Blair exception (Tennessee) · Go Syfert
← Tennessee issues

Blair exception in Tennessee

6 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Blair v. West Town Mallgreen
tenn · 2004 · cited in 2 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2004–2014
2 sentences

2014Creation of the Defective Condition The Parkers argue that the undisputed facts of this case place it within the first prong of the Blair analysis: “the condition was caused or created by the owner, operator, or his agent.” Id.

2014Creation of the Defective Condition The Parkers argue that the undisputed facts of this case place it within the first prong of the Blair analysis: “the condition was caused or created by the owner, operator, or his agent.” Id.

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
McIntyre v. Balentine green
tenn · 1992
2 sentences

2024The Tennessee Supreme Court decided Blair four years after Tennessee abrogated the doctrine of contributory negligence in favor of the modified comparative fault scheme adopted in McIntyre v. Ballentine, 833 S.W. 2d. 52 (Tenn. 1992).

2024The Tennessee Supreme Court decided Blair four years after Tennessee abrogated the doctrine of contributory negligence in favor of the modified comparative fault scheme adopted in McIntyre v. Ballentine, 833 S.W. 2d. 52 (Tenn. 1992).

12024–2024
Blair v. Campbell green
tenn · 1996
1 sentence

2007We applied the independent contractor rule to *300 defeat Blair’s claim because the contract between the parties to repair a leaky roof gave Blair sufficient notice that he might face danger in connection with the roof repair. 924 S.W.2d at 77 .

12007–2007
Means v. Ashby green
tennctapp · 2003
2 sentences

2005Id. at 58 .

2005Id. at 58 .

12005–2005
Johnson ex rel. Johnson v. Wilbourn green
tennctapp · 1989
1 sentence

2000In response the Norrises contend that “the doctrine of equitable estoppel would not apply to paternity actions, as they are entirely statutory in nature.” In support of this assertion they cite the case of Johnson By Johnson v. Wilbourn, 781 S.W.2d 857 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989), which refused to apply the doctrine in an adoption suit (at page 861): A case very much in point, in which the chancellor likewise erred in decreeing an adoption based upon equitable maxims, is St.

12000–2000

Where else courts name it

PA 6 (1978–2022) TN 6 (2000–2024) MT 4 (2004–2009) CA 3 (2007–2022) TX 3 (2004–2025) SC 3 (2004–2015) OH 2 (2013–2021) DC 2 (1997–1997) WA 2 (2017–2018) NE 2 (2009–2018)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check