Assigned on Briefs: March 1, 2017
from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 14-1614-IV
Russell T. Perkins, Chancellor
trial court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint as
untimely, in part, due to its determination that the general
savings statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-1-105, did not
apply. We affirm the decision of the trial court and remand
for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.
R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery
Court Affirmed and Remanded
Clark, Dunlap, Tennessee, Pro se.
Brooks Fox and Catherine J. Pham, Nashville, Tennessee, for
the appellee, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and
B. Goldin, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which
Frank G. Clement, Jr., P.J., M.S., and John W. McClarty, J.,
MEMORANDUM OPINION 
B. GOLDIN, JUDGE
and Procedural History
plaintiff in this case, Jerry Clark, was formerly employed by
the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County
("Metro") as a correctional officer. On October 4,
2012, Mr. Clark was injured by another Metro officer during a
training exercise. According to Mr. Clark, his fellow officer
"battered" him during the subject training.
Following the October 4 incident, Mr. Clark notified his
supervisors of his injury, sought medical treatment, and
filed a criminal complaint against the officer who had
subsequently conducted an investigation into Mr. Clark's
allegations, and on October 31, 2012, it submitted a
memorandum regarding its findings. In pertinent part, Metro
concluded that Mr. Clark's allegations were unfounded.
Following a disciplinary panel's recommendation that Mr.
Clark be terminated for "dishonesty, " Metro
terminated his employment on December 26, 2012.
Mr. Clark filed suit against Metro on June 24, 2013 as a
result of his termination, he took a voluntary nonsuit in
November 2013. Less than a year later, on November 18, 2014,
Mr. Clark re-filed his complaint against Metro, asserting
claims for violation of the Tennessee Public Protection Act
and common law retaliatory discharge.The re-filed complaint, which
is the operative pleading at issue in this appeal, contains a
specific recital that it was filed pursuant to the Tennessee
savings statute codified at Tennessee Code Annotated section
November 25, 2015, Metro filed a motion to dismiss Mr.
Clark's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. Metro's motion contended that Mr.
Clark's claims were time-barred for two reasons. First,
Metro argued that the savings statute did not apply with
respect to governmental entities. Second, Metro argued that
because no process had issued in Mr. Clark's lawsuit and
over a year had passed since the commencement of the action,
Mr. Clark could not rely upon the original commencement of
the lawsuit to toll the running of the statute of
limitations. The trial court agreed with Metro's