Tenn. R. Civ. Pro. 12.02(6) is a mechanism that can be used by a defendant to seek dismissal of a complaint without the need to file an answer or otherwise defend the case.
Vandergrif v. Erlanger Health Systems, No. E2022-00706-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2023) states no new law on the subject but does give us a quick reminder on the court’s responsibilities in ruling on a 12.02(6) motion:
A Rule 12.02(6) motion challenges only the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not the strength of the plaintiff’s proof or evidence. Webb v. Nashville Area Habitat for Human., Inc., 346 S.W.3d 422, 426 (Tenn. 2011) (citing Highwoods Props., Inc. v. City of Memphis, 297 S.W.3d 695, 700 (Tenn. 2009)). In considering a motion to dismiss, courts
“must construe the complaint liberally, presuming all factual allegations to be true and giving the plaintiff the benefit of all reasonable inferences.” Id. (citing Tigg v. Pirelli Tire Corp., 232 S.W.3d 28, 31-32 (Tenn. 2007)).
Id. at *4.
Thus, the burden is on the plaintiff to set forth in the complaint allegations of fact state a claim upon which may be granted. That means the plaintiff must understand the elements of the cause(s) of action set forth in the complaint, gather the relevant facts, and plead facts that support each element of the cause of action. Plaintiff must also plead facts that establish that the claim was filed within the applicable statute of limitations. In tort cases, this means pleading when the cause of action arose. On the statute of limitations issue, the reviewing court will assume that the allegation concerning the date of the incident is true, look at the court record to determine the date the action was filed, and will then be in the position to determine the action was timely filed.