Court Reviews Whether the Trial Court Properly Denied a Rule 60.02 Motion in a Case involving an Automobile Accident

RICHARD A. WILLETTE, JR. v. CARROLL G. HULSE ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. October 7, 2010)

This action arises out of a vehicular accident in which the plaintiff sustained serious personal injury. A complaint was filed on behalf of the pro se plaintiff; however, the complaint was not signed by the plaintiff or a licensed attorney as required by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 11.01.

The plaintiff subsequently retained counsel, but the plaintiff's attorney failed to make a written appearance until months later. Moreover, neither the attorney nor the plaintiff signed the complaint to cure the signature deficiency until after the case was dismissed and the statute of limitations had run.

The plaintiff then filed a Rule 60.02 Motion for Relief from Judgment or Order based on Excusable Neglect. That motion was denied and this appeal followed. We have determined that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's Rule 60.02 motion; therefore, we affirm.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/willetter_100710.pdf