ÿWPCY Ó‹‚ç:ÖÄb›óÅAH—}ؽjBH‰r,{MØ”ðŸÍ|oѳb@(¼LøÒ1-ZVHM%°Ö¨‹Ê¼ŸÏjàøH™ ú‰#šÅä§âëN°aŒM”…Ö·h–-kûñ”É—z­+clª’æ8H} íq3äHßzÞ¾ ÝéÛ «ï$ýö§—À§ÐáñHº, ÇV‡ý}ï„GŽGÕô­gŒê[C?&ßõÑÉÍ ‚þ½1>]DȨŸ i»×.‰·ñPqùØÅ r{ѬáG;ÂIºžTâ©ëoÇ„°wR¶g*_òÝÀ“V¡îú’5Øé$ìkÔ"«·ÅÔ"ŠiX"ïÉÖqì=ÙßïVÏ;MFØä³PS`#!@UNa %¯ 0éµwž 4¢ ¶ Å NÍ Ï ^ l x mz 0%‘ 0D¶ »ú &µ‡ÛbAj]« AQrYU:ËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËËË BÆ" 0ýè 0ýå 0Dââ D3&˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX0¹V$¡legalÒ°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€XUXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑtpO'3|x “Ô_ÔÑ\@R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñòò2€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„20„307.–rS'L ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(Õ(3ͪ$¤¤Ý ƒV!ÝÒ°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€XvmXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ±Ô_Ôòò3€óóAction€under€the€GTLA€must€be€commenced€within€twelve€(12)€months€after€the€cause€ofÐ Ü Ðaction€arises.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-20-305(b) Ô_Ôòò4óó€Although€the€legislature€has€extended€Ô_ÔGTLAÔ_Ô€jurisdiction€to€General€Sessions€Court€concurrentÐ Ü Ðwith€Circuit€Court€in€counties€with€a€population€of€more€than€600,000,€Ô_ÔHamblenÔ_Ô€County,€whereÐ Èì Ðthis€cause€of€action€arose,€under€the€most€recent€Census€Bureau€figures€falls€far€short€of€theÐ ´Ø Ðstatutory€population€requirement.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€29„20„305,€307;€Tablesòò€óóVol.€at€1013. }Ô_Ôòò5óó€ð ðIf€the€person€entitled€to€commence€an€action€is,€at€the€time€the€cause€of€action€accrued,€eitherÐ Ü Ðwithin€the€age€of€eighteen€(18)€years,€or€of€unsound€mind,€such€person,€or€his€representatives€andÐ Èì Ðprivies,€as€the€case€may€be,€may€commence€the€action,€after€the€removal€of€such€disability,Ð ´Ø  Ðwithin€the€time€of€limitation€for€the€particular€cause€of€action,€unless€it€exceed€three€(3)€years,Ð Ü Ðand€in€that€case€within€three€(3)€years€from€the€removal€of€such€disability.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððòòÐ Èì Ðóó28-1-106.  7Ô_Ôòò6óó€ð ðThe€court,€before€holding€a€governmental€entity€liable€for€damages,€must€first€determine€thatÐ Ü Ðthe€employee's€or€employees'€act€or€acts€were€negligent€and€the€proximate€cause€of€plaintiff'sÐ Èì Ðinjury,€that€the€employee€or€employees€acted€within€the€scope€of€their€employment€and€that€noneÐ ´Ø Ðof€the€exceptions€listed€in€ðð€29-20-205€are€applicable€to€the€facts€before€the€court.ðð€Tenn.€CodeòòÐ  Ä ÐóóAnnòò.€óóðð€29-20-310(a).Ð Œ ° ÐÌà  à€ SÔ_Ôòò1óó€ð ðThe€circuit€courts€shall€have€exclusive€original€jurisdiction€over€any€action€brought€under€thisÐ Ü Ðchapter€and€shall€hear€and€decide€such€suits€without€the€intervention€of€a€jury,€except€asÐ Èì Ðotherwise€provided€in€ðð€29-20-313(b);€.€.€..ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-20-307.Z[\]_Cþÿ<<Cÿÿ hÝ ƒ[Š0"ÝÔ€XvmXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€XÐèXXXvmÔÔ€è[(çXXÐèÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€‰çè[(ÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€18,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAµÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(Õ3Š0$¢¢Ý ƒV!ÝÒ°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€XvmXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  Ý(Õ3Š0$££Ý ƒV!