with minimal precedential value.

Case Overview

Cynthia E. Yebuah v. Center For Urological Treatment, PLC - Dissenting is a court opinion from the Tennessee Supreme Court, filed on 2021-06-02 (Docket No. M2018-01652-SC-R11-CV).

Precedential Status: Published. This opinion may be cited as authority in future cases.

CaseLawBrief is currently processing this opinion through our AI enrichment pipeline to generate a comprehensive plain-English summary, key holdings analysis, entity extraction, and practical legal insights. The full analysis will include multiple perspectives for legal practitioners, students, and the general public.

AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

Court Syllabus

This case illustrates how the damages cap statute, Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-39-102, deprives injured plaintiffs of fair compensation by arbitrarily limiting their awards for noneconomic damages. Cynthia Yebuah and her husband, Eric Yebuah, suffered noneconomic damages because of the carelessness of Mrs. Yebuah's surgeon. Based on the evidence at trial, a jury awarded Mrs. Yebuah more than $750,000 in noneconomic damages for her pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life and awarded Mr. Yebuah less than $750,000 for his loss of consortium. The issue here is whether the trial court must apply the $750,000 statutory cap on noneconomic damages separately to each of the Yebuahs' awards or to the combined total of their awards. If the cap is applied separately to each award, the trial court must slash the jury's verdict to Mrs. Yebuah by 81% and allow Mr. Yebuah to recover all of the damages the jury awarded him. If the cap is applied to the combined total of the awards, then the trial court must cut the total award to the Yebuahs by 83%. Neither application can withstand constitutional scrutiny. I decline to choose between these two alternatives both are unconstitutional violations of the Yebuahs' right to trial by jury. See McClay v. Airport Mgmt. Servs., LLC, 596 S.W.3d 686, 701–09 (Tenn. 2020) (Lee, J., dissenting).

Case Details

Case NameCynthia E. Yebuah v. Center For Urological Treatment, PLC - Dissenting
Citation
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
Date Filed2021-06-02
Docket NumberM2018-01652-SC-R11-CV
Precedential StatusPublished
Impact Score0 / 100
Jurisdictiontn

Related Legal Resources

Tennessee Supreme Court Opinions tn Jurisdiction Home Search Cases Is It Legal? 2021 Cases All Courts All Topics States Rankings

About This Analysis

This AI-generated analysis of Cynthia E. Yebuah v. Center For Urological Treatment, PLC - Dissenting was produced by CaseLawBrief to help legal professionals, researchers, students, and the general public understand this court opinion in plain English.

CaseLawBrief aggregates court opinions from CourtListener, a project of the Free Law Project, and enriches them with AI-powered analysis. Our goal is to make the law more accessible and understandable to everyone, regardless of their legal background.

AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

Related Cases

Other opinions from the Tennessee Supreme Court: