ÿWPC „dr—åaÖå_?2r·6׵߯W Ö4#´Œq>©çIU›ÐôÂDx—Õm—³Þ²;‡œÁ/Ç-KsÀr+o—.ã®$%V‘üÑd^—^É.Ö³‘ÿ»Ìûb—Šã˦›Þñ1o´ôïØœQÄljnÅj ø»n•^uk*ۖɘò îxÇh™NŒb,ª¸©‚GåOƪk /gOÑ)®·s½íã1·Ó?Ö ð݆+\zÄ’lú Všn´Wø¶·ÃÊ‚öË÷Ô 4ÔzðÀæµu¤LêÉo¤éqQ›}©s…ºžëþ3JÛR]YFÂþ«D…ài¹p@™Éþ”¥íAqm ¹IÚÃ6¢ô^µà·H`–Ò«d2YêĆuX°``ëP3®þÒVe Žž¹ƒ¡Í([f ÙϨ$5Î¥ÓyôÊÀžªII¸¼ðÚ¦î,?N4hãØÛïüoçg°nÉQ•>Â'JÑ32Ç– ;€E笩ü6Õ) ­X߸E7ûdŒ‹%çEIð§üätE«‰¨ç²¬-¶cômÊÀ3 ²|ï^ÀgB¼gÊ\Pìôбïöñ¿÷†î÷©YºkçByí:oÿŸ”ƒZ&ª#|ÛÕÑ=1½G*葞µpWb %\U@b 0ˆ¢ 0D*U'NnN¼UN¾ z Ò† U:X U>’ `Ð w0Æ4ÆúÆÀƆ 0¤LNð4òE m#Á0ñ^ ùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùùb 0ë     Bøø 0¤ D3¹ D-ì 0K ASdÆ· 0¤} 0D! A«e»(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regularô\  `‹&Times New Roman VÝ ƒR>$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôéõò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€legislature€has€authorized€the€promulgation€of€local€rules€of€court€in€T.C.A.€Ô‡ ôë òòôéõÔððÔ#†ôéõò ò ôëÑ#ÔÔ‡ôéõòòôéõÔ€16„2„511,€which€provides:Ð ° ÐÔ#†ôéõòòôéõ#ÔÔ‡ôéõòòôéõÔà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÓ SÓÔ#†ôéõòòôéõˆ#ÔÔ‡ ôéõòòôéõÔUniform€rules€of€practice€may€be€promulgated€in€each€district€by€the€judges€thereof.Ð tÄ ÐSuch€rules€shall€be€consistent€with€the€statutory€law,€the€Rules€of€the€Supreme€CourtÐ 8ˆ Ðand€the€Rules€of€Criminal€and€Civil€Procedure.€The€judges€within€a€district€may,€byÐ üL Ðrule,€designate€courts€or€parts€of€a€court€that€will€be€primarily€responsible€forÐ À Ðhearing€certain€types€of€cases€or€cases€dealing€with€certain€areas€of€the€law.€Not€lessÐ „Ô Ðthan€thirty€(30)€days€prior€to€such€rules€taking€effect,€copies€of€such€rules€shall€beÐ H ˜ Ðpublished€and€circulated€to€the€practicing€bar,€and€filed€with€the€administrativeÐ  \ Ðdirector€of€the€courts.Ô#†ôéõòò ôéõ#ÔÔ‡ôéõòòôéõÔLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÉP$§§Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G=»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýš‚,-˜C1'­¡Corel3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 Šr1-s - ù-(|G2>$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G=»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôéõò»»Ô d(|3ÉP$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G=»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÉP$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G=»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G=»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼G=»»»ÔÑ8€QXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î_G=ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼G=»îî_ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAugust€7,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XQX»¼G=ÔÌò òÔ#†¼G=»XXQó#ÔROBERT€MAYòòóó€v.€WOODLAWN€MEMORIAL€PARK,€INC.òòóóÔ‡XQX»¼G=Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òA€Direct€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€01C„1921€€€€€€The€Honorable€Carol€Soloman,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„02945„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€September€17,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XQXXXQÔà  àThis€appeal€involves€a€dismissal€in€circuit€court€of€a€general€sessions€appeal€for€failure€ofÐ xÈ  Ðplaintiff„appellant€to€obtain€a€trial€date€within€45€days€of€the€appeal€pursuant€to€local€rule€of€court.