ÝÒ°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€XvmXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óYYYY'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒV!ÝÒ°ÒÒÀ°ÒÔ€XvmXXXÔÓÓÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑܰÑÑܰÑÒ°ÒÒ°ÀÒÓÓÑ8€vmXXdìdÈ8Ñßx€_B2.jzIÿó `€€@ÿEáÏ” tt¨¬ $ xßÔ_Ôà@  ìàò òÔ‡¼¯}»XXvmÔà@@† † ìàÔ#†XvmX»¼¯}#ÔÔ‡¼¯}»XXvmÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ Ü Ðà@cc$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌÔ#†XvmX»¼¯}W#Ôó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àÌÌÌÌÌCHERYL€GREEN,€individually,à h àà À à)à  àNO.€03A1„9903„CV„00084Ð   Ä Ðand€on€behalf€of€SEAN€ENIX,à h àà À à)Ð Œ ° Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à  àà h àà À à)à0  àAppeal€As€Of€Right€FromÐdˆ (#(# Ðv.à  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHAMBLEN€COUNTY€CIRCUIT€COURTÐ Pt  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌHAMBLEN€COUNTY€BOARD€OFà h àà À à)Ð (L  ÐEDUCATION€and€LESLIE€BROOKS,à À à)Ð 8  Ðà  àDefendants/Appellees.à h àà À à)à  àHON.€JOHN€K.€WILSONÐ $ ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellant:à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àFor€the€Appellee:Ð t˜ Ðó óóóMichael€C.€Murphy€à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJanet€L.€HoganÐ `„ ÐMorristownà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àKnoxvilleÐ Lp ÐÌÌÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PART,€ÌAND€REMANDEDà ¸ àà  àà0 h àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àà0p(#(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#àSwiney,€J.ÐÔ!ø (# (# ÐÌÌÌÌà@ëë'ìàò òòòÔ‡¼¯}»XXvmÔOPINIONÔ#†XvmX»¼¯} #ԈРp&” # Ðóóó óÌÌÓÓà  àà ` àThis€is€an€appeal€from€the€Trial€Courtððs€grant€of€Defendantsðð/Appelleesðð€motion€toÏdismiss€a€negligence€suit€arising€from€an€injury€to€a€student€in€a€public€school€gym€class,€where€suitÏwas€originally€filed€in€Hamblen€County€General€Sessions€Court€and€ð ðtransferredðð€by€the€GeneralÏSessions€Judge€to€Hamblen€County€Circuit€Court€under€the€exclusive€jurisdiction€provision€of€theÏTennessee€Governmental€Tort€Liability€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ðð€29„20„101€òòet€seq.óó€€Upon€motion€ofÐ ¼0à*. ÐDefendants,€the€Circuit€Court€found€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Cheryl€Green€barred€by€operation€of€theÏone€year€statute€of€limitations,€and€the€Defendants€immune€to€tort€negligence€claims€of€minorÏPlaintiff€Sean€Enix€under€Tenn€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„20„205€as€discretionary€functions.€€For€the€reasonsÏstated€herein,€the€Order€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed€dismissing€Plaintiff€Greenððs€claims,€reversedÐ 8@26 Ðas€to€Plaintiff€Sean€Enixððs€claims,€and€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€for€further€proceedings€consistentÏwith€this€Opinion€on€the€claims€of€Sean€Ô_ÔEnixÔ_Ô.Ð ´Ø ÐÓÁ Ó€Ìò òÓ  ÓòòBACKGROUNDóóó óÐ x œ ÐÓ:ÓÌÓÓà  àà ` àAn€11„year€old€student,€Sean€Enix,€was€injured€during€gym€class€at€a€HamblenÐ P t ÐCounty€elementary€school€on€May€14,€1997.€€A€negligence€action€naming€Hamblen€County€BoardÐ (L  Ðof€Education/Hamblen€County€Department€of€Education€and€Leslie€Brooks,€the€gym€teacher,€asÐ $  Ðdefendants€was€filed€in€Hamblen€County€General€Sessions€Court€May€13,€1998.