IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

 Submitted on Briefs, August 2, 2001

MOHAMED F. ALI, M.D., v. FREDIA MOORE (DUGGER) and DANNY

(PAT) STORY

Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Washington County

No. 19785 Hon. Thomas J. Seeley, Jr., Circuit Judge

FILED AUGUST 21, 2001

No. E2000-02534-COA-R3-CV

The Trial Court held the statute of limitations had run on plaintiff’s Complaint. On appeal, we

dismiss the appeal as not being timely filed.

Tenn. R. App. P.3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed.

HERSCHEL PICKENS FRANKS, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which CHARLES D. SUSANO,

JR., J., and D. MICHAEL SWINEY, J., joined.

Mohamed F. Ali, Mountain City, Tennessee, pro se.

Clifton Corker, Johnson City, Tennessee, for Appellee, Fredia Moore (Dugger).

OPINION

In this action plaintiff filed notice of appeal on September 26, 2000, appealing the

Trial Court’s “Order filed August 25, 2000.” The Order appealed from states in its entirety:

This action was finally dismissed by Order dated December 9, 1999. On February

24,2000, the Court determined that plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside, Alter or Amend,

was frivolous and without merit. The proper avenue for plaintiff to take to further

pursue his action is by appeal. The clerk is directed to NOT file any pleading, motion
-2-

or proposed order submitted by plaintiff, except a Notice of Appeal, unless plaintiff

pays in full all court costs, including this Order, incurred after February 24, 2000.

Further, due to the unusual circumstances surrounding plaintiff and the defendant,

Fredia Moore (Dugger), the clerk’s office shall not furnish plaintiff with Dugger’s

current address, and any notation of it in the file shall be deleted. The clerk’s office

shall serve Dugger with copies of any documents required to be served upon her.

The record establishes that plaintiff first sued the defendant on October 22, 1993, and

the case was non-suited on April 30, 1997. On April 29, 1998, plaintiff refiled his complaint against

the defendant and took a voluntary non-suit on April 30, 1998. Then on April 28, 1999, he filed his

complaint against defendant. In an Order dated December 9, 1999, the Trial Court noted that

plaintiff’s complaint filed for the third time was not “within one year of the first non-suit” and

dismissed the action with prejudice. 

The face of the record establishes that the time for filing another complaint had

expired long before plaintiff filed his third complaint. See Tenn. Code Ann. §28-1-105. 

After the Court’s dismissal of the Complaint on December 9, 1999, plaintiff filed a

Motion on January 7, 2000 alleging that he had followed the advice of his attorney, who was

appointed by the Court, within which to re-file the action. On February 24, 2000, the Court denied

this Motion and found the action was frivolous and without merit. However, plaintiff continued to

file motions which he styled as Rule 59, Tenn. R. Civ. P. motions, and while the Court entered

Orders denying the motions and found them to be frivolous and without merit, the Notice of Appeal

was not timely filed. Moreover, it would not bring before this Court the issues which the plaintiff

attempts to raise. The Judgment on plaintiff’s Complaint became final on February 24, 2000, and

no timely appeal was perfected. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed with the cost of the

cause assessed to plaintiff.

_________________________

HERSCHEL PICKENS FRANKS, J.