Timothy Roberson v. Cherry Lindamood, M2016-01797-COA-R3-CV

Plaintiff Timothy Roberson, an inmate, sued three prison employees in Wayne County Chancery Court alleging loss of legal documents related to his criminal case.
Roberson filed a Uniform Civil Affidavit of Indigency and a certified inmate trust account statement but did not initially include the separate affidavit listing all prior lawsuits as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 41-21-805.
Defendants moved to dismiss for noncompliance with § 41-21-805; Roberson later submitted an affidavit listing two prior suits but failed to disclose two prior habeas corpus proceedings.
Defendants introduced records of the undisclosed habeas corpus suits; the trial court dismissed Roberson’s complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with § 41-21-805.
Roberson appealed, arguing habeas corpus petitions are excluded from the statute’s disclosure requirement because the statutory definition of “claim” excludes petitions for post-conviction relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 41-21-805 requires disclosure of habeas corpus proceedings	Roberson: habeas petitions are post-conviction relief and “claim” excludes post-conviction petitions, so habeas proceedings need not be listed	Defendants: the statute requires a complete list of every "lawsuit or claim," so habeas corpus actions qualify as "lawsuits" and must be disclosed	Court: § 41-21-805 requires listing every "lawsuit or claim" and does not exclude habeas corpus proceedings; dismissal affirmed

Ellithorpe v. Weismark, 479 S.W.3d 818 (Tenn. 2015) (statutory interpretation—apply plain meaning to effectuate legislative intent)
Mills v. Fulmarque, 360 S.W.3d 362 (Tenn. 2012) (give statutory words their ordinary meaning in context)
Lee Medical, Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515 (Tenn. 2010) (presume legislature knows existing law when enacting statutes)
Davis v. Ibach, 465 S.W.3d 570 (Tenn. 2015) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo)
Spates v. Howell, 420 S.W.3d 776 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2013) (cost bond and filing fee requirements for civil actions)
Williams v. Bell, 37 S.W.3d 477 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000) (noncompliance with § 41-21-805 permits dismissal without prejudice)
Potts v. State, 833 S.W.2d 60 (Tenn. 1992) (distinguishing habeas corpus and post-conviction proceedings)
Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007) (rejecting intermingling of habeas corpus and post-conviction procedures)
Taylor v. State, 995 S.W.2d 78 (Tenn. 1999) (scope and limitations of habeas corpus relief)
Archer v. State, 851 S.W.2d 157 (Tenn. 1993) (habeas relief limited to convictions that are void)