€€Plaintiffs,€Enix€andÐ Øü  Ðhis€mother,€Cheryl€Green,€sought€in€the€Sessions€Court€ð ðas€a€result€on€May€14,€1997,€damages€(andÐ °Ô  Ðmedical€bills)€as€a€result€of€broken€elbow€of€Sean€Enix€due€to€negligence€of€Hamblen€County€BoardÐ ˆ¬ Ðof€Education/Hamblen€Co.€Dept.€Of€Education,€and€employee€Leslie€Brooks,€such€as€having€SeanÐ `„ Ðcompete€inside€a€closed€gym€with€no€wall€protection€padding€by€spinning€until€he€got€dizzy€and€thenÐ 8\ Ðrunning,€at€which€time€he€hit€the€wall,€breaking€his€elbow:€and€for€loss€of€companionship€of€theÐ 4 Ðmother€of€her€son.ððÐ è  ÐÓÓÓÓà  àà ` àThe€parties€filed€with€the€Sessions€Court€on€July€1,€1998€a€Stipulation€of€admissibilityÐ Àä Ðof€medical€bills€related€to€the€injury€as€reasonable€and€necessary.€€Following€an€òòin€cameraóó€hearingÐ ˜ ¼ Ðon€July€6,€1998,€an€ð ðOrder€of€Transferðð€was€issued€by€the€Sessions€Court€Judge€on€July€17,€1998,Ð p"” Ðstating€that€the€matter€ð ðshall€be€transferred€from€General€Sessions€Court€for€lack€of€subject€matterÐ H$l! Ðjurisdiction,€to€Circuit€Court€of€Hamblen€County.€€The€Defendants€have€agreed€to€the€transfer€on€theÐ  &D # Ðcondition€that€any€defenses€related€to€General€Sessions€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€transfer€and/orÐ ø'"% Ðthe€statute€of€limitations€defenses€are€specifically€preserved€.€.€..ððÐ Ð)ô#' ÐÓìÓÓÓà  àà ` àDefendants€filed€a€Jury€Demand€in€the€Hamblen€County€Circuit€Court€referencingÐ ¨+Ì%) Ðthe€Order€of€Transfer€on€July€27,€1998.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Plaintiffs€filed€an€Amended€Complaint€in€Circuit€Court€JulyÐ €-¤'+ Ð28,€1998,€naming€the€same€parties€as€in€the€General€Sessions€warrant,€and€more€fully€stating€theirÐ X/|)- Ðclaims€relating€to€the€conduct€and€occurrence€on€the€same€date€as€set€forth€in€the€General€SessionsÐ 01T+/ ÐCourt€warrant.Ð 3,-1 ÐÓ`ÓÓÓà  àà ` àDefendants€filed€an€Answer€to€Amended€Complaint€on€August€29,€1998,€admittingÐ Ü Ðthat€Defendant€Leslie€Brooks€was€a€teacher€at€a€Hamblen€County€Board€of€Education€school€on€theÐ ´Ø Ðdate€in€question,€that€Plaintiff€Sean€Enix€did€break€his€arm€during€gym€class,€denying€all€allegationsÐ Œ ° Ðof€negligence,€and€specifically€denying€any€breach€of€duty€of€care€to€Plaintiff€Enix.€€DefendantsÐ d ˆ Ðasserted€comparative€negligence,€discretionary€function€immunity€under€the€TennesseeÐ < ` ÐGovernmental€Tort€Liability€Act€(Ô_ÔGTLAÔ_Ô),€and€averred€insufficient€knowledge€concerning€theÐ 8  Ðinjuries€of€Plaintiff€Enix€and€damages€alleged€by€Plaintiff€Green.€€Defendants€also€requò òó óested€that€theÐ ì  Ðpunitive€damages€demand€be€stricken€from€the€Amended€Complaint,€and€reasserted€their€JuryÐ Äè  ÐDemand.Ð œÀ ÐÓáÓÓÓà  àà ` àDefendants€filed€a€Motion€to€Dismiss€pursuant€to€Rule€12€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ t˜ ÐCivil€Procedure€and€supporting€Memorandum€of€Law€on€September€9,€1998.€€The€Motion€assertedÐ Lp Ðthat€the€filing€in€Sessions€Court€was€ineffective€to€preserve€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Green€under€theÐ $H Ðone„year€statute€of€limitations€because€the€Sessions€Court€lacked€subject€matter€jurisdiction€underÐ ü  Ðthe€GTLA€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„20„307.Ð Ôø ÐÓêÓÓÓà  àà ` àThe€Trial€Court€filed€its€Order€on€February€24,€1999,€referencing€a€hearing€onÐ ¬Ð ÐFebruary€2,€1999,€and€stating€two€grounds€for€dismissal:€(1)€the€statute€of€limitations€barred€claimsÐ „!