WPC QRrXѦD p.+9(R$ЎQltA FB /X{:w5i5Hm{>jf O=i0Hˁ-x={e Kk9p&4Yg`D[G;zOlrdŹE۝ } i}rߟ8rZ7 ە^wUշoԾ%5ji#;E&9MkeDt1o-;uJ)nf6)Z>ƑyPd cṛa;0ECTb$2cp F0KN)'GwYmf4E_z&VnN(D-:c1S-q#ZUߌGp4l3ZJJGc eM^#k6$=;n.Pzaӟ#ȑ"d#!xUaN % 0Qw> 4B V e Nm ^ o { m} UN 0 0D  dd 0m -yUN`U:TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 0m D5 B0000 AQM 0md 0DHP LaserJet 8000 DN PS0(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX()$5hp4XXEƅC45hpTURCEƅKIRTU&m%IK6hp4%&mFƅC46hpNICFƅGƅCIN{Z='3|x='L U(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(~(2>$ !5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON       0  (#$  0    >$5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON @ @     2    _V!XFGOԀWenotethatPetitionerseeksinjunctiveanddeclaratoryrelief,inadditionto  monetarydamages,forallegeddeprivationofhisconstitutionalrights.RegardlessofthecaptionofPetitionerspleading,itssubstancemustbeexamined.SeeNortonv.Everhart, ~ 895S.W.2d317,319(Tenn.1995);seealsoHainesv.Kerner,404U.S.519,520,92S.Ct. p 594,596,30L.Ed.2d652(1972).  >$5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON @ @     1    _ԀV!XFGOԀAlthoughdefendantsdidnotraisethisissuebelow,wearenotprecludedfrom  consideringitonappeal.Becauseitisanissueofjurisdiction,itmayberaisedatanytime. Subjectmatterjurisdictionmayneverbewaivedandthelackthereofmaybechallengedatanystageoftheproceedings._Wunderlich_Ԁv._Fortas_,776S.W.2d953(Tenn.App.1989). LattimerU.A.P.A.BloomingdalesHuddlestonGoinsKirkeysEverhart(E3g$ !5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON   ##md#(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular V bg"5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON  _G N FFGOD  FG N   Ad FILEDXsX D  September29,1999Cecil_Crowson_,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdA ,cAZ"Arial Regular(E3g$ !5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON  \\\\)!dxdx dabZc[C<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(E3g$ !5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON  ($$   1  !5N4XXEOF45NT!XFEOKDLXT!&F%LKD6I,7%&FFOF76I,NOFFOGOFON  _=m FGOTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T<_@& &  INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @(ATNASHVILLE x`[B2.jze`  `@El ` dttx| ( xBILLYLATTIMER@.)  W @.)-(XXX- Petitioner/Appellant,@.)  AppealNo. 7  @.)  01A019804CH00200 O  vs.@.) g  @.)  DavidsonChancery   TENNESSEEDEPARTMENT@.)  No.98489II   OFCORRECTION,ETAL.,@.)   @.) Defendants/Appellees.@.) /  @.)  APPEALFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTFORDAVIDSONCOUNTYTHEHONORABLECHANCELLORMcCOYPRESIDING  BILLYLATTIMER,#91238TurneyCenterIndustrialPrisonRoute1,Only,Tennessee371409709ACTINGPROSEFORPETITIONER/APPELLANTJOHNKNOXWALKUPAttorneyGeneralandReporterMICHAELE.MOORESolicitorGeneralELENAJ.XOINISAssistantAttorneyGeneralCivilRightsandClaimsDivision4255thAvenueNorth ,W'$ Nashville,Tennessee372430488ATTORNEYSFORRESPONDENTS/APPELLEES  AFFIRMEDINPART,REVERSED INPARTANDREMANDED  1,)      PATRICIAJ.COTTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:CANTRELL,P.J.,M.S.KOCH,J.  [;62 < 8dGGd8     m01l =m OPINION #=m lm01 #    ThisisanappealfromthedismissalofaPetitionforDeclaratoryJudgmentbytheChanceryCourtofDavidsonCounty.Thepetitioner,BillyLattimer( Petitioner),isservingasentenceinthecustodyoftheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection.Hearguesthatthetrialcourtimproperlydismissedhislawsuitforlackofjurisdiction.Weagree. DuringhisincarcerationatNortheastCorrectionalCenter,Petitioneraccruedalargecollectionofphotographs(over1,000photos),whichhekeptintwoboundvolumes.HeallegedthatmanyofthephotoswerePolaroidpicturesofhisfamilytakenduringtheirvisitstohimaspartofaprisonphotoprojectandotherswerepurchasedfromavendoraffiliatedwiththeDepartment.Inanyevent,PetitioneracquiredorpossessedthephotographswiththeknowledgeandpermissionoftheDepartment. In1995or1996,theDepartmentspolicyregardingphotographschanged,andinmateswerenolongerpermittedtoacquirePolaroids.Petitionerallegesthatthepolicyprovidedthatthosepicturesalreadyinthepossessionofaninmatewouldnotbeconfiscatedsolongastheinmatewasnotthesubjectofcertaindisciplinaryactionsorwasnotpermanentlytransferredtoanotherinstitution.Thepolicypermittedinmateswhoweretransferredtomailtheircollectionselsewhere,butifthiswasnotaccomplishedwithinthirtydays,thecollectionsweretobedestroyed. InFebruaryof1997,PetitionerwastemporarilytransferredfromNortheastCorrectionalCenterforacourtdate.Uponhisreturn,Petitionerdiscoveredthathisphotoswereconfiscated.HefiledagrievancewiththeDepartment.ThePetitionerallegesthatwhilethisgrievancewasstillpending,helearnedthathis x940 photoshadbeendestroyed. MrLattimerfiledtheabovementionedprosepetitionintheChancery 0 CourtofDavidsonCounty.Hestyledita UniformAdministrativeProcedures  ` ActPetitionPursuanttoTenn.Code.Ann.45101,etseq.forDeclaratory @  Judgment.Petitionersought,inadditiontothedeclaratoryjudgment,$3,660inactualdamages,and$15,000inpunitivedamages,aswellasamandatoryinjunctionthatallseizuresofprisonerPolaroidphotographscease. Thedefendantsdidnotrespondtothepetitionandfilednopleadingsinthechancerycourtbeforethetrialcourtissuedasuasponteorderdismissingthe 0 claim.Findingthatthiswasanactionprimarilyfordamagestoproperty,thetrialcourtconcludedthatitlackedjurisdictiontohearMr.Lattimerslawsuitbecauseitinvolvedunliquidateddamages.@-I. Thepetitionfiledhereinseeksrelief,interalia,undertheUniform  !p AdministrativeProceduresAct,specificallyadeclaratoryjudgmentpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.45101,etseq.Thedefendantsarguethatthepetitionshould %  bedismissedforfailuretostateaclaimunderthatstatute. Tenn.CodeAnn.45224allowsapartytoseekadeclaratoryjudgmenttochallengethe legalvalidityorapplicabilityofastatute,ruleororderofanagencytospecifiedcircumstances.Tenn.CodeAnn.45224(a)(Supp.1998).Aprerequisitetosuchanaction,however,isthatthepartyfirstseekadeclaratoryorderfromtheagency.Id.;Tenn.CodeAnn.45224(b). 2-*  Inthepetitionfiledherein,thereisnoallegationthatpetitionerfirstsoughtadeclaratoryorderfromtheDepartment.Therecordincludesnosuchrequest.Therefore,thechancerycourtlackedjurisdictiontohearPetitionersdeclaratory 0940 judgmentactionbroughtundertheU.A.P.A.SeeWatsonv.TennesseeDeptof  Correction,970S.W.2d494,497(Tenn.App.1998);Pearsonv.GarrettFin. 0 Serv.,Inc.,849S.W.2d776,780(Tenn.App.1992)(whereacourthasreached  ` thecorrectresult,itwillnotbereversedeveniftheresultwaspredicatedonanerroneousreason).Thus,totheextentthedismissalofthecasewasalsoadismissaloftheTenn.CodeAnn. =m  =m45224claim,weaffirm. #  1      #=m   =m#   @-II. TheChanceryCourtpremisedthedismissalofthiscaseonTenn.Code P Ann.1611102(1980).Thatstatutestates:0 2 6 822T$2T$02T$2T$ 8 (a)Thechancerycourthasconcurrentjurisdiction,withthecircuitcourt,ofallcivilcausesofaction,triableinthecircuitcourt,exceptforunliquidateddamagesforinjuriestopersonorcharacter,andexceptforunliquidateddamagesforinjuriestopropertynotresultingfromabreachoforalorwrittencontract;andnodemurrerforwantofjurisdictionofthecauseofactionshallbesustainedinthechancerycourt,exceptinthecasesexcepted.  ! ! 8 (b)Anysuitinthenatureofthecasesexceptedabovebroughtinthechancerycourt,whereobjectionhasnotbeentakenbyapleatothejurisdiction,maybetransferredtothecircuitcourtofthecounty,orheardanddeterminedbythechancerycourtupontheprinciplesofacourtoflaw.  ! ! Tenn.CodeAnn.1611102.  TheChanceryCourthereindeterminedthatPetitionerslawsuitwas primarilyanactionfordamagesforlossofproperty,< #  2      ׀andthatsuchdamages ,`'$ wereunliquidatedanddidnotarisefromabreachofcontract.Thecourtthendeterminedthatithadnojurisdictionoversuchcases,relyingonTenn.CodeAnn.1611102.However,thecourtsholdingfailstorecognizetheeffectofsubsection(b)ofthestatute.Thatsubsectionclearlyprovidesthatintheabsenceofanobjection,chancerycourthasjurisdictionoversuchcases.Where,ashere,noobjectiontojurisdictionisinterposed,thechancerycourtmayeitherhearthecaseortransferittocircuitcourt. TheSupremeCourtofTennesseehasinterpretedTenn.CodeAnn.1611102torequiretransfer,ratherthandismissal,eveninsituationswherethechancerycourthasnosubjectmatterjurisdiction.InFlowersv.DyerCounty,830 ` S.W.2d51(Tenn.1992),theCourtheldthatTenn.CodeAnn. =m  =m1611102(b) GOF  =m  #GOFF GOo%##=m FGO%#mandatedtransferfromthechancerycourttothecircuitcourt,ratherthan  dismissal,ofacasebroughtundertheGovernmentalTortLiabilityAct,whichprovidedthatcircuitcourtshaveexclusivejurisdictionoveranyactionbroughtpursuanttotheAct. TheCourtrecentlyaddressedasimilarsituationinWoodsv.MTC %  Management,967S.W.2d800(Tenn.1998).Woodsfiledhiscomplaint,which '#  allegednumerousviolationsoftheUniformResidentialLandlordTenantAct( URLTA),Tenn.CodeAnn.6626501,etseq.,inchancerycourt.URLTA ,`'$ specifiesthatgeneralsessionscourtsandcircuitcourtshaveoriginaljurisdictionovercasesbroughtunderit.Tenn.CodeAnn.6628105(a)(1993).ThechancerycourtdismissedthesuitanddeniedWoodsmotiontotransferthecasetocircuitcourt.RelyingonTenn.CodeAnn.1611102(b),theCourtaffirmedthechancerycourtsfindingthatitlackedsubjectmatterjurisdiction,butdeterminedthatthedenialofthemotiontotransferwasreversibleerror.Inso 0940 doing,theCourtmadeclearthat 1611102requiredthechancerycourttotransferthelawsuit...tocircuitcourtforfurtherproceedings.Woods,967 0 S.W.2dat802.Thus,evenifthedefendantshereinhadobjectedtothecourtsjurisdiction,dismissalofMr.Lattimersclaimwouldhavebeenimproper.See @  Pauleyv.MadisonCounty,No.02A019607CH00161,1997WL110019at*2 p  3(Tenn.App.1997)(no =m  =mTenn.R.App.P.#=m   =m,#11applicationfiled).      Unlikethecasescitedabove,noobjectiontojurisdictionwasfiledinthiscase.Thisleavesthechancerycourtwithonemoreoptionthanthecourtsinthosecases.Thecase maybetransferredtothecircuitcourtofthecounty,orheardanddeterminedbythechancerycourtupontheprinciplesofacourtoflaw.Tenn.CodeAnn1611102. =m  =m  #=m   =m.#@aa-IV.   Onappeal,Petitionersuggeststhatthechancerycourthasproperjurisdictionbecausehisclaimisbasedonanimpliedcontractwiththestate.Inviewofourholding,thisargumentisnowmoot.@-V. Accordingly,thedismissalbythetrialcourtonthebasisoflackofjurisdictionisaffirmedastotheclaimbroughtundertheUniformAdministrativeProceduresAct,butisreversedastoanyotherclaims,andthiscaseisremandedforfurtherproceedings.CostsofthisappealaretaxedtoAppellees.=m  =m<,XX X(XX<0 0N T$ T$0N T$N T$_________________________________ T$T$   N   PATRICIAJ.COTTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________BENH.CANTRELL,P.J.,M.S.#=m  =m_1#=m  =m 0940 Ї___________________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE#=m  =m2#