WPC,. 9[o+P<k/=X.{q{ I^]7Kn8E%L &w}uwGfo iX~y%I,"&羆0uL/ggwKRz(G71ԴtyγM#Ƒ_U’_7:!蕴ҒTLN$q/?q_Q[PVanxIFW 7 O_?WG3]+ӵ}\p $ 1Ꟶ RnsiR!Mi}8I>7ɑ@_y3 .-lte]X汼2>Do6/<`*w~;UV9rG_v1:!F !%3 "WFx&Sxxgpz-NK.YtX'ڒΆ)O//s&b#\^  %) 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz R   o 5 0UNP 0R 05E 0 0 0t 0' 0 0{ 0 0 0 0e 0 0 0Z 0 0 0 0 0 0W 0 0 0C 0bm 0u B- 0C,!U>o!z!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 0')')')') B** 0/* D5* D-+ 0K5+5+ AS++ 0, 0D=- A-HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e,,,,0OxP+s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularj5+am Files\Cor 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.wpt3|xU mootnessEasley justiciabilityLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5*+ (_2623  ..*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   - -&&& $_   x 23   x   )Hairline d($    \  `&Times New Roman p !.8dd8 @    _?+ ` hp x X? 2]2=2]    1  Thecourtshaverecognizedseveralexceptionstothemootnessdoctrine.Exercisingtheirdiscretion,#2]2=#2=2]McIntyre  v.Traughber,884S.W.2dat137;Dockeryv.Dockery,559S.W.2d952,954(Tenn.Ct.App.1977),they#2]2=#2=2]havedeclined t todismisscaseswhentheissueinvolvesimportantpublicinterests,whentheissueisimportanttothe#2]2=#2=2]administrationof 8 justice,andwhenanissueiscapableofrepetitionbutwillevadejudicialreview.#2]2=q#2=2]StateexrelAnglin#2]2=1#2=2]v.Mitchell#2]2=#2=2],596 L S.W.2d779,782(Tenn.1980);#2]2=#2=2]NewRivieraArtsTheatrev.State#2]2=T#2=2],219Tenn.652,658,412S.W.2d#2]2=#2=2]890,893(1967);  #2]2=#2=2]LaRouchev.Crowell#2]2=#2=2],709S.W.2d585,587#2]2=#2=2]88(Tenn.Ct.App.1985).(|G2A$ !.8]dd8         0  = d(|3$ !.8]dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8]dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8]dd8     _  ]8XXdd8  @ G]INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#]G#Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsMarch18,1999 L XX] #]XX #CALVINEASLEYv.JAMESBRITTXX]  J @@ AppealfromtheChanceryCourtforDavidsonCounty  J @@No.972368IICarolL.McCoy,Chancellor  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M199800971_COA_ԄR3CVFiledOctober16,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     ThisappealinvolvesadisputebetweenaprisonerandtheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrection x  stemmingfromadisciplinaryproceeding.Afterhewasreclassifiedtoahighersecuritystatusand d transferredtoanotherinstitution,theprisonerfiledapetitionforwritofcommonlawcertiorariin P theChanceryCourtforDavidsonCountyclaimingthatthedisciplinaryboardandthewardenhad < actedarbitrarilyandcapriciouslybyfindinghimguiltyofthedisciplinaryoffenseofescape.The (x trialcourtdismissedthepetition,andtheprisonerperfectedanappealtothiscourt.Whilethis d appealwaspending,theprisonerwasreleasedfromprisontherebyrenderingthisappealmoot. P Accordingly,wevacatetheJune12,1998orderandremandthecasetothetrialcourtwithdirections < todismissitonthegroundsofmootness. (  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourt  VacatedandRemanded     #]Xn#XX.]WilliamC.Koch,Jr.,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichBenH.Cantrell,P.J.,M.S., t andWilliamB.Cain,J.,joined. ` CalvinEasley,Nashville,Tennessee,ProSe. 8!  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelE.Moore,SolicitorGeneral;andSohnia #`" W.Hong,AssistantAttorneyGeneral,fortheappelleeJamesBritt. #L# Z  OPINION #]XX #XX] %$!% #]XX #  XX]@) I.  '"'   CalvinEasleywasconvictedofrobberyandsentencedtothecustodyoftheTennessee )$) DepartmentofCorrectionfortwentyyears.OnApril2,1997,hewasincarceratedattheNashville p*%* CommunityServiceCenter( NCSC)andwasparticipatingintheworkreleaseprogram.Heleft \+&+ thefacilityattheappointedtimethatday;however,hefailedtoreturnattheappointedtime.Mr. H,', Easleyreturnedtothefacilityapproximatelyninehourslate. 4-(-   .p).   TheDepartmentchargedMr.Easleywiththedisciplinaryoffenseofescape.Adisciplinary  boardconvenedattheNCSCconductedahearingandonApril10,1997,foundMr.Easleyguilty  ofthedisciplinaryoffenseofescape.Basedontheboardsrecommendations,thewardenofthe  NCSCremovedMr.Easleyfromtheworkreleaseprogram.TheDepartmentalsoreclassifiedMr. t Easleyfromminimumsecuritytomediumsecuritystatus.BecausetheNCSCwasaminimum ` securityfacility,theDepartmentalsotransferredMr.EasleytotheSouthCentralCorrectional L  FacilityinClifton. 