¨ Ðof€Plaintiff€Green,€and€(2)€that€discretionary€function€immunity€under€the€GTLA€served€to€bar€allÐ \#€  Ðclaims€relating€to€the€incident€at€issue.€€The€Order€recites€the€finding€that€the€claims€of€PlaintiffÐ 4%X" ÐGreen€are€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations€because€no€case€was€filed€in€Circuit€Court€prior€to€theÐ  '0!$ Ðrunning€of€the€one„year€period€as€set€forth€in€the€GTLA,€and€one€sentence€dismissing€the€actionÐ ä(#& Ðbecause€ð ð.€.€.€the€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€Governmental€Tort€Liability€Act€immunizes€theÐ ¼*à$( Ðdefendants€with€respect€to€all€allegations€raised€by€the€pleadings€against€these€Defendants.ðð€€TheÐ ”,¸&* ÐOrder€then€states€that€ð ðthe€alleged€conduct€falls€within€the€discretionary€function€and€other€immunityÐ l.(, Ðprovisionsðð€of€the€GTLA.Ð D0h*. ÐÓ6!ÓÓÓà  àà ` àOn€motion€of€Defendants€and€determination€of€the€Trial€Court,€pretrial€discoveryÐ 2@,0 Ðtaken€prior€to€the€entry€of€the€dismissal€Order€is€included€in€the€Trial€Record€filed€with€this€Court.€Ð ô3.2 ÐNotice€of€this€appeal€was€filed€with€the€Clerk€of€the€Trial€Court€March€3,€1999,€with€attestation€ofÐ Ì5ð/4 Ðproper€service€and€appeal€bond€for€costs.Ð ¤7È16 ÐÓÓ%Óòòò òÓ  ÓDISCUSSIONó óóóÐ Ü ÐÓ±'ÓÌÓÓà  àà ` àUnder€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€Rule€12.02,€Defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss€was€converted€intoÐ ´Ø Ða€motion€for€summary€judgment€when€the€Trial€Court€considered€matters€outside€the€pleadings,€theÐ Œ ° Ðdiscovery€deposition€of€Plaintiff€Enix.€€The€standard€of€review€for€a€summary€judgment€under€Tenn.Ð d ˆ ÐR.€Civ.€P.€Rule€56€is€ò òde€novoó ó,€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€as€to€the€trial€courtððs€legalÐ < ` Ðconclusions.€€Summary€judgment€is€appropriate€when,€considering€the€evidence€in€the€light€mostÐ @  Ðfavorable€to€the€non„moving€party,€there€are€no€issues€of€material€fact€and€the€moving€party€isÐ ô  Ðentitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€òòGardner€v.€Ô_ÔInsuraÔ_Ô€Property€&€Ô_ÔCasÔ_Ô.€Ins.€Co.óó,€956€S.W.2d€1,Ð Ìð  Ð2€(Tenn.€App.€1997).€€There€are€no€disputed€issues€concerning€the€material€facts€relied€upon€by€theÐ ¤È ÐTrial€Court€in€issuing€the€Order€on€appeal.Ð |  ÐÓó'ÓÓÓà  àà ` àAlthough€not€precisely€as€stated€by€the€parties,€the€two€issues€on€appeal€are€(1)Ð Tx Ðwhether€filing€suit€in€General€Sessions€Court€preserved€the€cause€of€action€in€Circuit€Court€past€theÐ ,P Ðdate€the€statute€of€limitations€ran,€and€(2)€whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€dismissing€the€claims€byÐ ( Ðholding€that€the€alleged€conduct€of€the€Defendants€falls€under€the€discretionary€function€immunityÐ Ü Ðof€the€GTLA.Ð ´Ø ÐÓc,ÓÓÓà  àà ` àAddressing€the€statute€of€limitations€issue,€Plaintiffs€cite€without€any€discussionÐ Œ!° ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€16„15„729,€which€states:€Ð d#ˆ  ÐÓ–.Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àNo€civil€case,€originating€in€a€general€sessions€court€and€carried€to€aÐ <%`" Ðhigher€court,€shall€be€dismissed€by€such€court€for€any€informalityÐ (&L # Ðwhatever,€but€shall€be€tried€on€its€merits;€and€the€court€shall€allow€allÐ '8!$ Ðamendments€in€the€form€of€action,€the€parties€thereto,€or€the€statementÐ ($"% Ðof€the€cause€of€action,€necessary€to€reach€the€merits,€upon€such€termsÐ ì(#& Ðas€may€be€deemed€just€and€proper.