€Ð d´ ÐAfter€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal,€plaintiff€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend€pursuant€to€Tenn.R.Civ.P.,Ð P  ÐRules€59€and€60,€which€motion€was€denied.€€Plaintiff€has€appealed.€€We€reverse€and€remand.Ð <Œ ÐÌà  àÔ#†XQXXXQÓ#ÔÔ#†¼G=»XXQo#ÔÔ‡XQX»¼G=ÔÌÓÇÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Reversed€andÐ ì< ÐRemandedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼G=»àXQ0#ÔÔ‡XQX.¼G=ÔW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,€W.S.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,Ð ° ÐJ.óó€and€òòHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€J.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌPaul€W.€Duty,€John€H.€Lowe,€Goodlettsville,€For€Appellant,€Robert€MayÐ tÄ ÐÌScott€D.€Carey,€Sandi€L.€Pack,€Nashville,€For€Appellee,€Woodlawn€Memorial€Park,€Inc.Ð L œ ÐÓïÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼G=»XXQ#ÔÔ‡XQX»¼G=ÔÐ $"t! ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼G=»XXQÿ #ÔÔ‡XQX»¼G=ÔÓ  Óà  àPlaintiff,€Robert€May€(May),€sued€defendant,€Woodlawn€Memorial€Park€(Woodlawn),€inÐ ü#L# Ðgeneral€sessions€court€and€the€case€was€dismissed€by€the€general€sessions€court€on€June€20,€2001€forÐ è$8 $ Ðfailure€to€prosecute.€€On€June€21,€2001,€May€appealed€for€a€òòde€novoóó€trial€in€circuit€court€with€anÐ Ô%$!% Ðappropriate€appeal€bond.€€On€July€31,€2001,€May€filed€a€motion€to€set€the€case€for€trial,€or€in€theÐ À&"& Ðalternative,€for€a€scheduling€order€and€also€included€a€motion€to€amend€the€pleadings.€€The€motionÐ ¬'ü"' Ðwas€set€for€a€hearing€on€August€24,€2001,€but€at€the€request€of€Woodlawn,€was€continued€byÐ ˜(è#( Ðagreement€to€August€31,€2001.€€Ð „)Ô$) ÐÌà  àRelying€on€Rule€20(b),€Local€Rules€of€Practice€of€the€Courts€of€Record€of€Davidson€County,Ð \+¬&+ Ðâ âthe€trial€court,€on€September€24,€2001,€entered€an€order€dismissing€the€appeal,€which€states:Ð H,˜',ý9 Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€appears€to€the€Court€that€this€general€sessions€appeal€has€notÐ ° Ðâ âbeen€set€for€trial€within€forty„five€(45)€days.Мì` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àTherefore,€in€accordance€with€Rule€20(b)€of€Local€Rules€ofÐ tÄ ÐPractice€of€the€Courts€of€Record€of€Davidson€County,€it€isÐ `° ÐORDERED€that€the€judgment€of€the€General€Sessions€Court€is€herebyÐ L œ Ðmade€a€judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court.Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àFurther,€the€cost€of€this€cause€are€[sic]€assessed€to€theÐ  ` Ðappellant,€and/or€its€surety€for€which€execution€may€issue,€ifÐ ü L  Ðnecessary.Ðè 8 ` x` x ÐÌà  àOn€October€23,€2001,€May€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend€the€judgment€pursuant€to€RulesÐ À  Ð59€and€60,€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€€We€perceive€the€motion,€with€the€supporting€documents,€to€present€twoÐ ¬ü  Ðavenues€for€relief:€€(1)€May€asserts€that€he€complied€with€the€local€rule€by€filing€his€motion€for€a€trialÐ ˜è  Ðsetting€within€45€days;€(2)€If,€in€fact,€he€is€incorrect€in€his€interpretation€of€the€rule,€he€should€haveÐ „Ô  Ðrelief€resulting€from€his€counselððs€mistake,€inadvertence,€or€excusable€neglect.