Patricia Albright v. Lloyd A. Button, et al. - Concurring

Case Number
E2003-015910COA-R3-CV - F

While I concur with the majority to reverse the decision of the Trial Court and to dismiss Ms. Albright’s Complaint, I write separately to express my disagreement with the majority’s decision to take judicial notice of certain facts. I agree completely with the majority’s discussion of what the law is as to summary judgment, interpretation of a will, conditional bequests, and judicial notice. However, I cannot agree with the majority that this Court can take judicial notice that e]ssentially all of the services recited as conditions in the Deceased’s will are services that would be rendered by a hospital such as Parkwest for individuals admitted to the hospital on an inpatient bases.” While I suspect that such is true, I cannot say that such a “fact” is “(1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Tenn. R. Evid. 201(b). This being so, I cannot agree that this is a “fact” which is appropriate for judicial notice.

Authoring Judge
Judge D. Michael Swiney
Originating Judge
Judge William H. Russell
Case Name
Patricia Albright v. Lloyd A. Button, et al. - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version