8    Mr.Easleyexhaustedhisadministrativeappealsregardingthedisciplinehereceived,andon  ` July15,1997,hefiledaprosepetitionforwritofcommonlawcertiorariintheChanceryCourtfor  L  DavidsonCounty,allegingthatthedisciplinaryboardhadactedarbitrarilyandcapriciouslywhen  8  itfoundhimguiltyofescape.OnJune12,1998,thetrialcourtdismissedMr.Easleyspetitionafter $  findingthattherecordcontainedmaterialevidencesupportingthedisciplinaryboardsdecisionthat   Mr.Easleywasguiltyofthedisciplinaryoffenseofescape.Mr.Easleyappealedtothiscourt.     Afterbothpartiesfiledtheirbriefs,theclerkofthecourtreceivedachangeofaddressnotice   fromMr.EasleyindicatingthathewaslivingatanaddressinNashvillethatdidnotcorrespondwith p theaddressofanyoftheDepartmentsfacilities.BecauseneitherMr.EasleynortheAttorney \ GeneralhadprovidedthiscourtwithinformationregardingMr.Easleyscurrentstatus,thiscourt H ascertainedthatMr.EasleyhadactuallybeenreleasedfromprisononSeptember21,1999,having 4 servedhissentence.WetakenoticeofthechangeinMr.Easleysstatusasapostjudgmentfactin  p accordancewithTenn.R.App.P.14.  \ @) II.  4   WhenMr.Easleyfiledthisappeal,hispurposewastoconvincethiscourtthatweshould   vacatethetrialcourtsdismissalofhispetitionforcommonlawwritofcertiorariandthatweshould  sendthecasebacktothetrialcourttodeterminewhetherthedisciplinaryboardhadactedarbitrarily  andcapriciously.Theultimatereliefhesoughtwastoclearhisdisciplinaryrecordsothathecould  returntohisminimumsecurityclassificationandcouldbeplacedbackintheworkreleaseprogram l attheNCSCfortheremainderofhissentence.Mr.Easleysreleasecallsthejusticiabilityofthis X  caseintoquestion. D!   Thecourts,beingcarefulstewardsoftheirpower,havedevelopedvariousjusticiability #l! principlestoserveasguidelinesfordeterminingwhetherprovidingjudicialreliefinaparticularcase $X" iswarranted.Tobejusticiable,acasemustinvolvepresentlyexistingrights,liveissuesthatare $D # withinacourtspowertoresolve,andpartieswhohavealegallycognizableinterestintheresolution %0!$ oftheseissues.Acaseisnotjusticiableifitdoesnotinvolveagenuine,existingcontroversy &"% requiringtheadjudicationofpresentlyexistingrights.Statev.Brown&WilliamsonTobaccoCo., '#& 18S.W.3d186,193(Tenn.2000);Stateexrel.Lewisv.State,208Tenn.534,537,347S.W.2d47, (#' 48(1961);FordConsumerFin.Co.v.Clay,984S.W.2d615,616(Tenn.Ct.App.1998). )$(   Therequirementsforlitigationtocontinueareessentiallythesameastherequirementsfor h+&* litigationtobegin.CharterLakesideBehavioralHealthSys.v.TennesseeHealthFacilities T,'+ Commn,M199800985COAR3CV,2001WL72342,at*5(Tenn.Ct.App.Jan.30,2001)(No  Tenn.R.App.P.11applicationfiled).Thus,casesmustremainjusticiablethroughouttheentire  courseofthelitigation,includingtheappeal.Statev.Ely,48S.W.3d710,716n.3(Tenn.2001);  Cashionv.Robertson,955S.W.2d60,6263(Tenn.Ct.App.1997).Amootcaseisonethathas t lostitsjusticiabilitybecauseitnolongerpresentsapresent,livecontroversy.McCanlessv.Klein, ` 182Tenn.631,637,188S.W.2d745,747(1945);CountyofShelbyv.McWherter,936S.W.2d923, L  931(Tenn.Ct.App.1996);McIntyrev.Traughber,884S.W.2d134,137(Tenn.Ct.App.1994). 8  Thus,acasewillbeconsideredmootifitnolongerservesasameanstoprovidesomesortof $ t judicialrelieftotheprevailingparty.Knottv.StewartCounty,185Tenn.623,626,207S.W.2d337,  ` 33839(1948);FordConsumerFin.Co.v.Clay,984S.W.2dat616;Massengillv.Massengill,36  L  Tenn.App.385,38889,255S.W.2d1018,1019(1952).  8    Determiningwhetheracaseoranissuehasbecomemootisaquestionoflaw.Charter   LakesideBehavioralHealthSys.v.TennesseeHealthFacilitiesCommn,2001WL72342,at*5;   OrlandoResidence,Ltd.v.NashvilleLodgingCo.,No.M199900943COAR3CV,1999WL   1040544,at*3(Tenn.Ct.App.Nov.17,1999)(NoTenn.R.App.P.11applicationfiled).Thus,   unlessthecasefitswithinoneoftherecognizedexceptionstothemootnessdoctrine,3 1  1      ׀thecourtswill p ordinarilyvacatethejudgmentandremandthecasetothetrialcourtwithdirectionsthatitbe \ dismissed.FordConsumerFin.Co.v.Clay,984S.W.2dat617;McIntyrev.Traughber,884 H S.W.2dat138. 4   ThereliefthatMr.Easleyseeks!reclassificationtominimumsecuritystatus!cannolonger  \ haveanypracticaleffectonhispresentrightsandprivilegesnowthatheisbackinfreesociety. H ThereisnoreliefthatthecourtscangrantMr.Easleyifheweretoprevailinthiscase.Accordingly, 4 wefindthattheissuesMr.Easleyraisesonthisappealaremoot.   @^^( III.     InaccordancewithourfindingthatthisappealbecamemootasaresultofMr.Easleys  releasefromcustody,wevacatetheJune12,1998orderandremandthecasewithdirectionsthatMr. l Easleyspetitionbedismissedonthegroundsofmootness.WetaxthecostsofthisappealtoCalvin X  Easleyforwhichexecution,ifnecessary,mayissue. D!    `     h     ___________________________________ $X"    `     h     WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE