WPC\ # VUNa % 0N 0 b w@ 4 , 0D;    m 0J& 0Tp 0^ 0h" 0r 0| 0x 0 1u 0d BgU >B)DC AM.U*{ D3.  0@&v~fv AO 0D D/ B?HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0nLH'"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(&y$   (}(2U$ y!     X% X `   0  - - `aaUEUUeӀD 3|x(#$  0  bryant v. department of safety - opinion  *( ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   U2 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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd-'C << G<  9p`(Arial$$$$'dxd $ !  #d#%%   ))   YYY FILED)XApril11,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d#%%   $    %X       ThenoticeofseizurelistedMr.Bryantsaddressas 257W.MarketSt.Apt.3.Mr.Bryantassertedinalateraffidavitthatheactuallyresidedat257W.MarketStreet,Apt.4.Thediscrepancyintheaddressesmightbesignificantinothercircumstances,butitisnotϢsignifiicantinthiscase.("$    PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . %%          \RA'\  \RA'\7/dd7    ћ @ % INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLE% SAMUELTYRONEBRYANT, )      ) Plaintiff/Appellant,  )      ) DavidsonChancery      ) No.95710IIIVS.      )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019509CH00398̜R(+'A1-j|c4`  `@RߛMICHAELC.GREENE,  )CommissioneroftheTennessee )DepartmentofSafety,   )      ) Defendant/Appellee.  )@ APPEALFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTFORDAVIDSONCOUNTY@ ATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEE@ THEHONORABLEROBERTS.BRANDT,CHANCELLORForthePlaintiff/Appellant:    FortheDefendant/Appellee:FrancisX.Santore,Jr.     CharlesW.Burson̢SANTOREANDSANTORE    AttorneyGeneralandReporterGreeneville,Tennessee        RebeccaLyford        AssistantAttorneyGeneral@ % AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED %       WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE  %@ OPINION % ThisappealinvolvestheforfeitureofanautomobileundertheTennesseeDrugControlAct.TheautomobilesownerfiledapetitionforjudicialreviewoftheforfeitureorderintheChanceryCourtforDavidsonCounty,assertingthattheforfeitureproceedingwasunconstitutionalbecausehedidnotreceiveanoticeofseizureoracopyofthedepartmentsforfeitureorder.Thetrialcourtdismissedthepetitionbecauseitwasnottimelyfiled.Weaffirm. OnMay5,1994,SamuelBryantwasdrivingseveralchildrentoalocalskatingrinkwhenhewaspulledoverbytwomembersoftheFirstJudicialCircuitDrugTaskForce.AftersearchingMr.Bryants1985NissanMaxima,theofficersarrestedMr.Bryantonchargesofevadingarrest,childneglect,anddrivingonarevokedlicense.Aftertheyarrivedatthejail,oneofthearrestingofficersinformedMr.Bryantthathiscarwassubjecttoforfeiturebecausetheauthoritieshadfoundthreetenthsofagramofcrackcocaineinit. Whattranspiredafterthispointisdisputed.TheofficerassertedthathegaveMr.BryanttherequirednoticeofseizureformandthatMr.Bryantrefusedtosigntheacknowledgmentontheformthathehadreceivedit.Mr.Bryant,whoclaimstobefunctionallyilliterate,maintainsthathewasneverreadorshowntheform.Mr.Bryantlaterpleadedguiltytodrivingonarevokedlicenseandevadingarrestbutwasneverchargedwithpossessionofthecrackcocaine. Mr.Bryantdidnotfileatimelyclaimforhisautomobile,andonAugust12,1994,theDepartmentofSafetyenteredafinalorderforfeitingtheautomobileandacompactdiscplayer.ThedepartmentmailedacopyofitsforfeitureordertoMr.Bryantattheaddresslistedonthenoticeofseizure, ,   ףbuttheletterwaslaterreturned  marked undeliverableasaddressed:forwardingorderexpired.Thedepartmentmadenootherattemptstodeliverthenotice.Mr.BryantclaimsthathedidnotlearnoftheforfeitureuntilOctober1994whenhedischargedhislawyerandtookhisfiletoanewlawyer.TherecordcontainsnoexplanationconcerninghowacopyofthedepartmentsAugust12,1994ordercametobefoundinMr.Bryantsformerattorneysfile.Mr.BryantandhisnewlawyerdidnotfiledapetitionforjudicialreviewoftheAugust12,1994orderuntilMarch7,1995. Petitionsforjudicialreviewmustbefiledwithinsixtydaysaftertheentryofthefinaladministrativeorder.Tenn.CodeAnn.45322(b)(1)(Supp.1996).Thistimelimitationismandatoryandjurisdictional.Bishopv.TennesseeDeptofCorrection,896S.W.2d557,558(Tenn.Ct.App.1994).Thus,intheabsenceofanequitablegroundsimilartothosefoundinTenn.R.Civ.P.60.02,thetrialcourtmustdismissuntimelypetitionsforjudicialreview. Mr.BryantattemptstojustifyhisfailuretofileatimelypetitionforjudicialreviewbyassertingthatheisfunctionallyilliterateandthatheneverreceivedacopyofthenoticeofprocedureoracopyoftheDepartmentofSafetysAugust12,1994forfeiture.TherecordcontainsproofthatbothsubstantiatesandrefutesMr.Bryantsclaims.Weneednotanalyzethisevidenceindetail,however,becauseMr.BryantadmitsthathehadactualnoticeofthedepartmentsforfeitureorderbynolaterthanearlyOctober1994whenheandhisnewlawyerdiscoveredtheorderinthefileobtainedfromMr.Bryantsformerlawyer.Mr.Bryantoffersnoexplanationforhisfailuretofileapetitionforjudicialreviewwithinsixtydaysafter discoveringtheorder.Thus,evenifwegiveMr.Bryanteverybenefitofthedoubt,hispetitionforjudicialreviewmuststillbedismissedbecauseitisuntimely. WeaffirmthejudgmentdismissingMr.Bryantspetitionforjudicialreviewandremandthecaseforwhateverfurtherproceedingsmayberequired.WealsotaxthecostsofthisappealtoSamuelTyroneBryantforwhichexecution,ifnecessary,mayissue.       ____________________________       WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGECONCUR:________________________________HENRYF.TODD,P.J.,M.S.________________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE