2 Analyses of this statute by attorneys
A win for substance over form: Tennessee Supreme Court holds that Tennessee’s one-year savings statute applies to tolling agreements.
Daniel HorwitzDaniel A. HorwitzMarch 8, 2016[2] Decision at 6 (citing Clark v. Hoops, LP, 709 F. Supp. 2d 657, 669 (W.D. Tenn. 2010)).[3] Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-105. See also Rajvongs v. Wright, 432 S.W.3d 808, 811 (Tenn. 2013) (“The saving statute provides that if a timely filed action is dismissed without prejudice, a plaintiff may ‘commence a new action within one (1) year after’ the dismissal.”); Tenn. R. Civ. P. 41.01 (“Subject to the provisions of Rule 23.
Tennessee Supreme Court Should Correct Lower Courts’ Erroneous Interpretation of its Decision in Stevens v. Hickman, Restore Sanity to Health Care Liability Act Cases
Daniel HorwitzDaniel A. HorwitzJune 4, 2015[27]See Rajvongs v. Wright, 432 S.W.3d 808, 811 (Tenn. 2013) (holding that pursuant to Tennessee’s savings statute, “if a timely filed action is dismissed without prejudice, a plaintiff may ‘commence a new action within one (1) year after’ the dismissal.” (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-105(a) (1985))); Davis v. Ibach, No. W2013-02514-COA-R3-CV, 2014 WL 3368847, at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 9, 2014) (holding that “nothing in the statute governing certificates of good faith precludes a plaintiff from exercising the ‘free and unrestricted’ right to dismiss an action without prejudice provided in Tenn. R. Civ. P. 41.01.”).