 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Huddleston v. O'Deneal3/19/2002
On May 16, 2000, plaintiff, Jerry Huddleston, filed a complaint for legal malpractice in the Circuit Court of Madison County, Tennessee against the defendant, Ramsdale O'Deneal, a licensed attorney practicing in the State of Tennessee. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff paid the defendant $100.00 to file a lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiff against a police officer for damages suffered on June 11, 1997, when the officer, in the performance of his official duties, injured the plaintiff with his police vehicle. The complaint further alleges that on June 11, 1998, defendant filed a lawsuit on behalf of plaintiff against the police officer in the General Sessions Court of Gibson County, Tennessee.
According to the complaint, on June 27, 1998, the police officer filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the action against him is governed by the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-101 (2000), et seq., which provides that no claim may be brought against the police officer and that original exclusive jurisdiction is in the Circuit Court of Gibson County, Tennessee, not the General Sessions Court. The complaint avers that on July 22, 1998, the defendant voluntarily dismissed the general sessions suit and subsequently advised the plaintiff that he had until July 22, 1999 to bring his cause of action. The complaint further avers that the plaintiff re-filed his action pro-se in the Circuit Court of Gibson County on or about July 22, 1999, but "due to confusion on the parts of the Clerks of the General Sessions and Circuit Courts, the Complaint was not [actually] filed until November 14, 1999. . . ." According to the complaint, the Circuit Court of Gibson County, Tennessee dismissed the plaintiff's claim upon the filing of a motion for summary judgment by the defendants in the personal injury action because the plaintiff's claim was time-barred pursuant to the applicable statute of limitations, Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-20-305(b) (2000).
The plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the "Defendant was under a duty to provide competent legal service and advice to Plaintiff after accepting monetary consideration from Plaintiff for representation of Plaintiff . . . . he deliberate actions and negligent actions were so grossly deficient that Plaintiff's action(s) was dismissed before any determination of the merits of the claim was made. . . ." The complaint seeks $100 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages, as well as other general relief.
On March 28, 2001, a non-jury trial was held and apparently it was stated from the bench that judgment would be entered for the plaintiff in the amount of $100.00 in compensatory damages and plaintiff's claim for punitive damages would be dismissed. The ruling was memorialized by an order entered April 11, 2001. On April 5, 2001, after the trial, the Plaintiff filed a "Motion to Amend TRCP Rule 38, Motion for a Trial by Jury" asking the trial court to grant him a jury trial. Furthermore, on May 22, 2001, the plaintiff filed a "Motion for Speedy Ruling or Permission to Appeal" asking the trial court to provide a speedy ruling on the pending motions filed before the court or grant the plaintiff permission to appeal. By order entered and filed on May 24, 2001, the trial court denied both of the plaintiff's motions because they were filed after the non-jury trial and therefore, not timely filed. Plaintiff has appealed and presents the following issue for review as stated in his brief:
Whether the trial court erred in denying appellant a jury trial to determine the extent of liability of appellee and award monetary damage commensurate with harm done.
The defendant phrases the issue for
Page 1 2 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|