ÿWPC) ˜æ‘Îg#s*P%ØŠêãjýÑeÉp…š5áGm!sæŽÎX®7žG NÿÒš´hZ |TjZ¨gðC1/·R$6‡YÚËÙ ðRÎÂð|91žûaå›dfü¢*(A‘ÿ—…?ÛÝ_;&"Ççn}Ô1m³ò°D¹ùh'´éƒì‡4èþ“©ö¥½ï$„1IÎŒ"Çw—ùí!Jp{hÄÙ‘‡9þNwßcr‹ ý#rrµE?ú¹x[fòÀ±+:H\8Þo[6V”mQÔvìGº¹MŒ.ߤv©†-ºS½°sûŽU¿®æ¹BS7u}ßzòÝM 8„ÐQ¤éÊ$Uz`KŒI:äO€|7•í¡’œ‘ÆšýÂLÅ«° <4â6ÖÌwë?¬  ïÌxÌ$\Œ÷MÕaÌj´êh—¯I“^êõdž`Vi +mLBYkIS@šr’iƒë¨† IݵiN§—3¥HJ!·gʆy!ºû.„%g¨úXÏðrW‡  8\e!¬ ²¨ôuÁþ±4 7\-ˆÕBÀQ]·Î–ª ¥þ67fA-Å_ÆXVDKÅw?ÏVÝ6ž#U%¬óµ¾¥WðþÍ;¦Ä3®Ï0x9«ðÊW#ÉÂU N‹ %Ù 0:ß U N bg ^ o w{ 4 “ ¢ m¤ ¦» Na a a a 0Dc c c ,§ EÓ jÕ Õ j ?4© ºÝ"Þ—$`u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u&u& 0Õ(Õ(Õ(Õ( Br)˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular- ù-›€›0Ï €r0B013C13|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ œÝ ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€On€January€10,€2003,€Hooker€filed€an€application€for€permission€to€appeal€with€the€Supreme€Court€ofÐ ° ÐTennessee€pursuant€to€Rule€11€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€The€Supreme€Court€denied€thatÐ tÄ Ðapplication€on€March€10,€2003.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó "Ý ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€a€more€detailed€history€of€the€proceedings€in€this€lawsuit,€see€òòò òHooker€v.€Sundquistó óóó,€107€S.W.3d€532Ð ° Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002). `Ý ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔRule€11.02€provides€in€pertinent€part:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àà ` àBy€presenting€to€the€court€(whether€by€signing,€filing,€submitting,€or€later€advocating)€aÐ 8ˆ Ðpleading,€written€motion,€or€other€paper,€an€attorney€or€unrepresented€party€is€certifying€that€to€theÐ üL Ðbest€of€the€personððs€knowledge,€information,€and€belief,€formed€after€an€inquiry€reasonable€underÐ À Ðthe€circumstances,ð!ðЄÔÐ Ð  Ðà8  à€Ð Ð Ð  ÐÓ  Óà8 @ à*€*€*Ð  \ Ðà8 @ àÌÓ  Óà8  àà ` à(2)€the€claims,€defenses,€and€other€legal€contentions€therein€are€warranted€by€existing€law€orÐ ” ä  Ðby€a€nonfrivolous€argument€for€the€extension,€modification,€or€reversal€of€existing€law€or€theÐ X ¨  Ðestablishment€of€new€law;€[and]Ð# l Ð Ð  H #Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(3)€the€allegations€and€other€factual€contentions€have€evidentiary€support€or,€if€specificallyÐ tÄ Ðso€identified,€are€likely€to€have€evidentiary€support€after€a€reasonable€opportunity€for€furtherÐ 8ˆ Ðinvestigation€or€discovery€.€.€.€. ` Ý ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€provisions€on€which€Mr.€Hooker€relies€read€as€follows:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àà ` àAll€power€inherent€in€the€people€ð!ð€Government€under€their€control.€ð!ð€That€all€power€isÐ 8ˆ Ðinherent€in€the€people,€and€all€free€governments€are€founded€on€their€authority,€and€instituted€forÐ üL Ðtheir€peace,€safety,€and€happiness;€for€the€advancement€of€those€ends€they€have€at€all€times,€anÐ À Ðunalienable€and€indefeasible€right€to€alter,€reform,€or€abolish€the€government€in€such€manner€asÐ „Ô Ðthey€may€think€proper.ÐH ˜Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€1.Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àDoctrine€of€nonresistance€condemned.€ð!ð€That€government€being€instituted€for€theÐ X ¨  Ðcommon€benefit,€the€doctrine€of€non„resistance€against€arbitrary€power€and€oppression€is€absurd,Ð  l  Ðslavish,€and€destructive€of€the€good€and€happiness€of€mankind.Ðà 0 Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€2.Ð h¸  ÐÌà8  àà ` àOpen€courts€ð!ð€Redress€of€injuries€ð!ð€Suits€against€the€State.€ð!ð€That€all€courts€shall€be€open;Ð ð@  Ðand€every€man,€for€an€injury€done€him€in€his€lands,€goods,€person€or€reputation,€shall€have€remedyÐ ´  Ðby€due€course€of€law,€and€right€and€justice€administered€without€sale,€denial,€or€delay.€€Suits€mayÐ xÈ  Ðbe€brought€against€the€State€in€such€manner€and€in€such€courts€as€the€Legislature€may€by€lawÐ <Œ Ðdirect.ÐPÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€17.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà ` àFreedom€of€speech€and€press.