WPC v;U-a9TpvEN26Ӽw;v)(:bp-5]H34S=٤ed XbG[^'4B2@֯tv:8Qf0be @D ,nncq2ܹm]q%K)&V݅cCj<5i;ID*=HwMQhP:jkW01?Hҽ (&m"lsdRP ME48/K9z4F%QcY5}&R!Bc鵞:}j~̹xNq46d6[+𠩨RYl“U%+5+puhrSK>iú^O Č}tSvU} )˺-s:oL 8W<] Ыڤ؉I~`# @UNK % 0(w@4  * 2 : B JJ 0z  0D 0PZ  AQ UN 0DQ  U:  J % B- J 0DT 0DPP D/ B D3 A D? BGHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ &'(U)U*P+[,-D.Ӏ8_#tttttt3|x8c:\office\wpwin\template\opinion.wpt((*2$ !        0  (#$  0  ((3/Q$ !   d !"$&C<< C(hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(3$ !   "  X,XXXcXX,   Ad FILEDX,Xc  September2,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regularc:\office\wpwin\template\opinion.wpt dLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !     $      1       AppellanthasfiledamotiontoconsiderpostjudgmentfactspursuanttoTenn.R.App.P.14.ThecourtisunpersuadedthatthepostjudgmentdenialofPlaintiffsmotiontoamendhisoriginalcomplaintafterthecloseofthepleadingsamountstoafactwhichmateriallyaffectsthepositionsoftheparties.Thereforethatmotionshouldbeandisdenied.($$   1  ((' dxdP Pd 'dxd"^y  <<= 8C____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d d !    7'XXdXXd7  llXXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T..-( D@XX-8.r)<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP,  r.888..FREDE.DEAN D )     D )  Plaintiff/Appellant, D )      D ) @ AppealNo. 0 v.   D ) @ 01A019711CH00672 @ 88   D )88DONALCAMPBELL,etal. D ) @ DavidsonChancery  ` 88  #X'Xll#llXX' D ) @ No.972564III  p 8t)>.*jx` `@EL5 ` 8ttxP0 (  tߛ8  Defendants/Appellees.#X'Xll#llXX' D ) 0    COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEAPPEALFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTFORDAVIDSONCOUNTYATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEELLENHOBBSLYLE,CHANCELLOR  #X'Xll#FREDE.DEAN,PROSE `! RiverbendMaximumSecurityInstitution7475CockrillBendInd.Rd.Nashville,TN372091010JOHNKNOXWALKUPAttorneyGeneralandReporter D llXX' '$#" #X'Xll#ARTHURCROWNOVERII,BPR#12306 ($# AssistantAttorneyGeneralCivilRightsandClaimsDivisionCordellHullBuilding,2ndFloor425FifthAvenueNorthNashville,TN372430488  ATTORNEYSFORTHEDEFENDANTS/APPELLEESllXX'ԛ H.))   AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED̛̜  WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE :465 Ї#X'XllK#XX'  OPINION       #X'X #llXX'ThiscasecomestousonappealfromanorderdismissingAppellant p DeanscomplaintagainstAppellees,filedapparentlyundertheauspicesof42U.S.C.1983etseq.,allegingviolationofcivilrightsunderthecolorofstateauthority.ThetrialcourtdismissedMr.Deanscomplaintforfailuretospecifythecapacityofthedefendantsbeingsued.Forthereasonsandundertheauthoritiesrecitedbelow,weaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissalofMr.Deansclaimwithprejudice.# #  1      כ P    ThegravamenofMr.DeansoriginalcomplaintisthathetestedpositivefortuberculosiswhileinthecustodyoftheTennesseeDepartmentofcorrections.πForcompensationforhis injuryhesuesDonalCampbell,CommissioneroftheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrections,JimRoseandCharlesBass,AssistantCommissioners;RobertConley,WardenatWestTennesseeHighSecurityFacility,andDavidMills,WardenatTurneyCenterandIndustrialPrison.  Appellantscomplaintreadsinpertinentpart:8  InSeptember1996,plaintiffwastestedatTurneyCenterIndustrialPrison(TCIP)fortuberculosis,andtheresultswerepositive.    8      8  InMarchof1995,uponcomingintotheTDOC,plaintiffwastestedfortuberculosisandtheresultswerenegative.    8  InJuneof1995,plaintiffarrivedatNortheastCorrectionalCenter,NECC.InSeptemberof1995,wasagaintestedatNECC,againtheresultswerenegative....    8  ItisthepolicyofTDOCtotestallinmatescomingintoTDOCandagaintodotestingontheinmatesbirthdaymonth,plaintiffsbeinginSept.    8  PlaintiffstatesthatsometimebetweenSeptember1995andSeptember1996,plaintiffwasexposedtothetuberculosis 3.4 germ.    8  PlaintiffallegesthatTDOCwasnegligentinitsdutytoprovideplaintiffwithasafeandhealthylivingenvironment.    