Paul Farnsworth, A/K/A Ronnie Bradfield v. Donita Moore

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

Submitted on Briefs September 28, 2000

PAUL FARNSWORTH, a/k/a RONNIE BRADFIELD v. DONITA MOORE,

ET AL.

Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Bledsoe County No. 2056 Thomas W. Graham, Judge _______FILED DECEMBER 27, 2000_____________ No. E2000–01623-COA-R3-CV ______________________________

The Plaintiff, an inmate of the penal system of this State, sues the Warden of the Southeastern Tennessee State Regional Correctional Facility and certain other officials of the facility seeking monetary damages and an injunction based on five separate causes of action. The Trial Court dismissed his complaint, finding that because he refused to submit to a medical evaluation provided by the Defendant pursuant to the orders of the Court, the Court was unable to make an evaluation and as a result of his violation of Tenn.R.Civ.P. 41.02, dismissed his suit. We affirm.

Tenn.R.App.P.3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed;

Cause Remanded

HOUSTON M. GODDARD , P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which HERSCHEL P. FRANKS and CHARLES D. SUSANO, JR., JJ., joined.

Paul Farnsworth, a/k/a Ronnie Bradfield, Henning, Tennessee, Appellant, Pro Se Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Michael Moore, Solicitor General, and Pamela S. Lorch, Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellees Donita Moore, et al.

OPINION Paul Farnsworth, a/k/a Ronnie Bradfield,1 seeks damages from James Bowlen, Warden of the Southeastern Tennessee State Regional Correctional Facility, and certain other officials of the Correctional Facility. He seeks damages alleging five separate causes of action which are set out in the Appendix to this opinion.

The Trial Court ultimately found that Mr. Farnsworth had “refused to submit to a medical evaluation provided by the Defendant pursuant to the orders of this Court.” The Court then found that it was impossible for it to make an evaluation and, because Mr. Farnsworth was in direct violation of Tenn.R.Civ.P. 41.02,2 dismissed his suit.

Our review of the record persuades us that the Trial Court did not abuse his discretion in dismissing the case and his action was appropriate under the circumstances.

For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the cause remanded for collection of costs below. Costs of appeal are adjudged against Mr. Farnsworth.

_________________________________________ HOUSTON M. GODDARD, PRESIDING JUDGE