€ð!ð€That€the€printing€presses€shall€be€free€to€every€person€toÐ ` Ðexamine€the€proceedings€of€the€Legislature,€or€of€any€branch€or€officer€of€the€government,€and€noÐ Ô$ Ðlaw€shall€ever€be€made€to€restrain€the€right€thereof.€€The€free€communication€of€thoughts€andÐ ˜è Ðopinions,€is€one€of€the€invaluable€rights€of€man,€and€every€citizen€may€freely€speak,€write,€andÐ \¬ Ðprint€on€any€subject,€being€responsible€for€the€abuse€of€that€liberty.€€But€in€prosecutions€for€theÐ  p Ðpublication€of€papers€investigating€the€official€conduct€of€officers,€or€men€in€public€capacity,€theÐ ä4 Ðtruth€thereof€may€be€given€in€evidence;€and€in€all€indictments€for€libel,€the€jury€shall€have€a€right€toÐ ¨ø Ðdetermine€the€law€and€the€facts,€under€the€direction€of€the€court,€as€in€other€criminal€cases.€Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€19.Ð ôD! ÐÌà8  àà ` àBill€of€rights€to€remain€inviolate.€ð!ð€The€declaration€of€rights€hereto€prefixed€is€declared€toÐ |Ì# Ðbe€a€part€of€the€Constitution€of€this€State,€and€shall€never€be€violated€on€any€pretence€whatever.€Ð @ $ ÐAnd€to€guard€against€transgression€of€the€high€powers€we€have€delegated,€we€declare€thatÐ !T% Ðeverything€in€the€bill€of€rights€contained,€is€excepted€out€of€the€General€powers€of€government,€andÐ È!& Ðshall€forever€remain€inviolate.ÐŒ"Ü'Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€XI,€ðð€16.Ð $d)  Ð *Ý ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€decision€in€the€prior€appeal€of€this€case€concluded€that€the€complaint€filed€by€Mr.€Hooker€was€notÐ ° Ðwell„grounded€in€law€or€fact,€because€the€issues€involved€were€ð ðno€differentðð€than€in€other€cases€filed€by€Mr.€HookerÐ tÄ Ðin€which€his€constitutional€arguments€were€rejected.€€òòò òSee€Hookeró óóó,€107€F.3d€at€537.€€That€conclusion€is€the€law€of€theÐ 8ˆ Ðcase. °Ý ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAt€the€hearing,€Mr.€Hooker€represented€to€the€trial€court€that€he€had€filed€over€13€lawsuits€and€spent€overÐ ° Ð$25,000€of€his€own€funds€challenging€the€ð ðmeat€and€drinkðð€practices€of€elected€officials,€which€proceedings€haveÐ tÄ Ðbeen€ongoing€for€over€9€years.€€€ ÔÝ ƒR«l$ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€reflects€that€the€motion€was€received€by€the€defendants€on€July€10,€2003,€but€was€actually€filedÐ ° Ðin€the€trial€court€on€July€25,€2003,€the€same€day€on€which€the€trial€court€ruled€on€the€motion.€€In€any€event,€theÐ tÄ Ðmotion€to€amend€was€timely€under€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€59.04. SUNDQUISTNAIFEH COAduplicative P.J. W.S.HighersKleinselterBredesenMcWherternonmonetary i]nT.C.A.prelitigationmeritlessprefilingIn InTrigonaKetchumCofieldCommnChippsOrtman I]tt]hererelitigatingKleinfelterpretenceF.R.D.(.G2«l$¤¤Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôòXXÔ dÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡XûpXXXÔÔ‡¼GÙ»XXûpÔÑ€ÑÑ8€ûpXXdìdÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÌÌà@ü ü ìàÔ#†XûpX»¼GÙ\#ÔÔ‡î\îXXûpÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ Ô$ Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†XûpXîî\#ÔÔ‡¼GÙ»XXûpԈРúJ ÐÓ  Ó€March€17,€2004€SessionÐ  p ÐÔ#†XûpX»¼GÙ #ÔÌò òÔ‡¼GÙ»XXûpÔJOHN€JAY€HOOKER€€v.€DON€SUNDQUIST,€òòde€facto€Governor€ofÐ  n ÐTennessee,€in€his€individual€capacity,€in€his€capacity€as€candidate,Ð 2 ‚ Ðand€in€his€official€capacity€as€de€facto€Governor,€PAUL€SUMMERS,Ð F – ÐAttorney€General€of€Tennessee,€in€his€official€capacity€and€as€aÐ Zª  Ðmember€of€the€Supreme€Court€Bar€of€Tennesseeóó,€LIEUTENANTÐ n¾  ÐGOVERNOR€JOHN€WILDER,òò€in€his€official€capacity€as€Speaker€ofÐ ‚Ò  Ðthe€Senate,€and€óóJIMMY€NAIFEH,€òòin€his€official€capacity€as€SpeakerÐ –æ  Ðof€the€House€of€RepresentativesóóÔ#†XûpX»¼GÙ4#Ôó óÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAn€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ªú Ðà@@øøìàNo.€01„C„3804€€€€€Thomas€W.