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.R.Civ.P.Ð pÀ Ð60.02€(1).Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€denied€Mayððs€motion€and€he€has€appealed,€presenting€three€issues€for€review,Ð 4„ Ðas€stated€in€his€brief:Ð  p ÐÌÔ‡XQXXXQÔà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1)€Whether€the€Appellant€complied€with€the€local€rules€of€theÐ øH ÐDavidson€County€Court€when€he€filed€his€motion€to€set€his€generalÐ ä4 Ðsessions€appeal€within€forty„five€(45)€days€of€the€receipt€of€theÐ Ð  Ðwarrant€by€the€Circuit€Court;€Ð¼ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)€Whether€the€local€rule€in€question€and€the€actions€of€the€trial€courtÐ ”ä Ðin€dismissing€Appellantððs€general€sessions€appeal€were€contrary€toÐ €Ð Ðcontrolling€state€law€and€wrongfully€deprived€Appellant€of€hisÐ l¼ Ðfundamental€rights€of€due€process€and€equal€protection;€ÐX ¨` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(3)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€set€aside€the€dismissalÐ 0"€  Ðof€Appellantððs€general€sessions€appeal.€€Ô#†XQXXXQõ#ÔÔ‡XQXXXQÔà p àÐ#l!` x` x ÐÌà  àConsideration€of€the€first€issue€involves€an€interpretation€of€Local€Rule€20(b)€of€the€LocalÐ ô$D # ÐRules€of€Practice€of€the€Davidson€County€Court€of€Record,€which€states:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àÔ#†XQXXXQ¿#ÔÔ‡XQXXXQÔOnce€the€warrant€being€appealed€is€received€by€and€filed€with€the€Circuitи'#&Ð Ð  Ðà  àCourt€Clerk,€the€appellant€has€the€duty€to€set€the€appeal€for€a€hearingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðà  àbefore€a€trial€judge.€€The€appellant€has€forty€five€(45)€days€to€secure€a€trialÐ )à$( Ðà  àdate€from€the€court.€€This€time€is€counted€from€the€date€the€Circuit€CourtÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àClerk€files€the€appealed€warrant.€€If€the€appellant€fails€to€secure€this€orderÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àwithin€the€45€day€time€period,€an€order€will€be€entered€making€the€judgmentÐ ° Ðà  àof€the€General€Sessions€Court€the€judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€with€costsÐ œì Ðà  àtaxed€to€the€appellant.€€At€the€time€the€appeal€is€perfected€in€the€Clerkððs€office,Ð ˆØ Ðà  àthe€clerk€shall€give€the€appellant€or€the€appellantððs€attorney€written€notice€ofÐ tÄ Ðà  àthis€rule.Ô#†XQXXXQ#ÔÔ‡XQXXXQÔÐ `° ÐÌà  àAll€trial€courts€are€required€to€adopt€in€writing€local€rules€describing€procedures€for€variousÐ 8 ˆ Ðsteps€in€the€trial€of€cases,€including€the€setting€of€cases€for€trial.€€Rule€18€(a)(1),€Rules€of€theÐ $ t ÐSupreme€Court.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€the€promulgation€of€the€local€rules€is€somewhat€analogous€to€the€legislativeÐ  ` Ðactions€and€the€interpretation€and€construction€of€the€rules€as€guided€by€the€rules€concerningÐ ü L  Ðstatutory€construction.