WPCe( # VUNa % 0U<M w@ 4  0 0D  0J 0T^ 0^ 0h 0rx 0| 0f 0 1u|U, 0d BU,U>B)DC1 D3t AMU* 0@^&$v~ov AO&' 0D' D/( BH(HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(p+$TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman UHHӀDDyJ  d=>3|x((3l$ +!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   `   0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d((((7Border 1dd""""'dxd-)C << G<  9p`(Arial("$      !  #d#'    \RA'\  ,,   YYY FILED,X July10,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.,AppellateCourtClerk   !  #d#'    \RA'\   $       RulesoftheCourtofAppeals,Rule10(b):MEMORANDUMOPINION.TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase. x !#d#'    \RA'\   $       Mr.Ohlssonwasneverservedandisnotapartytothepresentappeal.  !#d#'    \RA'\   $       Wenotethat,sincethetimeaninterlocutoryappealwasgrantedinthismatter,TennesseeRuleofCivilProcedure15.03hasbeenamended.Asamended,theruleprovidesthatanamendmentshallrelatebackiftheotherconditionsofRule15.03aresatisfiedandthenewpartyisadded withintheperiodprovidedbylawforcommencinganactionorwithin120daysaftercommencementoftheaction.Tenn.R.Civ.P.15.03(1995).(Emphasisadded.)However,theadvisorycommentstotherulestatethattheamendmentshallbeeffectiveJuly1,1995.UndertheTennesseeConstitution,ArticleI,,Ԁ20 noretrospectivelaw,orlawimpairingtheobligationsofcontracts,shallbemade.Aretrospectivelawisonewhichtakesawayorimpairsvestedrightsacquiredunderexistinglaws. Morrisv.Gross ,572S.W.2d902,907(Tenn.1978).Apartyhasavestedrightinthedefensethatthestatuteoflimitationshasexpired. FordMotorCo.v.Moulton ,511S.W.2d690,69597(Tenn.1974).Thus,wedeclinetoapplyTenn.R.Civ.P.15.03retroactivelyintheinstantcase.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &&&Xd&#&&Xd#'    \RA'\  7lXXdd7    @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ WESTERNSECTIONATJACKSON  ________________________________________________ SELANDERGATESOWENS,   FROMTHESHELBYCOUNTY       CHANCERYCOURT,No.1028431 PlaintiffAppellee,    THEHONORABLENEALSMALL,       CHANCELLORVs.       C.A.No.02A019409CH00221       VACATEDANDDISMISSED  ADAMSMARKHOTELS,INC.,MEMPHIS, etal,       AlanBryantChambersofMemphis, DefendantAppellant.   ForAppelleeL+.);+'h|` . `L       J.EdwardWise,JohnW.Simmons       ofMemphis,ForAppellant___________________________________________________________________________̛@ MEMORANDUMOPINION /   ל___________________________________________________________________________ CRAWFORD,J.  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtpursuanttoT.R.A.P.9.Defendants,AdamsMarkHotels,Inc.(AdamsMark)andSevenSeventeenHBMemphisCorporation(SevenSeventeen),appealfromtheorderofthetrialcourtthatdeniedamotiontodismissandallowedplaintiff,SelanderGatesOwens,toamendhercomplainttoaddSevenSeventeenasaparty. OnMay14,1993,PlaintifffiledacomplaintagainstAdamsMarkandEricOhlsson,personallyandinhiscapacityasDirectorofPersonnelServices. 