€Brothers,€JudgeÐ –æ ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Y` AßÐ Zª ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„02042„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€April€27,€2004ó óÔ#†XûpXXXûp=#ÔÔ‡XûpXXXûpÔò òÐ U¥ ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<,` AßÐ -} Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€case€involves€Rule€11€sanctions.€€The€plaintiff€filed€a€lawsuit€challenging€the€practice€of€servingÐ (x Ðmeat€and€drink€at€political€fund€raisers,€alleging€that€the€practice€violates€Article€X,€section€3€of€theÐ d ÐTennessee€Constitution.€€The€defendants€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss,€based€in€part€on€the€fact€that€theÐ P Ðplaintiff€had€previously€filed€similar€lawsuits€against€other€defendants€upon€the€same€constitutionalÐ ì< Ðgrounds,€and€that€these€prior€lawsuits€had€been€dismissed.€€The€trial€court€granted€the€defendantsððÐ Ø( Ðmotion€to€dismiss.€€The€defendants€then€filed€a€motion€for€sanctions€pursuant€to€Rule€11€of€theÐ Ä  ÐTennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure.€€This€motion€was€denied.€€The€defendants€appealed,€and€thisÐ °! ÐCourt€reversed€the€denial€of€sanctions€and€remanded€the€case€to€the€trial€court.€€On€remand,€the€trialÐ œ"ì  Ðcourt€imposed€as€a€sanction€a€screening€mechanism€whereby€any€complaint€filed€by€the€plaintiffÐ ˆ#Ø! Ðwithin€the€next€two€years€must€be€reviewed€by€a€special€master€to€ensure€that€it€is€not€legallyÐ t$Ä" Ðfrivolous€or€duplicative.€€The€plaintiff€now€appeals€that€order,€claiming€that€the€sanction€imposedÐ `%° # Ðviolates€his€constitutional€rights.€€We€affirm,€concluding€that€the€sanction€imposed€is€reasonable€andÐ L&œ!$ Ðdoes€not€deprive€the€plaintiff€of€his€constitutional€rights.€Ð 8'ˆ"% Ѐ€€Ð $(t#& ÐÓÓò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Affirmedó óÐ )`$' ÐÌòòÓ  ÓHolly€M.€Kirby,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€Court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,€€W.S.,óóÐ è*8&) Ðand€òòAlan€E.€Highers,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Ô+$'* ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General,€and€JanetÐ ¬-ü(,V ÐÔ_ÔM.€Kleinfelter,€Senior€Counsel,€for€the€Appellants,€Governor€Don€Sundquist,€Paul€Summers,Ð ° ÐLieutenant€Governor€John€Wilder€and€Jimmy€Naifeh.Ð œì ÐÌJohn€Jay€Hooker,€òòpro€seóó.Ð tÄ ÐÓ³ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÐ L œ ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àOn€December€13,€2002,€Plaintiff/Appellant€John€Jay€Hooker€(ð ðMr.€Hookerðð)€filed€aÐ $ t Ðcomplaint€against€Governor€Don€Sundquist,€individually€and€in€his€official€capacity,€as€well€asÐ  ` ÐLieutenant€Governor€John€Wilder,€Speaker€Jimmy€Naifeh,€and€Attorney€General€Paul€Summers,€inÐ ü L  Ðtheir€official€capacities€(collectively,€ð ðdefendantsðð).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€complaint€alleged€that€Governor€SundquistÐ è 8  Ðhad€violated€Article€X,€section€3€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€during€his€1998€re„election€campaignÐ Ô$  Ðby€holding€fund€raisers€in€which€ð ðhe€served€ððmeat€and€drinkðð€in€the€process€of€party„giving€to€voters,Ð À  Ðlobbyists€and€friends€ððto€be€electedðð.€.€.€.ðð€€The€complaint€stated€that€it€was€the€ð ðfourth€in€a€series€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðcases€filed€in€the€Circuit€Court€to€ððreform€the€election€process€in€Tennesseeðð€to€make€the€electionÐ ˜è  Ðprocess€lawful€under€both€the€Federal€and€State€Constitutions.ðð€€Several€days€later,€Mr.€Hooker€filedÐ „Ô  Ðan€amended€complaint€that€was€virtually€identical€to€the€original€complaint.Ð pÀ Ѐ€Ð \¬ Ðà  àOn€January€18,€2002,€the€defendants€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€Mr.€Hookerððs€complaint,Ð H˜ Ðasserting€that€there€was€no€factual€support€for€any€of€the€allegations€and€that€the€complaint€wasÐ 4„ Ðcontrary€to€existing€law.€€The€defendants€relied€in€part€on€other€lawsuits€filed€by€Mr.€Hooker€againstÐ  p Ðother€public€officials€in€which€he€raised€the€same€constitutional€challenges€to€the€practice€of€servingÐ  \ Ðmeat€and€drink€at€fund€raisers.