1 Rule 10 (Court of Appeals). Memorandum Opinion . -- (b) The cour t, with concurrence of all judges participating in the case, may affirm, reverse or modify the actions of the trial court by memorandum opinion when a formal opinion would have no precedential value. When a case is decided by memorandum opinion it shall be designated “MEMORANDUM OPINION,” shall not be published, and shall not be cited or relied on for any reason in a subsequent unrelated case. 

# FILED
March 26, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE,

AT JACKSON

_________________________________________________________________ CHARLES E. DORSE II, ) Shelby County Chancery C

ourt ) No. 109600-3 Plaintiff/Appellant ) ) App. No. 02A01-9712-CH-00315 ) VS. ) HON. D. J. ALI SSANDRATOS, ) CHANCELLO

R ) MARTIN R. KRIGER, ) AFFIRMED AND REMANDED ) Defendant/Appellee. ) ) OPINION FIL

ED: Charles E. Dorse II

, Pro Se Martin R. Kriger,Memphis, Tennessee for Defendant/Appellee.

______________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OP

INION 1

______________________________________________________________________________ Farmer, J.

Charles E. Dorse II appeals from the order of the trial court dismissing his complaint for failure to file within

the applicable statute of limitations. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is an inmate in custody

of the Tennessee Department of Correction. The defendant, Martin Kriger, is a n at tor ney w ho w as ap poi nte d to repr esen t Pl ain tif f in a cri min al a cti on i n Sh elb y Cou nty.

Thecomplaint is styled State Tort Claim Complaint for a Violation of Civil Rights. Thegravamen of th

e compla int is that t

he defendant fa

iled to notify

the plaintiff that

, after his conviction, the plaintiff received an adverse decision in the Court of Criminal Appeals and that the defendant failed to either file, or advise Plainti ff of his right to file, a timely application for permission to appealto the Tennessee Supreme Court pursuant to Rule 11 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is a suit for legal malpractice.2 The rule has been amended to extend the time for filing to within sixty days a fter the entry of the

judgment of the in

termediate appe

llate court. Accordingto the complaint, Pl aintiff was notified by the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals that that court had released its opinion on April 1, 1992 and that his attorney did not fil e a R ule 11 a ppl ica tio n wi thi n th irt y days 2 of that date.

Actions against attorneys for legal malpractice shall be commenced within oneyear after the cause of action accrued. T.C.A. § 28-3-104. A suit may be brou ght mo re than one year after the injury oc

curs, provided it

is brought within one year after it is discove

red or, in the exer

cise of reasonable care and diligence, should have been discovered. Gosnell v. Ashland Chem., Inc. , 674 S.W.2d 737 (Te n n. App. 1984). The plaintiff alleges in his complaint that he was advised by the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals on June 23, 1993 that an adverse decision had been rendered by that co urt on April 1, 1992 and that his attorney had failed to file a timely a pplication for permission to appealwith the Supreme Court. This complaint was filed June 6, 1997. Therefore,
we co nclude that the trial court was correct in dismissing the complaint for failure to commen c e within the applicable statute of limitations. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed and the costs of this appeal are t

axed to the appell

a nt, Charles E. Dor

se II for which execution ma

y issue if
nece ssa ry.

____________________________________ FARMER

, J.

______________________________ CRAWFORD, P.J., W.S. (Conc urs)

______________________________ LILL ARD, J. (Concurs)