0   ׀OnMay21,1993,processwasservedonBarbaraDillon,DirectorofHumanResourcesforSevenSeventeen,thecorporationthatownsandmanagestheAdamsMark. PlaintiffscomplaintallegesthatsheworkedattheAdamsMarkϜanditspredecessorsfrom1975untilMay14,1992,whenshewasterminated.Plaintiff,whoisanAfricanAmericanfemale,wastoldthatherposition,CommunicationsManager,wasbeingeliminated.Atthetimeofherdischarge,Plaintiffrequestedapositionasanhourlycommunicationsemployee;whichincludethePBXManager,PBXSupervisor,ChiefOperator,andServiceOperator,butwastoldbyMr.OhlssonthatanysuchpositionwasbeingeliminatedandthatallPBXemployeeswouldbemanagedbythefrontdesk.OnJuly31,1992,JacquieSmith,aEuropeanAmericanfemale,waspromotedtoPBXϜSupervisor.Plaintiffwasnevertoldoftheopening. ThecomplaintaversthatAdamsMarkdischargedPlaintiffinviolationofT.C.A.421401and421311,andthatthedefendants:8 8 [D]iscriminatedagainstherwithrespecttocompensation,terms,conditions,andprivilegesofemployment,andfurtherlimitedandclassifiedherinawaythatdeprivedherofindividualemploymentopportunities,allofwhichwasbaseduponraceandsex.̛ӜPlaintifffurtherallegesthat,asaresultofdefendantsactions,plaintiffhassuffered greatmentalanguish,haslostheremployment,wagesandbenefitsofemployment,andhergoodname. OnJune21,1993,AdamsMarkfiledamotiontodismiss,statingthatonMay14,1992,andatalltimesthereafter,theownerandmanageroftheentityknownastheAdamsMarkwasSevenSeventeen.ThemotionaversthatnoentitynamedAdamsMarkhaseverownedormanagedthehotel,thatthecourtlacksjurisdictionoverthepersonofAdamsMark,andthatprocessandserviceofprocessareinsufficientastoAdamsMark.Finally,themotioncontendsthatSevenSeventeenisanecessaryandindispensablepartywhomplaintifffailedtojoin. Inherreplytothemotiontodismiss,plaintiffstatesthatsheexercisedduediligenceindeterminingthetrueowneroftheAdamsMark.PlaintiffaversthatemployeesofthehoteltoldherattorneysthattheAdamsMarkwasownedbytheAdamsMarkHotel,Inc.,Memphis,939RidgelakeBoulevard,Memphis,Tennessee.PlaintifffurtheraversthathercomplaintallegesthattheAdamsMarkisorwasasubsidiaryofHBECorporation,andthatSevenSeventeenismostlikelyasuccessorcorporationofHBE. ThetrialcourtdenieddefendantsmotiontodismissandorderedthatplaintiffscomplaintbeamendedtoreflectSevenSeventeenasanadditionalpartydefendant.Thedefendantsthereafterfiledamotionforreconsiderationor,inthealternative,forpermissionforaninterlocutoryappeal.Thecourtdenieddefendantsmotionforreconsideration,butgrantedpermissionforaninterlocutoryappeal.ByorderenteredOctober13,1994,thisCourtgrantedaninterlocutory͜appeal. Appellantspresenttwoissuesonappeal,thefirstofwhich,asstatedinappellantsbrief,is:8 8 WhetherthetrialcourterredbynotdismissingAdamsMarkHotel,Inc.,theoriginalnameddefendant,astherecordreflectsthereisnosuchcorporationandnosuchentitywasinvolvedinthedecisionofwhichOwenscomplains. ItisundisputedintherecordthatAdamsMarkwasandisnotalegalentity.Judgementsagainstanonentityarevoid. McLeanv.Chanabery, 5Tenn.App.276,279(1926). Appellantssecondissueonappeal,asstatedinappellantsbrief,is:8 8 WhetherthetrialcourterredbyaddingSevenSeventeenasapartydefendantandthereafterrefusingtodismissSevenSeventeen,astherecordreflectsOwensclaimagainstSevenSeventeenisbarredbytheapplicablestatuteoflimitations,Tenn.CodeAnn.283102or421311. ClaimsbroughtpursuanttotheFederalCivilRightsstatuteaswellastheTennesseeHumanRightsAct,T.C.A.421101etseq.,aregovernedbytheoneyearstatuteoflimitationscontainedinT.C.A.283104(Supp.1995). Bennettv.SteinerLiffIronandMetalCo. ,826S.W.2d119,121(Tenn.1992).Thestatuteoflimitationsbeginstorunonthedaythedischargedecisionismadeandcommunicated. Websterv.TennesseeBd.ofRegents ,902S.W.2d412,414(Tenn.App.1995).Apartymayamenditsoriginalcomplainttoaddadditionalparties;however,theamendmentonlyrelatesbacktothedateoftheoriginalpleading,forstatuteoflimitationspurposes,if:8 