Carol Gaddy, 69, stands in front of a house the Dunlap, Tenn., mayor says is uninhabitable and a danger to the public. (Photo David Tulis)

Carol Gaddy, 69, stands on side side of an historic house the Dunlap, Tenn., mayor Dwain Land says is uninhabitable and a danger to the public. It is being remodeled, and all permits required for the work were entered into a two-year lawsuit by the city against Mrs. Gaddy and her husband, Thomas. (Photo David Tulis)

The increasingly bizarre property seizure case against Thomas and Carol Gaddy of Dunlap, Tenn., was filed in the wrong court where it remains under control of judges who have dismissed the couple’s many constitution-based pleadings.

The city charter requires all such cases pertaining to city ordinance be filed in city court.

By David Tulis / Noogaradio 1240 AM 101.1 FM

The charter grants the city power to establish a city court “with jurisdiction to try all offenses for violation of the city ordinances and bylaws.”

The judge “shall have jurisdiction in and over all cases for the violation of and all cases arising under the laws and ordinances of the city” (Dunlap city charter, article 16, section 1).

Mayor Dwain Land, in seeking control of the Gaddy property, and city attorney Stephen Greer made their initial complaint not in city court as required by their authority. But on Feb. 11, 2015 they filed in chancery.

The venue for City of Dunlap vs. Thomas Gaddy is unclear, since it is being heard by circuit court judge Thomas Graham “by interchange” after the chancery judge recused himself. The tribunes have summarily rejected the Gaddys’ claims, with the files of the case record in custody of Mr. Graham’s circuit clerk, Karen Millsaps in Dunlap.

A reporter left a message on the cell phone of attorney Greer on Saturday morning, and by suppertime had not yet replied.