€€The€primary€rule€of€statutory€construction€is€that€the€intention€of€theÐ è 8  Ðlegislative€body€must€prevail.€€ò òòòMosier€v.€DOTó óóó,€982€S.W.2d€864€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€InÐ Ô$  Ðconstruing€the€legislation,€the€Court€must€seek€a€reasonable€construction€in€light€of€the€purposes,Ð À  Ðobjectives,€and€spirit€of€the€legislation€based€on€good,€sound€reasoning.€€ò òòòSee€Scott€v.€Ashland€HealthÐ ¬ü  ÐCare€Ctr.ó óóó,€49€S.W.3d€281€(Tenn.€2001).€€In€ascertaining€the€intent€of€the€legislature,€the€court€mayÐ ˜è  Ðlook€to€the€language€of€the€legislature,€its€subject€matter,€the€object€and€reach€of€the€legislation,€andÐ „Ô  Ðthe€wrong€or€evil€which€it€seeks€to€remedy€or€prevent,€and€the€purpose€sought€to€be€accomplishedÐ pÀ Ðin€its€enactment.€€ò òòòSee€State€v.€Gillilandó óóó,€22€S.W.3d€266€(Tenn.€2000).€€Legislative€intent€or€purposeÐ \¬ Ðis€to€be€ascertained€primarily€from€the€natural€and€ordinary€meaning€of€the€language€used.€€ò òòòSeeÐ H˜ ÐLipscomb€v.€Doeó óóó,€32€S.W.3d€840€(Tenn.€2000).Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àWhile€trial€courts€of€this€state€have€the€authority€to€make€and€implement€reasonable€localÐ  \ Ðrules€of€practice€and€procedure€in€their€respective€courts,€the€rules€cannot€conflict€with€substantiveÐ øH Ðrules€of€law.€€ò òòòSee€Brown€v.€Dalyó óóó,€884€S.W.2d€121€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994).€€In€the€interpretation€ofÐ ä4 Ðlocal€rule€20€(b),€we€should€read€the€local€rule€in€light€of€the€objectives€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ Ð  ÐCivil€Procedure€ð ðto€secure€a€just,€speedy,€and€inexpensive€determination€of€every€action.ðð€Ð ¼  ÐÔ_ÔTenn.R.Civ.P.Ô_Ô€1.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àLocal€rule€20(b)€states€that€the€appellant€has€to€secure€a€trial€date€from€the€court€andÐ €Ð Ðcontemplates€that€securing€a€trial€date€is€by€court€order.€€To€obtain€such€an€order,€a€written€motionÐ l¼ Ðmust€be€filed.€€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€7.02.€€The€primary€principle€underlying€these€decisions€is€thatÐ X ¨ Ðð ðprocedural€rules€should€be€used€to€enhance,€rather€than€impede,€the€search€for€justice€and€avoidÐ D!” Ðlegal€technicalities€and€procedural€niceties.ðð€€ò òòòSee€Levy€v.€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appeals,€WilliamsonÐ 0"€  ÐCountyó óóó,€M1999„001260COA„R3„CV,€2001€Lexis€722€*1€at€*€12€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€27,€2001).€Ð #l! ÐConsequently,€where€no€prejudice€exists,€procedural€rules€should€not€be€used€to€ð ðthwart€theÐ ° Ðconsideration€of€cases€on€their€merits.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€*13;€ò òòòsee€also€Wallace€v.€Wallaceó óóó,€733€S.W.2d€102,Ð œì Ð106€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987).€€ð ð[I]t€is€the€general€rule€that€courts€are€reluctant€to€give€effect€to€rulesÐ ˆØ Ðof€procedure€which€seem€harsh€and€unfair,€and€which€prevent€a€litigant€from€having€a€claimÐ tÄ Ðadjudicated€upon€its€merits.ðð€€ò òòòChildress€v.€Bennettó óóó,€816€S.W.2d€314,€316€(Tenn.€1991)€(citing€ò òòòStappÐ `° Ðv.€Andrewsó óóó,€172€Tenn.