€€The€trial€shall€be€de€novo,Ð Ø)ü#' Ðincluding€damages.€ÐÄ*è$(` x` x ÐÌÓ .Óà  àà ` àDefendants€assert€that€the€exclusive€jurisdiction€of€an€action€under€the€GTLA€lies€inÐ œ,À&* ÐCircuit€Court,׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó ó€and€therefore€the€Hamblen€County€General€Sessions€Court€had€no€subject€matterÐ t.˜(, Ðjurisdiction€and€no€authority€to€hear€any€matter€or€enter€any€order€relating€to€the€warrant€filed€byÐ L0p*. ÐPlaintiffs.€€Defendants€assert€that€the€Order€of€Sessions€Court€transferring€the€matter€to€Circuit€CourtÐ $2H,0 Ðâ âis€a€nullity,€the€Amended€Complaint€filed€in€Circuit€Court€is€the€first€filing€in€the€matter,€andÐ ü3 .2 ÐPlaintiff€Greenððs€claims€are€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations€as€the€Amended€Complaint€was€filedÐ Ü Ð15€months€after€the€date€of€the€injury.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ´Ø Ðâ âà  àà ` àDefendants€cite€as€supporting€the€assertion€that€ð ðany€orders€or€ruling€of€a€court€whichÐ Œ ° Ðacts€without€subject€matter€jurisdiction€are€null€and€void,ðð€òòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€281€S.W.2d€492€(Tenn.Ð d ˆ Ð1955),€and€a€federal€court€case,€òòHooks€v.€Hooksóó,€771€F.2d€935€(6th€Cir.€1985).€€òòBrownóó€isÐ < ` Ðdistinguished€as€addressing€the€power€of€Chancery€Court€to€enjoin€enforcement€of€one€portion€ofÐ 8  Ða€final€judgment€of€a€Circuit€Court.€òòBrownóó€involved€neither€a€Sessions€Court€order,€nor€a€statute€ofÐ ì  Ðlimitations€issue.Ð Äè  Ðà  àà ` àThe€relevant€issue€in€òòBrownóó€was€that€the€Circuit€Court€had€general€jurisdiction€of€theÐ œÀ Ðsubject€matter,€but€exceeded€statutory€authority€in€awarding€alimony€to€the€wife.€€This€case€does€notÐ t˜ Ðappear€to€have€any€value€in€assessing€the€statute€of€limitations€issue€on€appeal,€because€unlike€theÐ Lp Ðfacts€in€òòBrownóó,€no€order€reaching€the€merits€of€the€case€was€entered€by€General€Sessions€Court€inÐ $H Ðthis€action.€€Likewise,€òòHooksóó€is€not€instructive€as€to€the€issue€on€appeal€as€it€deals€with,€among€otherÐ ü  Ðthings,€criminal€charges,€an€action€for€debt,€Parental€Ô_ÔKidnappingÔ_Ô€Prevention€Act€and€Uniform€ChildÐ Ôø ÐCustody€Jurisdiction€Act€applicability€to€an€action€involving€state€court€action€in€Texas,€and€variousÐ ¬Ð Ðfederal€claims€filed€in€district€court€in€Tennessee.€€There€appears€to€be€no€mention€of€GeneralÐ „!¨ ÐSessions€Court€or€statute€of€limitations€issues€in€òòHooksóó.Ð \#€  Ðà  àà ` àPlaintiffsðð€assertion€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€16„15„729€is€not€appropriate,€as€transferÐ 4%X" Ðfor€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€is€not€an€ð ðinformality.ðð€€The€rule€regarding€transfer€for€lackÐ  '0!$ Ðof€subject€matter€jurisdiction€is€well€established€in€Tennessee.€€Appropriate€guidance€in€resolvingÐ ä(#& Ðthe€transfer€issue€is€found€in€a€line€of€cases€cited€by€neither€party€on€appeal,€but€essential€to€ourÐ ¼*à$( Ðanalysis.€€ð ðThe€general€rule€governing€transfer€is€that€a€court€lacking€subject€matter€jurisdiction€overÐ ”,¸&* Ða€case€has€no€authority€to€transfer€it,€unless€that€authority€is€specifically€conferred€by€statute,€rule,Ð l.(, Ðor€constitutional€provision.ðð€òòNorton€v.€Ô_ÔEverhartÔ_Ôóó,€895€S.W.2d€317,€319€(Tenn.€1995).€€The€SupremeÐ D0h*. ÐCourt€cites€as€authority€for€the€rule,€and€then€discusses€extensively,€òòColeman€v.