×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Dismissal of Tennessee Prisoner's Petition for Failure to Prosecute Reversed
In this case involving a prisoner's pro se petition for writ of certiorari, the Tennessee Court of Appeals held that the trial court improperly dismissed the petition for failure to appear and prosecute.
Eddie Williams, a prisoner in the Tennessee Department of Corrections (DOC), filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Morgan County Chancery Court on March 6, 2001 seeking review of a prison disciplinary action. The DOC moved to dismiss on grounds of improper venue and failure to state a claim. Williams filed a response. A trial was set for January 14, 2002 but Williams, who was still in prison, did not appear.
On January 15, 2002 the DOC moved for dismissal for failure to appear and prosecute. The motion was granted the same day. Williams appealed.
On appeal the DOC notified the Court of Appeals that Williams was in its custody on January 14, 2002 and that absent "a writ of habeas corpus or some other order commanding that he be brought to court," Williams was unable to appear for trial. The trial court apparently issued no such order. The notice further stated that "[i]n the interest of justice" the DOC believed that dismissal of Williams petition was improper and that "the case should be remanded to determine whether the motion to dismiss should be granted or writ should issue."
On January 31, 2003 the Court of Appeals agreed. The order of dismissal was vacated and the case remanded to the trial court for a ruling on William's petition and on the DOC's motion to dismiss. See: Williams v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, Tenn.Ct.App., Case No. E2002-00306-COA-R3-CV.
Eddie Williams, a prisoner in the Tennessee Department of Corrections (DOC), filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the Morgan County Chancery Court on March 6, 2001 seeking review of a prison disciplinary action. The DOC moved to dismiss on grounds of improper venue and failure to state a claim. Williams filed a response. A trial was set for January 14, 2002 but Williams, who was still in prison, did not appear.
On January 15, 2002 the DOC moved for dismissal for failure to appear and prosecute. The motion was granted the same day. Williams appealed.
On appeal the DOC notified the Court of Appeals that Williams was in its custody on January 14, 2002 and that absent "a writ of habeas corpus or some other order commanding that he be brought to court," Williams was unable to appear for trial. The trial court apparently issued no such order. The notice further stated that "[i]n the interest of justice" the DOC believed that dismissal of Williams petition was improper and that "the case should be remanded to determine whether the motion to dismiss should be granted or writ should issue."
On January 31, 2003 the Court of Appeals agreed. The order of dismissal was vacated and the case remanded to the trial court for a ruling on William's petition and on the DOC's motion to dismiss. See: Williams v. Tennessee Department of Corrections, Tenn.Ct.App., Case No. E2002-00306-COA-R3-CV.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Williams v. Tennessee Department of Corrections
| Year | 2003 |
|---|---|
| Cite | Tenn.Ct.App., Case No. E2002-00306-COA-R3-CV |
| Level | State Court of Appeals |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |