WPCv B.DN9{>:ޛ&p?EbLO&F8Pq<D]Z/֢4BaG{F'4fevS?ƟkE@Tm0}aT|TP<>2j_`\K*pDH?O ~ΤUEnj-*̇3mP R{C!)Aˊ0ln=b@lٗSCzahiG=B^cR`pTŽ]i/0+a1ǔ7M}n,kk ꃱw PjyvI}8Ē{fX7/Nւ,qt ~)zǍ)8֓;b#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz   _ %  0DNUN$EEiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiibkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk 0ssss B^^ 0{ D3 D-R 0K AS 0 0D AHP LaserJet 4 Plus,,,,,,0V-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular],+00 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 Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0  (9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular  Rn$      1  ټ  _ItappearsfromtherecordthatthecauseincriminalcourtwasintheformofafeepetitionpursuanttoTenn.  CodeAnn.820101.- -(|G2n$ !.8dd8         0  ټ d(|3A#$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3A#$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8XXdd8  @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON# #Ԉ ,   September18,2002Session X XX #XX#SHELBYCOUNTYDEPUTYSHERIFFSASSOCIATION,etal.v.  ` SHERIFFA.C._GILLESS_,JR.XX  ( x @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforShelbyCounty 0  @@No.CH0111483D.J._Alissandratos_,Chancellor  p @@*AV) ` dE<` A @  @@TTNo.W200102668_COA_ԄR3CVFiledOctober22,_2002_ ?  AV) ` dE<` A     XXXXTheplaintiffinthiscaseallegesthatthecreationofthepositionofcivilianprocessserveras  approvedbytheShelbyCountyCivilServiceMeritBoardandbythecriminalcourtunderafee   petitionviolatestheShelbyCountyCharterandthestatutorydutiesoftheSheriff.Thetrialcourt  dismissedthecauseasbeingrenderedmootbytheapprovalofthefeepetition.Wereverseand  remand. ~ < #XXXXH##XX#XXTenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtReversed;and V Remanded  F   #X#XX.DavidR.Farmer,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichAlanE._Highers_andHollyK. &v _Lillard_,_J.J._,joined. f AlanBryantChambers,Memphis,Tennessee,fortheappellants,ShelbyCountyDeputySheriffs F AssociationandSargentC.D.Booker,President. 6 LouisP.BrittandFredE.Jones,Jr.,Memphis,Tennessee,fortheappellee,SheriffA.C._Gilless_,Jr. !  k OPINION #XX#XX #" #XX\ #  XXXXXX  XX  InMayof2001,theShelbyCountyHumanResourcesDepartmentpostedopeningsforthe % $ newjobpositionofProcessServerI..Dutiesofthispositioninclude:executionandreturnof r&!% processordersofthecourt;servingofallpapersofthecourt,includingwritsofexecution,writsof ^'"& possession,summons,_replevins_,distresswarrants.OnJune1,TheDeputySheriffsAssociation J(#' ( theAssociation)filedadeclaratoryjudgmentactionagainstShelbyCountySheriffA.C._Gilless_, 6)$( Jr.( theSheriff)inchancerycourt,seekinganinjunctionandalleging:1)thepositionviolatesthe "*r%) statutorydutiesofthesheriffsofficepursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.88201(1),(5);2)theSheriff +^&* hasnoauthoritytoemploycivilianprocessserversandtoengageincompetitionwithprivateprocess +J'+ servers;3)thepositionviolatestheShelbyCountyCharter;4)thecreationofthepositionis ,6(,  repugnanttotheexistingclassificationofDeputySheriff.TheSherifffiledamotiontodismiss -")- _onJune21. ThetrialcourtfoundthattheemploymentofcivilprocessserversbytheSheriffs  DepartmentwasproperlyunderthejurisdictionoftheShelbyCountyCriminalCourtandtransferred  thecaseaccordingly.     ThecriminalcourtdeniedtheSheriffsmotiontodismiss,finding significantfactualand d legalquestionsastowhethertheDefendant,SheriffA.C.Gilless,Jr.,actedlegally,underTenn. P  CodeAnn. 820101and88201,whenhehiredcivilianprocessserversforthepurposeof <  servingcivilprocessonbehalfofthecourtsofthisCounty.Thecourtthereforegranteda ( x preliminaryinjunctionenjoiningtheSherifffromtrainingorcompensatingcivilprocessservers  d pendingafullhearingonthemerits.Followingahearing,thecriminalcourtsustainedthepetition  P  oftheSheriff, #  1      ׀and thenumberofemployees,includingDeputyJailers,DeputySheriffsand  <  Assistants.Thecourtfurtherorderedthat thePetitioner[Sheriff]maypaysalariesincompliance (  with20012002ShelbyCountySalaryPolicyandPersonnelPolicy...asapprovedbytheCivil   MeritServiceBoard[sic]andtheBoardofCommissioners....Thecriminalcourtthenremanded   thecausebacktochancerycourt.Theremandorderreads:   8   ` ThiscausecametobeheardonAugust28,2001beforetheHon.W.Otis t Higgs,Judge,upontestimonyofSheriffA.C.Gilless,Jr.,statementofcounselforthe ` parties,andtheentirerecordofthiscause.FromallofwhichitappearedtotheCourt L thatthepetitionoftheSheriffseekingapprovaltohireprocessofficersisreasonable 8 andshouldbegranted,andthattheabovestyledcausewastransferredtothisCourt $t fromPartIIIoftheChanceryCourt,theHon.D.J.Alissandratos,Ch.,toresolvethe ` issueofapprovalundertheAntiFeeStatute,T.C.A.820101;andtheissuebeing L resolvedinfavoroftheSheriff,asreflectedinaseparateorder,thiscaseshouldnow 8 beremandedbacktotheChanceryCourtfortheresolutionoftheremainingissues $ raisedinthecomplaint.     Uponremand,thechancellorfoundthattheissuesraisedbytheAssociationweresubjectto  Tenn.CodeAnn.820101andhadbeenrenderedmootbyorderofthecriminalcourtapproving  thepositions.Thechancelloraccordinglydismissedtheaction.Thisappealfollowed. p    IssuePresented  H!  @ '  Thedispositiveissueofthisappeal,asweperceiveit,iswhetherthechancellorerredin #l! dismissingthecauseofactiononthegroundsofmootness. $X"    (#' StandardofReview   G  Theissuepresentedinthiscaseisanissueoflaw.Ourreviewofthetrialcourtsjudgment  onissuesoflawis denovo ,withnopresumptionofcorrectness.Tenn.R.App.P.13(d); Bowden p v.Ward ,275S.W.3d913,916(Tenn.2000). \   Analysis  4    TheAssociationscentralargumentonappealisthatthiscauseofactionwasdismissed  X withoutaresolutionoftheissuespresented.Itcontendsthatthecriminalcourtjudgmentdidnot  D  addresstheissuesofwhetherthecreationofthepositionofprocessserverviolatesthestatutory  0  dutiesoftheSheriff,isinviolationoftheShelbyCountyCharter,andisnotincompliancewiththe   provisionsoftheCountysCivilServiceMeritAct.TheAssociationthereforesubmitsthatthe   resolutionofthefeepetitionincriminalcourtdidnotrendertheseissuesmoot,andthatthecriminal   courtaccordinglyremandedtheseissuesbacktothechancerycourt.      Inordertobejusticiable,acauseofactionmustpresentagenuinecontroversyfor h adjudicationbythecourt. McIntyrev.Traughber ,884S.W.2d134,137(Tenn.Ct.App.1994). T Whentheissueshavebeenresolvedandthecasenolongerpresentsacontroversy,theresolutionof @ whichwillprovidemeaningfulrelieftooneoftheparties,ithasbecomemootandisnotjusticiable. ,|  Id. Acauseofactionmustmaintainitsjusticiabilitythroughoutthecourseoflitigation,including h thecourseofappeal. Id. atn3. T   Uponreviewoftherecordinthiscase,wearenotaresatisfiedthatthecriminalcourt , judgmentresolvedtheissuesregardingapplicationoftheCountyCharter,theCountysCivilService  MeritAct,andthestatutorydutiesoftheSheriff.WhiletheAssociationscomplaintacknowledges  thatthecivilianpositionofprocessserverwasapprovedbytheCivilServiceMeritBoard,the  Associationcontendsthatapprovalofthispositionwasinerrorsincethedutiesofprocessserverare  thosewhichmustbecarriedoutbySheriffsdeputiespursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.88201.The x AssociationfurtherarguesthatthepositionviolatestheprovisionoftheCountyCharterthat all d duties[oftheSheriff],conferredorimpliedbylaw,shallexpresslycontinueastheyexistedpriorto P  theenactmentofthisCharter.Thecriminalcourtdidnotadjudicatetheseissues,butspecifically