8  PlaintifffurtherallegesthatTDOCisresponsiblebystatelawforthewellbeingandmedicalneeds.    8      Ӏ  Nospecificactsorfailurestoactareallegedwithregardtoanyofthe @  nameddefendantsinthissuit.&&InresponsetothecomplaintallDefendantsfiledmotionstodismissforfailuretostateaclaim.ThegroundforthesemotionswasthatMr.Deanhadfailedtoindicateclearlythecapacityinwhichthedefendantsweresued. Wellsv.Brown ,891F.2d591(6thCr.1989).Appellantaskswhether  thetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioningrantingthismotiontodismissonthemerits.#Inviewingsuchanaction,ourstandardofreviewisdenovoontherecordwithapresumptionofcorrectnessonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthataction.Tenn.R.App.P.13.#̛  Capacityisraisedbyspecificnegativeaverment.Tenn.R.Civ.P.9.01(1998).Defendantsmadethesespecialavermentsbywayoftheirmotionstodismiss.Indeedtocomewithinthepurviewofa1983action,theplaintiffmustallege,amongotherthings,whetheritissuingthedefendantsintheirindividualcapacityfordamagesorasrepresentativesofthegovernmentalentity,keepinginmindthegovernmentalimmunitycontemplatedinourstatutes.  #m#Mr.DeanallegedinhiscomplaintthathecontractedTuberculosisinone +&{!' oftheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrectionsfacilitiesinwhichhewashousedbetweenSeptemberof1995andSeptemberof1996.̀ *C&- ##  Appellantstatesinthecaptionofhiscomplaintthatthenamed ,'/ defendantsaresuedintheirindividualandofficialcapacity.Theaddamnumof #.s)1 thecomplaintreadsasfollows:   @ RELIEFSOUGHT    $20,000,00eachdefendantcompensatorydamages  $50,000,00eachdefendantpunitivedamages  $10,000,00eachdefendantforpainandsuffering[sic]    Nowhereinthecomplaintdoesappellantindicatethatheissuingthe 84< defendantsfordamagesintheirindividualcapacity,asisrequiredunder42U.S.C.1983.See Wellsv.Brown ,891F.2d591(6thCr.1989).Evenifheweresuing H theseindividualsintheirindividualcapacity,hehasnotallegedsufficientfactstobringthisactionwithinthepurviewofacourtconsideringa1983claim.    TheabsoluteimmunityofstateofficersandemployeesfromsuitinthetypeofsituationallegediscontainedintheplainlanguageofTitle9ofourcode.8  Stateofficersandemployeesareabsolutelyimmunefromliabilityforactsoromissionswithinthescopeoftheofficersoremployeesofficeoremployment,exceptforwillful,malicious,orcriminaactsoromissionforactsoromissionsdoneforpersonalgain.Tenn.CodeAnn.98307(h)(1997).      Tocrossthepleadingthresholdinsuchacase,Appellantmustatleastallegewithclarityandspecificitytheactionsofofficialswhichconstitutethe unnecessaryandwantoninflictionofpaincontemplatedby ++Estellev.Farmer++ F М anditsprogeny. Estellev.Farmer ,429U.S.97,104,97S.Ct.285,291,50  L.Ed.2d251(1976).Seealso Stampsv.McWherter ,888F.Supp.71(WDTenn. ,| 1995).Theallegationsdontevenrisetothelevelofaproperclaimfornegligence.Appellantmaybelieveittotallylogicaltoholdprisonofficialsresponsibleforthefreemovementofgermsandviruses.''However,absentsomeproofofparticularmalfeasanceornonfeasanceonthepartofthoseindividualswhichdeliberatelyfacilitatesthemovementofthoseverygermsintheappellantsdirection,anactionunder42U.S.C.1983simplywillnotlie.Wefind$dismissalappropriateunderthecircumstances.$%ondenovoreviewpursuanttoTenn.R.App.P.13,thattheevidencedidnotpreponderateagainstdismissalwithprejudice.%  AppelleesraiseissueregardingthesubjectmatterjurisdictionoftheϜChanceryCourt.Inviewofourdecisionontheabovegroundsthequestionwithregardtosubjectmatterjurisdictionnotraisedattrialismoot.̛  Theactionofthetrialcourtisaffirmedinallrespectsandthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessary.,Costsonappealaretaxedagainstappellant., @  5g0; -  (  ())-*  * D _________________________________   D WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE W94@ МCONCUR:̛̜̜_________________________________________̜HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S.̛̜_________________________________________̜#XDX #XXDBENH.CANTRELL,JUDGE p  #XDXk(#