€Colemanóó,€229Ð 2@,0 ÐS.W.2d€341€(Tenn.€1950).€€Additionally,€the€Court€discusses€the€case€of€òòFlowers€v.€Dyer€Countyóó,Ð ô3.2 Ð830€S.W.2d€51€(Tenn.€1992),€where€the€transfer€rule€is€discussed€and€applied€in€the€context€of€anÐ Ü Ðaction€under€the€GTLA.Ð ´Ø Ðà  àà ` àIn€òòFlowersóó,€the€plaintiff€filed€suit€under€GTLA€in€chancery€court.€€The€trial€courtÐ Œ ° Ðdenied€defendantððs€motion€to€dismiss€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction.€€This€Court€reversed€theÐ d ˆ Ðtrial€court€and€dismissed€the€action,€and€the€Supreme€Court€overruled€the€dismissal.€€In€mandatingÐ < ` Ðtransfer€from€the€chancery€court€to€circuit€court,€the€Supreme€Court€discussed€the€exclusiveÐ 8  Ðjurisdiction€provision€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„20„307,€but€applied€the€provisions€of€Tenn.€CodeÐ ì  ÐAnn.€ðð€16„11„102,€which€sets€forth€authority€specifically€conferred€by€statute€for€transfer€fromÐ Äè  Ðchancery€court€to€circuit€court€of€cases€for€want€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction,€noting€that€suchÐ œÀ Ðtransfer€is€mandatory€when€objection€to€chancery€jurisdiction€is€made.€€òòFlowersóó,€830€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2d€at€52„Ð t˜ Ð53.Ð Lp Ðà  àà ` àThe€present€procedural€posture,€however,€differs€significantly€from€the€situation€inÐ $H ÐòòFlowers€óó.€€There€is€no€authority€specifically€conferred€by€statute,€as€required€under€the€rule€explicitlyÐ ü  Ðadopted€in€òòColemanóó€and€recently€restated€in€òòNorton€v.€Ô_ÔEverhartÔ_Ôóó,€for€transfer€from€the€GeneralÐ Ôø ÐSessions€Court€to€Circuit€Court€as€there€was€for€the€transfer€granted€plaintiff€Flowers.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€òòColeman€óóÐ ¬Ð Ðclearly€establishes€that€a€court€lacking€subject€matter€jurisdiction€may€not€transfer€a€case€in€theÐ „!¨ Ðabsence€of€statutory€authority.€òòNortonóó,€895€S.W.2d€at€320.€€Even€though€the€Court€in€òòNortonóó€did€Ð \#€  Ðð ð.€.€.€invite€the€legislature€to€enact€a€broad€transfer€statute.€.€.ðð,€òòIdóó.,€no€such€statutory€authority€is€citedÐ 4%X" Ðby€Plaintiffs,€and€none€is€apparent€to€this€Court.òòóó€€The€Order€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed€to€theÐ  '0!$ Ðextent€that€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Green€are€dismissed€for€failure€to€timely€file€this€cause€of€actionÐ ä(#& Ðin€a€court€with€subject€matter€jurisdiction.Ð ¼*à$( Ðà  àà ` àThis€does€not,€however,€dispose€of€all€issues€on€appeal.€€Minor€Plaintiff€Enix€has€theÐ ”,¸&* Ðright€to€file€suit€for€personal€injury€for€one€year€past€his€eighteenth€birthday.€òòDoe€v.€Coffee€CountyÐ l.(, ÐBd.€of€Educóó.,€852€S.W.2d€899,€904€(Tenn.€App.€1992)(applying€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„1„106׃@×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€to€aÐ D0h*. Ðcause€of€action€under€the€GTLA).€€Plaintiffs€assert€error€in€the€Order€of€the€Trial€Court€to€the€extentÐ Ü Ðthat€the€Trial€Court€declared€the€actions€that€underlie€of€the€cause€of€action€below€to€be€immuneÐ ´Ø Ðunder€the€GTLA€discretionary€function€exception.Ð Œ ° Ðà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€argue€that€the€actions€of€Defendant€teacher€Brooks€areòòóó€operational€and€notÐ d ˆ Ðimmune€from€suit€as€discretionary€functions€under€the€GTLA.€€The€specific€averments€in€the€presentÐ < ` Ðcause€of€action€are€negligence€in€holding€activities€inside€the€gym€that€were€usually€done€outside,Ð 8  Ðand€not€having€available€wall€padding€in€place€during€the€activities€in€the€gym.€€As€to€the€issueÐ ì  Ðregarding€dismissal€under€GTLA€discretionary€function€immunity,€Defendants€cite€the€specificÐ Äè  Ðallegations€of€negligence€in€the€Plaintiffsðð€Warrant€and€Amended€Complaint.€€Holding€the€field€dayÐ œÀ Ðpractice€inside€the€gym,€failing€to€pad€the€gym€wall,€failure€of€Defendant€Board€of€Education€toÐ t˜ Ðprovide€safe€premises€for€the€activities,€and€failure€to€properly€train€Defendant€Brooks€are€assertedÐ Lp Ðto€fall€under€discretionary€function€immunity.Ð $H Ðà  àà ` àDefendants€deny€both€negligence€and€proximate€cause€relating€to€the€acts€at€issue,Ð ü  Ðquoting€a€selection€from€the€GTLA€that€a€trial€court€judge€must,€as€a€prerequisite€to€finding€liabilityÐ Ôø Ðunder€the€Act,€determine€that€the€acts€at€issue€were€negligent€and€the€proximate€cause€of€the€injury,Ð ¬Ð Ðthat€the€employee€acted€within€the€scope€of€employment,€and€that€none€of€the€exceptions€to€removalÐ „!¨ Ðof€immunity€apply,ò òó ó€specifically€citing€discretionary€function€immunity€as€to€the€alleged€acts€ofÐ \#€  ÐDefendant€Brooks.׃T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð 4%X" Ðà  àà ` àBoth€parties€cite€the€key€case€in€evaluating€discretionary€function€immunity,€òòBowers€Ð  '0!$ Ðv.€City€of€Chattanoogaóó,€826€S.W.2d€427€(Tenn.€1992).€€The€facts€of€òòBowersóó€involved€injuries€to€aÐ ä(#& Ðminor€incurred€when€a€school€bus€route€was€altered€by€the€school€board,€resulting€in€a€change€in€timeÐ ¼*à$( Ðfor€the€bus€to€arrive€at€stops.€€The€minor€exited€the€bus€at€a€different€time€and€place€than€usual,€andÐ ”,¸&* Ðthe€minorððs€mother€was€not€present€to€meet€her€child€as€was€her€usual€practice.€€In€attempting€toÐ Ü Ðcross€an€unfamiliar€street,€the€minor€was€struck€by€a€passing€vehicle€and€injured.€€Additionally,€theÐ ´Ø Ðbus€driver€had€skipped€stops€on€the€route€and€did€not€use€the€flashing€lights€on€the€bus€to€stop€trafficÐ Œ ° Ðas€the€minor€crossed€the€street.Ð d ˆ Ðà  àà ` àIn€òòBoweróós€the€Supreme€Court€abandoned€the€longstanding€ð ðdiscretionary/ministerialÐ < ` Ðtest,ðð€and€adopted€the€ð ðplanning/operationalðð€test€for€determining€immunity€under€the€GTLA.€Ð 8  Ðð ðUnder€the€planning„operational€test,€decisions€that€rise€to€the€level€of€planning€or€policy„makingÐ ì  Ðare€considered€discretionary€acts€which€do€not€give€rise€to€tort€liability,€while€decisions€that€areÐ Äè  Ðmerely€operational€are€not€considered€discretionary€acts€and,€therefore,€do€not€give€rise€toÐ œÀ Ðimmunity.ðð€òòBowersóó,€826€S.W.2d€at€430.€€The€Court€stressed€that€such€immunity€applies€to€allÐ t˜ Ðconduct€involving€the€balancing€of€policy€considerations,€and€can€sometimes€apply€to€operationalÐ Lp Ðactors€when€such€actor€is€properly€charged€with€balancing€policy€considerations.Ð $H Ðà  àà ` àApplication€of€GTLA€discretionary€function€immunity€is€determined€by€whether€ð ðaÐ ü  Ðparticular€course€of€conduct€is€determined€after€consideration€or€debate€by€an€individual€or€groupÐ Ôø Ðcharged€with€the€formulation€of€plans€or€policiesðð€which€would€be€immune,€or€ð ða€decision€resultingÐ ¬Ð Ðfrom€a€determination€based€on€preexisting€laws,€regulations,€policies,€or€standardsðð€which€would€beÐ „!¨ Ðoperational€and€not€immune.€€Another€factor€listed€is€whether€the€act€is€the€type€properly€Ô_ÔreviewableÔ_ÔÐ \#€  Ðby€the€courts,€and€not€an€investigation€into€an€executive€or€legislative€decision€process.òòóó€òòBowersóó,€826Ð 4%X" ÐS.W.2d€at€431.Ð  '0!$ Ðà  àà ` àThe€trial€court€in€Bowers€examined€the€driverððs€manual€given€Chattanooga€PublicÐ ä(#& ÐSchool€bus€drivers€and€the€Board€of€Education€policy€statement€regarding€transportation€servicesÐ ¼*à$( Ðto€determine€whether€particular€aspects€of€the€suit€were€immune€under€the€GTLA€discretionaryÐ ”,¸&* Ðfunction€exception€to€liability.€€While€the€decisions€of€the€school€board€as€to€changing€the€bus€routeÐ l.(, Ðand€time€were€found€to€be€immune€from€tort€suit€as€discretionary€functions,€the€actions€of€theÐ D0h*. Ðindividual€bus€driver€in€deciding€exactly€where€to€stop€the€bus€and€not€using€the€flashing€signals€toÐ 2@,0 Ðstop€traffic€were€operational€and€not€immune€from€suit€under€the€GTLA,€thus€open€to€examinationÐ ô3.2 Ðâ âfor€negligent€Ô_Ôconduct.Ô_Ô€òòBowersóó,€826€S.W.2d€at€432.Ð Ì5ð/4 Ðà  àà ` àThere€is€no€evidence€in€the€Trial€Record€before€us€that€the€Circuit€Court€made€any€Ð Ü Ðâ âfindings€of€fact€as€to€the€planning/policy€making€aspects€and€the€operational€aspects€of€this€case.€Ð ´Ø ÐAdditionally,€although€not€cited€by€the€parties,€there€is€a€statute€implying€that€there€are€operationalÐ Œ ° Ðaspects€to€the€performance€of€a€school€teacherððs€duties€under€similar€circumstances.€€ð ðIt€is€the€dutyÐ d ˆ Ðof€the€teacher€to€.€.€.€[Ô_Ôg]iveÔ_Ô€instruction€in€physical€education€as€provided€by€law€and€officialÐ < ` Ðregulations.ðð€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€49„5„201(a)(6),€Duties€of€Teachers.€€There€is€no€evidence€in€theÐ 8  ÐTrial€Record€that€the€Trial€Court€made€any€findings€of€fact€that€would€allow€determination€of€theÐ ì  Ðnature€of€the€acts€alleged€in€this€cause€of€action€under€the€òòBowersóó€test.€€In€order€to€determine€whichÐ Äè  Ðalleged€acts,€if€any,€would€be€immune€under€the€planning/operational€test,€and€whether€any€acts€notÐ œÀ Ðso€immune€rise€to€the€level€of€negligent€conduct,€the€Trial€Court€must€make€findings€of€fact€as€to€theÐ t˜ Ðexistence€of,€and€proper€performance€under,€relevant€laws,€policies,€and€procedures€for€the€activitiesÐ Lp Ðat€issue.€€The€Trial€Court€did€not€have€before€it,€and€neither€do€we,€sufficient€factual€evidence€toÐ $H Ðallow€it€to€decide€where€the€alleged€acts€fit€under€the€planning/operational€test.Ð ü  ÐÓï1Óò òÓ  ÓòòCONCLUSIONóóó ó€Ð Ôø ÐÓîiÓÌÓÓà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€dismissing€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Cheryl€Green€isÐ °Ô Ðaffirmed.€€The€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€dismissing€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Sean€Ô_ÔEnixÔ_Ô€is€reversed,Ð ˆ!¬ Ðand€the€cause€of€action€as€to€the€claims€of€Plaintiff€Sean€Enix€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€forÐ `#„  Ðfurther€proceedings€òòóóconsistent€with€this€Opinion.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€Appellees.Ó4jÓÐ 8%\" ÐÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à______________________________Ð À*ä$( Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€J.Ð ¬+Ð%) ÐÌÌCONCUR:Ð p.”(, ÐÌÌÌ______________________________Ð  2D,0 ÐHOUSTON€M.€GODDARD,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_ÔÐ  30-1 ÐÌÌÌÌ______________________________Ð ¨7Ì16 ÐCHARLES€D.€SUSANO,€JR.,€€J.