€€These€lawsuits€were€resolved€against€Mr.€Hooker.€€ò òòòSee,€e.g.,€HookerÐ øH Ðv.€Bredesenó óóó,€No.€M2002„01025„COA„R3„CV,€2002€WL€31425791€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€30,€2002);Ð ä4 Ðòòò òHooker€v.€McWherteró óóó,€No.€98„2246„III€(July€31,€1998),€òòò òcited€in€Hooker€v.€Sundquistó óóó,€107€S.W.3dÐ Ð  Ð532,€534„35€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002).€€Pursuant€to€Rule€11€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,Ð ¼  Ðthe€defendants€also€sent€to€Mr.€Hooker,€but€did€not€file€in€the€trial€court,€a€motion€for€sanctions,Ð ¨ø Ðasserting€that€the€amended€complaint€was€both€legally€and€factually€frivolous€in€violation€ofÐ ”ä ÐTennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€11.02(2)€and€(3).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mr.€Hooker,€of€course,€did€not€voluntarilyÐ €Ð Ðdismiss€the€lawsuit.€€On€February€8,€2002,€the€trial€court€granted€the€defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss,Ð ° Ðfinding€that€Mr.€Hookerððs€complaint€presented€no€legal€or€factual€basis€for€relief.€€Thereafter,€theÐ œì Ðdefendants€filed€in€the€trial€court€the€motion€for€sanctions€that€had€been€previously€sent€to€Mr.Ð ˆØ ÐHooker.€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€the€defendantsðð€motion€for€sanctions,€holding€thatÐ tÄ Ðð ðthe€chilling€affect€[sic]€on€the€average€citizens€of€this€state€so€greatly€outweighs€the€inconvenienceÐ `° Ðthatððs€associated€with€this€lawsuit€that€I€cannot€see€that€sanctions€are€appropriate.ðð€€On€April€1,€2002,Ð L œ Ðthe€trial€court€entered€an€order€incorporating€that€ruling.Ð 8 ˆ Ѐ€Ð $ t Ðà  àThe€defendants€appealed€the€denial€of€their€motion€for€sanctions€to€this€Court.€€On€DecemberÐ  ` Ð19,€2002,€this€Court€issued€a€decision€finding€that€Mr.€Hookerððs€ð ðbelief€that€his€complaint€was€ððwell„Ð ü L  Ðgrounded€in€both€fact€and€lawðð€[was]€an€unreasonable€oneðð€and€remanded€the€cause€for€the€issuanceÐ è 8  Ðof€an€appropriate€sanction.׃  ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòò òHooker€v.€Sundquistó óóó,€107€S.W.3d€532,€537€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002).Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àOn€remand,€the€trial€court€held€a€hearing€at€which€the€parties€were€given€an€opportunity€toÐ ¬ü  Ðargue€the€issue€of€sanctions.€€At€the€hearing,€the€defendants€sought€the€imposition€of€nonmonetaryÐ ˜è  Ðsanctions€that€would€curb€the€repetitive€lawsuits€filed€by€Mr.€Hooker.€€Mr.€Hooker€argued€that€anyÐ „Ô  Ðaward€of€sanctions€against€him€for€filing€lawsuits€to€protect€the€Tennessee€Constitution€wasÐ pÀ Ðunwarranted,€and€that€such€lawsuits€should€not€be€limited€by€the€courts.€€On€June€27,€2003,€the€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourt€entered€an€order€issuing€sanctions€against€Mr.€Hooker.€€The€trial€court€held€that€ð ð[i]n€order€toÐ H˜ Ðprotect€Mr.€Hookerððs€ability€to€have€meaningful€access€to€the€courts€while€preventingò òó ó€needlesslyÐ 4„ Ðrepetitive€or€frivolous€litigationðð€the€following€sanction€was€warranted:Ð  p ÐÌà8  àà ` àFirst,€Mr.€Hooker€shall€pay€all€outstanding€court€costs€associated€with€anyÐ øH Ðprevious€filings€in€which€he€is€the€plaintiff€that€have€been€dismissed.€€He€shall€notÐ ä4 Ðbe€allowed€to€file€any€further€complaints€in€Circuit€or€Chancery€Court€for€the€20thÐ Ð  ÐJudicial€Division€against€the€State€of€Tennessee€and/or€any€elected€officials,€eitherÐ ¼  Ðin€their€individual€or€official€capacity,€in€which€he€is€plaintiff,€until€such€costs€areÐ ¨ø Ðpaid.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àSecond,€any€complaint€filed€by€Mr.€Hooker€within€the€next€twenty„four€(24)Ð l¼ Ðmonths€in€any€of€the€State€Trial€Courts€of€the€20th€Judicial€Division,€shall€beÐ X ¨ Ðsubmitted€by€the€Clerk€to€the€Special€Master€of€the€Circuit€Court€who€shallÐ D!” Ðdetermine:Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌÐ  $X" Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.