8 [W]ithintheperiodprovidedbylawforcommencingtheactionagainsthimthepartytobebroughtinbyamendment(1)hasreceivedsuchnoticeoftheinstitutionoftheactionthathewillnotbeprejudicedinmaintaininghisdefenseonthemerits,and(2)kneworshouldhaveknownthat,butforamisnomerorothersimilarmistakeconcerningtheidentityoftheproperparty,theactionwouldhavebeenbroughtagainsthim.Exceptasabovespecified,nothinginthisruleshallbeconstruedtoextendanyperiodoflimitationsgoverningthetimeinwhichanyactionmaybebrought.Tenn.R.Civ.P.15.03(1994). 1   ׀ In Allenv.RiverEdgeMotorLodge ,861S.W.2d364(Tenn.App.1993),theEasternSectionofthisCourtconsideredacasewithissuessimilartothecaseatbar.In Allen ,theplaintifffellfromabalconyattheRiverEdgeMotorLodge(Lodge)onJune16,1990,andsubsequentlyfiledacomplaintforpersonalinjuries,namingtheLodgeasdefendant.AclerkattheLodgeacceptedserviceofprocessonJune18,1991,justoveroneyearfromthedateoftheaccident.ThedefendantfiledananswerwhichrevealedthatBoothEnterprises,Inc.,ownedtheLodge.Thetrialcourtdismissedplaintiffssuit,basedonthefactthattheproperdefendantdidnotreceivenoticeofthelawsuitwithintheapplicablestatuteoflimitationsperiod. Id .at364.Inaffirmingthetrialcourtsdecision,theCourtofAppealsstated:8 8 TheclearlanguageofRule15.03,theCommitteecommenttotheRuleandapplicablecases,establishthatapartysoughttobeaddedbyamendmentmustreceivenoticeofthelawsuitbeforethelimitationperiodexpires,inorderfortheamendmenttorelatebacktothefilingofthecomplaint.@ ***8 8 [F]orpurposesofRule15.03noticemeansnoticethatalawsuithasbeenfiled,notawarenessoftheunderlyingincident. Id .at365(citing Smithv.SoutheasternProperties,Ltd., 󛀜776S.W.2d106(Tenn.App.1989)). Id .at365.Similarly,in Dukev.ReplogleEnterprises, 891S.W.2d205(Tenn.1994),theSupremeCourtstatedthatacomplaintwhichistimelyfiledbutfailstocorrectlynamethedefendantbyitslegalname,andisservedonthedefendantafterthestatuteoflimitationshasrun,willnotrelatebackunderTenn.R.Civ.P.15.03. Id .at206.Thecourtstated:8 8 AsRule15.03nowstands,hadtheserviceofprocessonNathanReplogle[thedefendant]been served beforetheexpirationofstatutorylimitations,theplaintiffsamendmenttoaddtheproperpartydefendantwouldhaverelatedbacktothedateoftheoriginalcomplaintandthecausewouldnothavebeentimebarred. Id .at207. ServicewaseffectedonSevenSeventeenmorethanoneyearaftertheallegeddiscriminationoccurred.ThereisnoindicationthatSevenSeventeenhadnoticeofplaintiffssuitpriortoMay21,1993.Plaintiffsfailuretoeffectserviceontheproperdefendantpriortotheexpirationofthestatuteoflimitations;May14,1993,preventsrelationbackoftheamendedcomplaintunderTenn.R.Civ.P.15.03. Duke ,891S.W.2dat20405; Allen ,861S.W.2dat36566.  Forthereasonsstatedherein,weholdthatplaintiffscauseofactionagainstAdamsMarkisdismissedforfailuretonamealegalentity,andplaintiffscauseofactionagainstSevenSeventeenisbarredbythestatuteoflimitations.T.C.A.283104.Accordingly,theorderofthetrialcourtisvacated,andplaintiffssuitisdismissed.CostsofappealareassessedagainsttheAppellant.       _________________________________       W.FRANKCRAWFORD,       PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S. CONCUR:_________________________________DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE _________________________________ HEWITTP.TOMLIN,JR.SENIORJUDGE ̛̛