€610,€113€S.W.2d€749,€750€(1938)).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àIn€ò òòòFrazier€v.€East€Tennessee€Baptist€Hosp.ó óóó,€55€S.W.3d€925€(Tenn.€2001),€our€SupremeÐ $ t ÐCourt€was€faced€with€a€situation€somewhat€analogous€to€the€situation€presented€here.€€In€ò òòòFrazieró óóó,Ð  ` Ðplaintiff€sued€a€hospital€and€a€physician€in€a€medical€malpractice€action.€€During€the€course€of€theÐ ü L  Ðpreliminary€proceedings,€plaintiff€voluntarily€dismissed€the€hospital€as€a€party€defendant€onÐ è 8  ÐAugust7,€1998.€€After€further€discovery,€plaintiff€determined€that€the€hospital€should€actually€be€aÐ Ô$  Ðparty€defendant€and,€on€August€5,€1999,€plaintiff€filed€in€the€circuit€court€a€motion€to€amend€theÐ À  Ðoriginal€complaint€and€a€proposed€amended€complaint€adding€the€hospital€as€a€defendant.€€OnÐ ¬ü  ÐAugust€10,€1999,€an€order€was€entered€granting€the€motion€to€amend,€thereby€rejoining€the€hospitalÐ ˜è  Ðas€a€defendant.€€The€hospital€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss,€arguing€that€plaintiffððs€action€was€untimely,Ð „Ô  Ðbecause€the€order€granting€the€motion€to€amend€was€filed€two€days€after€the€expiration€of€the€one„Ð pÀ Ðyear€statutory€period€for€commencement€of€a€new€action€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€Ô#†XQXXXQG#ÔÔ‡ XßHXXXQÔððÔ#†XQXX XßHÉ2#ÔÔ‡XQXXXQÔ€28„1„105.€€TheÐ \¬ Ðhospital€took€the€position€that€the€filing€of€the€motion€to€amend€did€not€constitute€a€commencementÐ H˜ Ðof€the€new€action,€as€provided€for€in€the€savings€statute.€€In€holding€that€the€plaintiffððs€action€againstÐ 4„ Ðthe€hospital€was€timely€filed€within€the€savings€statute,€the€Court€quoted€with€approval€from€ò òòòEatonÐ  p ÐCorp.€v.€Appliance€Valves€Coó óóó.,€634€F.Supp.€974,€982„83€(N.D.€Ind.€1984),€as€follows:Ð  \ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[O]nce€the€plaintiff€has€filed€its€proposed€amended€complaintÐ ä4 Ðaccompanied€by€a€motion€for€leave€to€amend€within€the€statutoryÐ Ð  Ðperiod,€the€statute€of€limitations€is€tolled€even€though€the€court€orderÐ ¼  Ðgranting€leave€to€amend€and€the€technical€filing€of€the€amendedÐ ¨ø Ðcomplaint€occur€after€the€running€of€the€statute€of€limitations.€€ThisÐ ”ä Ðis€the€only€just€and€proper€result€since€once€leave€to€amend€has€beenÐ €Ð Ðrequested€and€a€proposed€complaint€is€on€file,€the€plaintiff€has€takenÐ l¼ Ðthose€steps€within€his€power€to€toll€the€statute€and€must€await€theÐ X ¨ Ðappropriate€court€order.ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌò òòòId.ó óóó€at€982„83.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àThe€ò òòòFrazieró óóó€Court€said:Ð ô$D # ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWe€agree€with€the€general€rule€expressed€in€these€jurisdictions€to€holdÐ Ì&"% Ðthat,€when€the€motion€to€amend€the€complaint€and€a€proposedÐ ¸'#& Ðamended€complaint€are€filed€prior€to€the€running€of€the€statute€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðlimitations,€the€motion€to€amend€stands€in€place€of€the€actualÐ )à$( Ðamended€complaint€while€the€motion€is€under€review€by€the€court.Ð|*Ì%)` x` x ÐÐ h+¸&* Ð55€S.W.3d€at€930.Ð ° ÐÌÔ#†XQXXXQ3#ÔÔ‡ XQXXXQÔà  àThe€trial€courtððs€requirement€that€Appellant€secure€an€actual€date,€after€he€had€filed€a€MotionÐ ˆØ Ðto€Set,€erects€a€technical€barrier€to€appeal,€such€as€our€Supreme€Court€has€cautioned€against.€€ò òòòSeeÐ tÄ ÐJohnson€v.€Hardinó óóó,€926€S.W.2d€236,€238€(Tenn.€1996).€€Neither€an€attorney€nor€a€pro€se€litigant€hasÐ `° Ðthe€power€to€mandate€a€court€to€set€a€hearing€date.€€The€most€that€the€attorney€can€do€is€to€request,Ð L œ Ðby€motion,€that€a€date€be€set.€€Once€that€motion€has€been€filed,€the€matter€is,€for€all€intents€andÐ 8 ˆ Ðpurposes,€out€of€the€hands€of€the€attorney€or€litigant.€€As€in€ò òòòFrazier,€supraó óóó,€the€appellant€has€takenÐ $ t Ðthe€steps€within€his€power€to€obtain€a€trial€date.€ò òòòSee€Eaton€Corp.€v.€Appliance€Valves€Co.,€ó óóó634Ð  ` ÐF.Supp.€974,€982„83€(N.D.€Ind.€1984).€€Consequently,€in€the€instant€case,€it€would€fly€in€the€face€ofÐ ü L  Ðjustice€to€require€that€the€matter€actually€be€set€within€the€forty„five€(45)€day€period€prescribed€byÐ è 8  ÐLocal€Rule€20(b).€€Such€a€holding€could€open€the€rule€to€abuse€and€contravene€the€purpose€behindÐ Ô$  Ðthe€òòTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedureóó.€€Ô#†XQXX XQú:#ÔÔ‡XQXXXQÔÐ À  ÐÌà  àA€case€very€similar€to€the€case€at€bar€was€presented€to€this€Court€in€ò òòòNelson€v.€TheÐ ˜è  ÐApplication€Groupó óóó,€1997€Tenn.€Ct.€App.€LEXIS€796.€€The€applicable€rule€then€was€local€rule€19,Ð „Ô  Ðwhich€required€that€ð ðthe€case€shall€be€set€for€trial€within€forty„five€(45)€days.ðð€€Although€the€motionÐ pÀ Ðto€set€the€case€for€trial€was€filed€within€forty„five€days,€no€order€was€entered€within€that€time€period,Ð \¬ Ðand€the€trial€court€dismissed€the€case€for€failure€to€comply€with€Rule€19.€The€appealing€lawyer€filedÐ H˜ Ðmotions€for€relief€pursuant€to€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€60.02€and€59.04,€which€motion€was€denied.€€On€appeal,Ð 4„ Ðthis€Court€reversed€the€trial€courtððs€order€overruling€the€60.02€motion€and€remanded€the€case€forÐ  p Ðfurther€proceedings.€€In€so€doing,€the€Court€noted€ð ðthat€the€lawyer€complied€with€Rule€19€by€timelyÐ  \ Ðfiling€a€motion€to€set.ðð€€Ð øH ÐÌà  àAppellant€in€the€instant€case€timely€filed€the€motion€pursuant€to€Rule€20€to€set€the€case€forÐ Ð  Ðtrial.€€Upon€the€filing€the€motion€the€determination€of€the€trial€date€is€out€of€the€hands€of€the€movant,Ð ¼  Ðand€ØØa€reasonable€construction€of€the€rule€is€that€the€filing€of€the€motion€complies€therewith€and€weÐ ¨ø Ðso€hold.€€However,€if€we€are€in€error€in€this€€holding,€at€the€very€least€the€appellant€is€entitled€to€reliefÐ ”ä Ðpursuant€to€Rule€60.02.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€order€of€the€trial€court€dismissing€plaintiffððs€appeal€is€reversed,€and€the€caseÐ X ¨ Ðis€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary.€€Costs€of€the€appealÐ D!” Ðare€assessed€against€the€appellee,€Woodlawn€Memorial€Park,€Inc.Ô#†XQXXXQM@#ÔÔ#†¼G=»XXQ] #ÔÔ€XQX»¼G=ÔÐ 0"€  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à__________________________________________Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.