à8¸ ` x` xàWhether€the€complaint€alleges€violations€of€Article€XÐ ° ÐSection€3€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€and/orÐ œì ÐSection€2„19„126,€T.C.A.,€andЈظ ¸  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.à8¸ ` x` xàWhether€such€filings€are€legally€frivolous€and/or€areÐ `° Ðmerely€duplicative€of€matters€already€litigated.ÐL œ¸ ¸  ÐÌà8  àThe€Special€Master€will€then€provide€a€written€report€reflecting€those€findings€to€theÐ $ t ÐPresiding€Judge€of€the€Davidson€County€State€Trial€Courts€with€copies€to€Mr.Ð  ` ÐHooker,€his€counsel€and€all€named€defendants.€€In€this€report€the€Special€Master€shallÐ ü L  Ðrecommend€whether€the€complaint€should€proceed€or€be€dismissed.€€No€answer€orÐ è 8  Ðresponsive€pleading€shall€be€required€unless€the€complaint€is€allowed€to€proceed€andÐ Ô$  Ðthe€time€for€filing€such€responsive€pleading€shall€commence€to€run€upon€filing€of€saidÐ À  Ðreport.€€If€Mr.€Hooker€and/or€any€of€the€named€defendants€are€dissatisfied€with€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdetermination€by€the€Special€Master€they€may€request€that€the€Presiding€Judge€reviewÐ ˜è  Ðthe€report€by€filing€a€motion€seeking€relief€within€ten€(10)€days€of€entry€of€the€report;Ð „Ô  Ðotherwise,€the€report€may€be€adopted€by€the€Presiding€Judge€without€hearing.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌThus,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€screening€mechanism€for€two€years€during€which€any€complaint€filedÐ H˜ Ðby€Mr.€Hooker€in€state€trial€court€must€be€submitted€by€the€clerk€of€the€court€to€a€special€master.€Ð 4„ ÐAccording€to€the€order,€the€special€master€must€then€determine€whether€Mr.€Hookerððs€new€lawsuit€Ð  p Ðis€frivolous€or€duplicative€of€other€lawsuits€previously€filed€by€him.ò òó ó€€The€trial€court€noted€that€it€wasÐ  \ Ðð ðreluctant€to€impose€any€sanction€that€would€create€a€barrier€that€denies€the€right€of€citizens€toÐ øH Ðchallenge€the€interpretation€of€our€Constitution,€statutes€and€case€law.ðð€€The€trial€court€observed,Ð ä4 Ðhowever,€that€ð ðendless€litigation€over€the€same€subject€is€detrimental€to€our€society.€.€.€.€€AnÐ Ð  Ðunsuccessful€litigant€should€not€be€allowed€to€keep€filing€the€same€lawsuit€in€different€courts€hopingÐ ¼  Ðto€obtain€a€different€result€on€a€settled€point€of€law.ðð€€Therefore,€to€balance€Mr.€Hookerððs€interestÐ ¨ø Ðin€having€meaningful€access€to€the€courts€with€the€potential€harm€of€endless€repetitive€litigation,€theÐ ”ä Ðtrial€court€concluded€that€the€specially„tailored€screening€mechanism€would€be€an€appropriateÐ €Ð Ðsanction.Ð l¼ Ѐ€Ð X ¨ Ðà  àMr.€Hooker€filed€a€timely€motion€to€alter€or€amend€the€order€on€sanctions.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trial€courtÐ D!” Ðheld€a€hearing€on€the€matter,€at€which€Hooker€argued€that€the€trial€court€did€not€have€jurisdiction€toÐ 0"€  Ðprevent€him€from€filing€lawsuits€to€challenge€constitutional€violations.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€On€July€25,€2003,€the€trial€Ð  #l! Ðcourt€entered€an€order€denying€the€motion€to€alter€or€amend,€maintaining€that€ð ðthis€restrictiveÐ ° Ðsanction€appears€to€be€the€only€means€of€curbing€these€repetitive€filings.ðð€€From€that€order,€Mr.Ð œì ÐHooker€now€appeals.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€Hooker€argues€that€the€sanction€imposed€was€unconstitutional,€because€it€deprivesÐ `° Ðhim€of€his€right€to€defend€the€integrity€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€in€violation€of€Article€I,Ð L œ Ðsections€1,€2,€17,€19,€and€Article€XI,€section€16€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€asserts€that,€ifÐ 8 ˆ ÐRule€11€sanctions€are€permitted€to€be€used€to€interfere€with€a€citizenððs€right€to€protect€theÐ ° ÐConstitution,€then€the€Constitution€will€be€destroyed€and€the€concept€that€ð ðall€power€is€inherent€inÐ œì Ðthe€peopleðð€will€be€replaced€with€the€notion€that€the€judiciary€has€the€power€to€prohibit€a€citizenÐ ˆØ Ðfrom€exercising€his€constitutional€rights.€€In€response,€the€defendants€argue€that€the€trial€court€actedÐ tÄ Ðwell€within€its€authority€in€imposing€the€screening€mechanism€as€a€sanction€against€Mr.