A $4 million lawsuit has been filed in connection with extensive injuries suffered by a 13-year-old East Hamilton student when a car went out of control in East Ridge.
Nancy Tomanelli, mother of Daniel Christopher Tomanelli, is asking $3 million compensatory damages and $1 million punitive damages.
Attorney Hoyt Samples filed the suit in Circuit Court against Tymeshia Shanice Dixon.
The youth was struck by the Dixon car on Dec.
3.
He has since been moved to the Shepherd Center in Atlanta.
Here is the full complaint:
Nancy Tomanelli, individually and as parent and next friend of Daniel Christopher Tomanelli ("Daniel") and Daniel, a minor, state the following for their causes of action against Tymeshia Shanice Dixon ("Dixon"):
Plaintiffs are residents of Hamilton County, Tennessee, and have been at all times relevant to this controversy. Nancy Tomanelli is the mother of Daniel and has primary custody of Daniel. Tymeshia Shanice Dixon is a resident of Hamilton County, Tennessee, and has been at all times relevant to these proceedings.
Daniel was born on July 16, 2003, and was thirteen (13) years of age at the time of the accident in issue.
This claim arises out of an accident which occurred on December 3, 2016, at approximately 8:40 a.m. EST in East Ridge, Tennessee, near the intersection of Altamaha Street and Ringgold Road.
At the time of the accident, Dixon was driving a 2012 Chevrolet Malibu which she owned.
Dixon was proceeding in a generally westerly direction when she left the roadway, crossed a sidewalk and struck a vehicle owned by Donald Britton which was parked adjacent to a building located at 5345 Ringgold Road, East Ridge, Tennessee.
At the time of the collision, the Britton vehicle was entirely out of any lane of traffic, was completely across the sidewalk and was plainly visible. The weather was clear and the Britton vehicle was clearly visible.
In the process of exiting the Britton vehicle in which he had been an occupant, Daniel was savagely and viciously struck by the Dixon vehicle which was under the operation and control of Tymeshia Shanice Dixon.
Daniel was critically injured and was transported by ambulance to T.C. Thompson Children’s Hospital in Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee, where he spent more than three weeks in the Intensive Care Unit, before being transported to a specialty brain injury hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.
As a direct and proximate result of the accident in issue, Daniel sustained a massive head injury including a subdural hematoma which required substantial drainage. Daniel also had such severe injuries to his spleen that such organ had to be removed. Daniel also sustained a collapsed lung and significant bruising of his kidney. Daniel sustained a major fracture of his left clavicle and had significant injuries to his left arm and particularly elbow which required surgical repair. Daniel also had a right pelvic fracture and fractures in both of his hip sockets. Furthermore, Daniel had a fractured jaw, lost many of his front teeth and multiple facial fractures. In short, Daniel sustained significant and life threatening injuries to multiple areas of his body.
Daniel was transported from T.C. Thompson Children’s Hospital to Shepherd’s Center which is a spinal cord and brain injury rehabilitation hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, whose purpose is to assist people who have experienced catastrophic injuries.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-103 (Required Obedience To Traffic Laws), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-115 (Driving On Right Side Of Roadway), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-123 (Driving Within A Single Lane), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-152 (Violation Of Speed Limit), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-10-105 (Reckless Driving), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Upon information and belief, Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-199 (No Texting While Driving), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constituted a violation of T.C.A. §55-8-125 (Driving On Divided Highways), which violation constituted per se negligence, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages sustained by Plaintiffs, for which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon failed to keep a proper lookout and such negligence constituted a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs’ injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon failed to maintain an assured clear distance from the Britton vehicle, and such violation constituted negligence which was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs’ injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon operated her vehicle in a reckless fashion without due regard for the safety of others, and such actions and omissions constituted a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs’ injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon failed to operate her vehicle in such a way as to avoid colliding with the Britton vehicle, and such negligence was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon was driving too fast for conditions, which constitutes negligence which was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions and omissions constitute negligence through the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquiture, which negligence was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon drove her vehicle at a speed in excess of the statutory speed limit and at a speed which was greater than that which was reasonable and prudent under the conditions of travel, and such actions constitute negligence, which was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon failed to have due regard for the actual and potential hazards existing at or about the time of the accident in issue, and such failure was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon operated her vehicle at a time when she had actual knowledge that her conduct created an extreme degree of risk to others, and such conduct constitutes gross negligence, which gross negligence was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries and damages, for all of which the Defendant is liable.
Dixon’s actions constituted a conscious indifference for the safety of others which conscious indifference warrants the imposition of punitive damages, for which Dixon is liable.
As a direct and proximate result of Dixon’s actions and/or omissions as described above, Nancy Tomanelli brings this suit to recover for her loss of parental consortium as well as for all medical bills incurred as a result of Daniel’s injuries.
As a direct and proximate result of Dixon’s action and/or omissions as described above, Daniel brings this suit to recover for his mental and physical suffering.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray the following:
That summons and process be issued and that the Defendant be required to answer within the time required by law;
That Plaintiffs receive the sum of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) in compensatory damages as a result of the actions/omissions of the Defendant;
That Plaintiffs receive the sum of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in punitive damages as a result of Defendant’s actions/omissions;
That a jury of twelve persons be empaneled to hear all issues in this case;
That a summons be issued through the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance to State Auto Insurance Companies (policy number AGA1543366) (Donald Britton policy) with respect to an uninsured or underinsured motorist claim by Plaintiffs and the Donald Britton umbrella policy (number UGA 0000651);
That a summons be issued through the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance to All State Insurance Company (Nancy Tomanelli’s policy number 963833943) with respect to Plaintiffs’ uninsured or underinsured motorist claim.
That the court costs and discretionary costs in this case be taxed against the Defendant;
That Plaintiffs receive full and fair compensation for all property damage sustained by them; and
That Plaintiffs receive such other and further relief as to which they may be entitled.
SAMPLES, JENNINGS, CLEM & FIELDS, PLLC
By:_______________________________________
Hoyt O. Samples, BPR 6765
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
130 Jordan Drive
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37421
Telephone: 423-892-2006