WPC 9Q2^@]JKN_ C-̻isJ!lM!ac7*?FBtxlK;+6 ߷+R6HWKzq?Iid FmdX 5V_N?ct =e4-]Z( UjyD߳8ZU(bikW m0@{KO֚F>T+0|sY$vd l'a"| R0۳_`2-73˳1 Ovf 5O\8GUJ?x5|):g#L~-^t4;:_';.LM6U=/ l(DF "T61 Y3#^ژg$g@t<2$R=&|_2Eb:adžŹv͢o&$YY|uRJOu7H)b %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m # UN   k 1HN? 0DAAEb 0 Bzz 0 D3; D-n 0K AS9 0 0D A ;jV+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularK+3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 > RT$      1       _TheplaintiffscomplaintagainstDavidB.Hill,anattorney,wasdismissedonhismotionwithprejudice.This  actionbythetrialcourtisnotanissueonthisappeal.(#$  0  - -(|G2T$ !.8d d 8         0  g` d(|3E$ !.8d d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3E$ !.8d d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8d d8     _   g 8cXXdd 8  @  o gINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE# g o #Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsAugust2,2001 L  X4#X g # gX X4##MICHAELDICKERSON,etal.v.JACKIESTUART,etal. X4#X g  J @@ AppealfromtheChanceryCourtforCockeCounty  J @@No.99101TelfordE.Forgety,Jr.,Chancellor  6 FILEDOCTOBER19,2001    @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200100150COAR3CV   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Theplaintiff,aprisonerinstatecustody,filedacomplaintproseseekingreliefagainstJackieStuart, x  hiswife,GayeStuart,andoneother #  1      ׀baseduponanallegedagreementtosellhimrealproperty.The d trialcourtdismissedthecomplaintwithoutahearingfor fail[ure]toprosecute,findingthatthe P plaintiffhadrefusedthecourtsoffertopresenthistestimony viatelephonedeposition.Wevacate < thetrialcourtsjudgmentandremandforfurtherproceedings. (x # gX X4## X4#X g Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourt < Vacated;CaseRemanded  (   CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.# g X4#w# X4#X. g,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichHoustonM.Goddard,  P.J.,andD.MichaelSwiney,J.,joined.  MichaelL.Dickerson,MountainCity,Tennessee,ProSe. t DavidS.Byrd,Morristown,Tennessee,fortheappellees,JackieStuartandGayeStuart. L  8 OPINION # gX X4## X4#X g #`" # gX X4#E #   X4#X g  Inhiscomplaint,theplaintiff,MichaelL.Dickerson,claimsthatonAugust29,1995,he %$!% purchasedrealpropertyfromthedefendantsandacouplewhoselastnameisONeil.Heallegeshe &"& paid$60,000forthepropertyandreceivedareceiptforsame.Thereisintherecordareceiptdated '"' August29,1995,for$60,000,whichpurportstobesignedbytheStuartsandtheONeils.Thereis (#(  alsointherecordacopyofacashierschecktothosefourpartiesfor$53,284.93.Thatcheckisalso )$)< datedAugust29,1995.Thecheckreflectstheplaintiffastheremitter.Neitherthechecknorthe  receiptreferencesaspecifictransaction.     Inthiscase,theplaintifffiledthreemotionsseekingtobetransportedtothecourtfor t hearings.Thetrialcourtdeniedeachofthesemotions.Wefindnoabuseofdiscretioninthese ` rulings.See Loganv.Winstead ,23S.W.3d297,299(Tenn.2000)(holdingthataprisonerlitigant L   hasnoabsoluteright...tobepresentduringcivillitigation). 8    Therecordinthiscaseissketchyregardingtheproposedtelephonedepositionoftheplaintiff.  ` However,itisclearthatthetrialcourtgavetheplaintiffanopportunitytopresenthistestimonyby  L  deposition.Itisalsoclearthattheplaintiffrefusedthisopportunityandobjectedtopresentinghis  8  caseinthismanner. $    TheSupremeCourthasaddressedthefactorstobeconsideredbyatrialcourtwhenfaced   witharequestfordelayfromaprisoner.In Logan ,theCourtopinedthat     8 ` anabeyanceshouldbegrantedbythetrialcourtonlywhenreasonable p underthecircumstances,inlightofseveralcountervailing \ considerations,suchasthelengthoftheprisonerlitigantssentence, H thedifficultyoftheprisonerinpresentingproof,theburdenonthe 4 courtinmaintainingadocketonwhichsuchclaimswillindefinitely  p remain,theimpracticabilityoflitigatingasuitmanyyearsafterits  \ filingbecausememoriesfadeandwitnessesbecomedifficultto H locate,andadefendantsrighttohaveclaimsagainsthimorher 4 timelyadjudicated. ` x` x  Id. at301.    Althoughanincarceratedplaintiffdoesnothaveanabsoluterighttohaveacivilproceeding  heldinabeyanceoranabsoluterighttopersonallyattendacourtproceeding, id. at299,theremay l betimeswhenbothareappropriateandnecessary.  Thesequestionsarewithinthetrialcourts X  discretion. Id. at302. H!   Wehavegenerallyaddressedlitigationbyprosepartiesasfollows:  #p!   8 ` Whilelitigantswhoproceedproseareentitledtofairandequal $H # treatment, theymustfollowthesameproceduralandsubstantivelaw %4!$ astherepresentedparty. Irvinv.CityofClarksville ,767S.W.2d & "% 649,652(Tenn.Ct.App.1988).Indeed,aproselitigantrequires ' #& evengreaterattentionthanonerepresentedbycounsel.Thetrial (#' judgemustaccommodatetheproselitigantslackoflegalknowledge )$( withoutgivingtheproselitigantanunfairadvantagebecausethe *%) litigantrepresentshimself. Id. l+&*` x` x Ї Johnsonv.Wade ,C/ANo.W199901651COAR3CV,2000WL1285331,at*1(Tenn.Ct.App.  W.S.,filedSeptember6,2000).    Inthiscase,theplaintiffdidnotmakeaspecificrequesttodelayahearingonthemerits t pendinghisreleasefromincarceration.However,itisabundantlyclearfromtherecordthatthe ` plaintiffwantstoprosecutehisaction.Whilethetrialcourtappropriatelyexerciseditsdiscretion L  whenitrefusedtoallowtheplaintifftobetransportedtocourt,thereisnoindicationintherecord 8  thatthetrialcourtconsidereddelayingthismatteruntiltheplaintiffcouldpersonallyprosecutehis $ t action.ThereisevidenceintherecordthattheplaintiffpaidthedefendantsandtheONeils$60,000  ` inconnectionwithsometransactionatoraboutthetimethepartieswereadmittedlydiscussingthe  L  saleofrealproperty.Whiletherecorddoesnotclearlyreflecthowallofthisisrelated,itisclear  8  thattherewasatransactionofsomekindamongtheplaintiff,thedefendants,andtheONeils.This $  beingthesituation,wethinkthisisanappropriatecaseforaremandtothetrialcourttoconsider   whetherornotahearingonthemeritsshouldbepostponedpendingthereleaseoftheplaintifffrom   incarceration.Onremand,thecourtshouldconsiderthefactorssetforthin Logan .Weexpressno   opinionastowhetheratrialonthemeritsshouldbedelayed  .Thisdecisionisforthetrialcourtin   thefirstinstanceafteracarefulreviewofthepertinentfacts. p   Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisherebyvacatedandthiscaseisremandedforfurther H proceedings.Costsonappealaretaxedagainsttheappellee. 4    `     h     _______________________________ 4    `     h     CHARLESD.SUSANO,JR.,JUDGE