€Hooker.€Ð `° ÐThey€note€that€the€sanction€does€not€deny€Mr.€Hooker€access€to€the€courts€or€the€exercise€of€his€freeÐ L œ Ðspeech€rights,€but€rather,€it€simply€ensures€that€his€future€lawsuits€for€a€two„year€period€are€notÐ 8 ˆ Ðrepetitive€or€frivolous,€relieving€future€defendants€during€that€period€from€having€to€respond€toÐ $ t Ðrepetitive,€frivolous€lawsuits€and€conserving€scarce€judicial€resources.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àAs€previously€indicated,€our€prior€decision€directed€the€trial€court€to€impose€Rule€11Ð è 8  Ðsanctions€against€Mr.€Hooker,€so€the€decision€of€whether€to€impose€sanctions€is€not€at€issue.€€In€thisÐ Ô$  Ðappeal,€Mr.€Hooker€challenges€the€nature€and€extent€of€the€sanction€imposed.€€Where€a€sanction€isÐ À  Ðmandatory,€the€nature€and€extent€of€the€sanction€is€discretionary€with€the€trial€court.€€òòò òSee€AndrewsÐ ¬ü  Ðv.€Bibleó óóó,€812€S.W.2d€284,€288€(Tenn.€1991)€(quoting€ò òòòWhittington€v.€Ohio€River€Co.ó óóó,€115€F.R.D.Ð ˜è  Ð201,€209€(E.D.€Ky.€1987)).€€Under€that€standard,€the€trial€courtððs€decision€is€reviewed€to€determineÐ „Ô  Ðð ð(1)€whether€the€factual€basis€for€the€decision€is€supported€by€the€evidence,€(2)€whether€the€trialÐ pÀ Ðcourt€identified€and€applied€the€applicable€legal€principles,€and€(3)€whether€the€trial€courtððs€decisionÐ \¬ Ðis€within€the€range€of€acceptable€alternatives.ðð€€òòò òMercer€v.€Vanderbilt€University,€Inc.ó óóó,€No.€M2000„Ð H˜ Ð00801„COA„R3„CV,€2002€WL€31728864,€at€*10€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€5,€2002).€€The€trial€courtððsÐ 4„ Ðdecision€is€set€aside€only€when€it€has€misconstrued€or€misapplied€the€controlling€legal€principles€orÐ  p Ðhas€acted€in€a€manner€that€is€inconsistent€with€the€weight€of€the€evidence.€€òòò òWhite€v.€VanderbiltÐ  \ ÐUniversityó óóó,€21€S.W.3d€215,€223€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999).Ð øH ÐÌà  àMr.€Hooker€does€not€challenge€the€factual€basis€for€the€trial€courtððs€sanction€in€this€case.€Ð Ð  ÐRather,€the€crux€of€Mr.€Hookerððs€argument€is€that€the€screening€mechanism€imposed€against€himÐ ¼  Ðviolates€his€constitutional€rights.€€He€acknowledges€having€filed€a€series€of€lawsuits€assertingÐ ¨ø Ðviolations€of€Article€X,€section€3€and€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€2„19„126,€and€that€various€courts,Ð ”ä Ðincluding€this€Court,€have€declined€to€accept€his€interpretation€of€those€laws.€€He€claims,€however,Ð €Ð Ðthat€these€lawsuits€were€filed€in€order€to€protect€the€Constitution,€and€that€the€screening€mechanismÐ l¼ Ðfashioned€by€the€trial€court€is€unconstitutional€because€his€unfettered€right€to€pursue€those€actionsÐ X ¨ Ðis€ð ðunalienableðð€and€ð ðindefeasible.ðð€€Mr.€Hooker€cites€no€case€in€which€such€a€screening€mechanismÐ D!” Ðwas€held€to€be€unconstitutional€or€inappropriate€under€similar€circumstances.€Ð 0"€  ЀÌà  àRule€11€provides€a€guideline€for€determining€the€appropriate€sanction€in€a€given€case,€statingÐ $X" Ðthat€the€sanction€ð ðshall€be€limited€to€what€is€sufficient€to€deter€repetition€of€such€conduct€orÐ ô$D # Ðcomparable€conduct€by€others€similarly€situated.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.03(2).€€The€ð ðsanction€mayÐ à%0!$ Ðconsist€of,€or€include,€directives€of€a€nonmonetary€nature€.€.€.€.ðð€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€€This€Court€has€held€that€it€isÐ Ì&"% Ðimpermissible€to€issue€an€injunction€that€completely€bars€a€litigant€from€filing€an€action€in€court.€Ð ¸'#& Ðòòò òSee€Ali€v.€Mooreó óóó,€984€S.W.2d€224,€230€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€The€imposition€of€such€an€absoluteÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrestriction€would€violate€the€open€courts€provision€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€which€provides:Ð )à$( ЇР ° Ðà8  àThat€all€courts€shall€be€open;€and€every€man,€for€an€injury€done€him€in€his€lands,Ð ° Ðgoods,€person€or€reputation,€shall€have€remedy€by€due€course€of€law,€and€right€andÐ œì Ðjustice€administered€without€sale,€denial,€or€delay€.€.€.€.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€17;€ò òòòsee€Alió óóó,€984€S.W.2d€at€230.€Ð `° ЀÌà  àImposing€prelitigation€restrictions,€however,€serves€ð ðRule€11ððs€goal€of€deterring€abuse€in€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðlitigation€process€by€providing€guidance€concerning€the€procedures€and€standards€utilized€in€theÐ $ t Ðimposition€of€Rule€11€sanctions.ðð€€ò òòòAndrews€v.€Bibleó óóó,€812€S.W.2d€284,€292€(Tenn.€1991).€€InÐ  ` Ðòòò òAndrewsó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€held€that€an€attorney€does€not€have€a€continuing€obligationÐ ü L  Ðunder€Rule€11€to€take€remedial€action€if€it€is€later€discovered€that€his€pleadings€are€factually€orÐ è 8  Ðlegally€meritless.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€291.€€In€reaching€its€conclusion,€the€Court€observed:Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà ` àTo€be€sure,€this€Court€views€Rule€11€as€a€potent€weapon€that€can€and€shouldÐ ¬ü  Ðbe€used€to€curb€litigation€abuses€that€from€time€to€time€plague€the€dockets€of€our€trialÐ ˜è  Ðcourts.€€Invoked€properly,€Rule€11€can€confer€great€benefits€on€all€concerned.€€IfÐ „Ô  Ðabused,€Rule€11€may€chill€an€attorneyððs€enthusiasm€and€stifle€the€creativity€ofÐ pÀ Ðlitigants€in€pursuing€novel€factual€and€legal€theories.€€As€a€result,€the€legal€system€asÐ \¬ Ða€whole€will€suffer.€ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ѐ€€€Ð 4„ Ðòòò òId.ó óóó€at€292.€€Thus,€Rule€11€sanctions€imposed€should€be€limited€so€as€to€protect€the€rights€of€theÐ  p Ðlitigant,€but€sufficient€to€protect€the€judicial€system€by€curbing€repetitive,€frivolous,€or€vexatiousÐ  \ Ðlitigation.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð øH ÐÌà  àFederal€courts€have€consistently€upheld€prefiling€restrictions€on€a€litigantððs€right€to€initiateÐ Ð  Ða€lawsuit€in€order€to€curb€repetitive,€frivolous,€or€vexatious€litigation.€€Ô#†XûpXXXûp†#ÔIn€òòò òIn€re€Martin„Trigonaó óóó,€9Ð ¼  ÐF.3d€226€(2d€Cir.€1993),€the€Second€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€discussed€the€need€for€the€variety€ofÐ ¨ø Ðtechniques€adopted€by€courts€to€prevent€litigation€abuses.€€The€appellate€court€reasoned:Ð ”ä ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€Supreme€Court€and€numerous€courts€of€appeals€have€recognized€thatÐ l¼ Ðcourts€may€resort€to€restrictive€measures€that€except€from€normally€availableÐ X ¨ Ðprocedures€litigants€who€have€abused€their€litigation€opportunities.€.€.€.€€Some€courtsÐ D!” Ðhave€responded€to€vexatious€litigants€by€completely€foreclosing€the€filing€ofÐ 0"€  Ðdesignated€categories€of€cases.€.€.€.€€Alternatively,€courts€have€adopted€the€less€drasticÐ #l! Ðremedy€of€subjecting€a€vexatious€litigant€to€a€ð ðleave€of€courtðð€requirement€withÐ $X" Ðrespect€to€future€filings.€.€.€.€€State€courts€have€also€fashioned€exceptions€to€theirÐ ô$D # Ðnormal€litigation€procedures€in€response€to€vexatious€litigants.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÐ Ì&"% Ðòòò òMartin„Trigonaó óóó,€9€F.3d€at€228„29€(citations€omitted).€€The€Second€Circuit€cited€several€cases€inÐ ° Ðwhich€federal€appellate€courts€upheld€district€court€orders€imposing€filing€restrictions€on€litigants.€Ð œì Ðò òòòId.óóó ó€at€229€(citing€ò òòòIn€re€Burnleyóóó ó,€988€F.2d€1,€3„4€(4thòòóó€Cir.€1992)€(approving€district€courtððs€orderÐ ˆØ Ðimposing€pre„filing€review€system€on€litigant);€ò òòòKetchum€v.€Cruzóóó ó,€961€F.2d€916,€921€(10thòòóó€Cir.€1992)Ð tÄ Ð(upholding€district€courtððs€order€requiring€litigant€to€obtain€leave€of€court€to€proceed€òòpro€seóó€in€anyÐ `° Ðfurther€litigation);€òòò òCofield€v.€Alabama€Pub.€Serv.€Commððnó óóó,€936€F.2d€512,€518€(11thòòóó€Cir.€1991)Ð L œ Ð(upholding€district€courtððs€order€requiring€pre„filing€approval€of€all€litigantsðð€pleadings);€òòò òChipps€v.Ð 8 ˆ ÐU.S.€Dist.€Court€for€Middle€Dist.€of€Penn.ó óóó,€882€F.2d€72,€73€(3d€Cir.€1989)€(modifying€districtÐ $ t Ðcourtððs€order€to€require€court€permission€for€litigantððs€subsequent€filings€concerning€particularÐ  ` Ðdispute);€òòò òIn€re€Davisó óóó,€878€F.2d€211,€211„13€(7thòòóó€Cir.€1989)€(upholding€order€requiring€districtÐ ü L  Ðcourtððs€five„judge€Executive€Committee€to€review€all€documents€submitted€by€litigant€to€determineÐ è 8  Ðif€matter€should€be€filed);€òòò òUrban€v.€United€Nationsó óóó,€768€F.2d€1497,€1500€(D.C.€Cir.€1985)Ð Ô$  Ð(enjoining€pro€se€litigant€from€filing€any€civil€action€in€any€federal€court€without€first€obtaining€leaveÐ À  Ðof€the€forum€court)).€Ð ¬ü  ЀÌà  àIn€ò òòòOrtman€v.€Thomasóóó ó,€99€F.3d€807,€811€(6thòòóó€Cir.€1996),€the€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€AppealsÐ „Ô  Ðfound€that€imposing€an€absolute€bar€on€a€litigant€in€order€to€prevent€the€filing€of€repetitive,€frivolousÐ pÀ Ðand€vexatious€lawsuits€was€too€broad€and,€thus,€was€impermissible.€€The€court€stated,€however,€thatÐ \¬ Ðprefiling€òòlimitationsóó€would€be€permissible.€€ð ð[I]t€is€permissible€to€require€one€who€has€abused€theÐ H˜ Ðlegal€process€to€make€a€showing€that€a€tendered€lawsuit€is€not€frivolous€or€vexatious€beforeÐ 4„ Ðpermitting€it€to€be€filed.ðð€€òòò òOrtmanó óóó,€99€F.3d€at€811.€€Similarly,€in€òòò òFeathers€v.€Chevron€U.S.A.,€Inc.ó óóó,Ð  p Ð141€F.3d€264€(6thòòóó€Cir.€1998),€the€appellant€challenged€pre„filing€restrictions€imposed€on€him€andÐ  \ Ðothers,€stating€that€the€restrictions€constituted€an€impermissible€bar€on€future€lawsuits.€€The€appellateÐ øH Ðcourt€disagreed,€however,€and€held€that€the€restrictions€ð ðmerely€imposed€a€conventional€prefilingÐ ä4 Ðreview€requirement.ðð€òòò ò€Feathersó óóó,€141€F.3d€at€269.€€The€appellate€court€stated€that€ð ð[t]here€is€nothingÐ Ð  Ðunusual€about€imposing€prefiling€restrictions€in€matters€with€a€history€of€repetitive€or€vexatiousÐ ¼  Ðlitigation.ðð€€òòò òId.€Ð ¨ø Ѐ€ó óóóÔ‡XûpXXXûpÔÐ ”ä Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€screening€mechanism€imposed€by€the€trial€court€was€narrowly€tailored€andÐ |Ì Ðshort€in€duration,€effectively€curbing€for€a€defined€period€of€time€any€repetitive€or€frivolous€lawsuitsÐ h¸ Ðfiled€by€Mr.€Hooker,€and€was€fully€warranted€given€Mr.€Hookerððs€undisputed€history€of€filing€suchÐ T ¤ Ðlawsuits.€€The€screening€mechanism€does€not€prevent€Mr.€Hooker€from€filing€another€lawsuit.€€ItÐ @! Ðprevents€him€only€from€relitigating€essentially€the€same€lawsuit.€€This€Court€has€great€respect€for€theÐ ,"|  Ðneed€to€litigate€novel€interpretations€of€the€constitutional€and€statutory€provisions,€and€has€respectÐ #h! Ðas€well€for€the€sincerity€of€Mr.€Hookerððs€beliefs.€€This€Court€must€also€respect€the€need€for€otherÐ $T" Ðlitigants€to€have€the€courts€hear€their€lawsuits,€such€as€the€mother€whose€parental€rights€are€beingÐ ð$@ # Ðterminated,€the€paraplegic€who€seeks€compensation€from€a€wrongdoer€for€his€injuries,€the€divorcedÐ Ü%,!$ Ðfather€who€seeks€custody€of€his€child,€the€business€owner€who€feels€he€has€been€wrongly€taxed€byÐ È&"% Ðhis€government,€the€prisoner€who€alleges€abuse€by€prison€officials.€€With€deference€to€the€nobilityÐ ´'#& Ðof€Mr.€Hookerððs€cause,€other€litigants€have€causes€that€are€noble€and€needs€that€are€great,€and€all€areÐ  (ð#' Ðentitled€to€a€full€and€fair€and€impartial€hearing.€€This€cannot€be€accomplished€if€any€litigant,Ð Œ)Ü$( Ðregardless€of€his€cause,€is€permitted€to€glut€the€judicial€system€by€filing€essentially€the€same€lawsuit€Ð  x*È%) Ðover€and€over€as€long€as€there€is€breath€in€his€body.€€Having€received€a€full€and€fair€hearing€and€anÐ ° Ðadverse€decision,€all,€including€Mr.€Hooker,€must€stand€down€and€accept€the€finality€of€the€CourtððsÐ œì Ðdecision.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€to€be€taxed€to€Appellant€JohnÐ `° ÐJay€Hooker,€and€his€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issue,€if€necessary.€€€€€€Ð L œ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________Ð ü L  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHOLLY€M.€KIRBY,€JUDGEÔ#†XûpXXXûp d#Ô