WPCZ # VUNa % 0( 0l 0DI w@ 4  0J 0T: 0^ 0h 0rT 0| 0B 0 1uX U, 0d U,]U>U6B)DC& AMiU*! D3 Bv~$ 0@v AO 0D D/ B=HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($((3$ !      0  (#$  0   TUVDWXDYZ[Ӏgh 3|xh2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d$$$$7Border 1dd-%C << G<  9p`(Arial  !#d#"  ''   YYY FILED'X June10,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.'AppellateCourtClerk   !#d#"  $       ##Rule10(b)oftheRulesoftheCourtofAppealsprovidesasfollows: 8 TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhvenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase.++++'dxd dPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@("$    Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &!!Xd&#!!Xd#"  P #7XXdd7\RA'\@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEESTATEOFWALTERI.BATES, )C/ANO.03A019601CH00030L&(%;+'h|Y`  `L      )POLKCOUNTYCHANCERYCOURT  PlaintiffAppellee, )      )      )      )v.      )HONORABLEEARLH.HENLEY,      )CHANCELLOR      )      )GLENDADAWSON,    )      )  DefendantAppellant.)AFFIRMEDANDREMANDEDJAMESHARVEYSTUTTSofDIXON&STUTTS,Sweetwater,forAppellantB.PRINCEMILLER,JR.,Cleveland,forAppellee@ MEMORANDUMOPINION )              Susano,J.  Thisisasuitonapromissorynote.Afterabenchtrial,thecourtbelowawardedtheplaintiffajudgmentfor$16,083.68andthedefendantappealed.Theonlyissueonthisappealiswhethertheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsjudgment.SeeRule13(d),T.R.A.P.Thetrialcourtsfindingsinthiscasearedependentonitsdeterminationregardingthecredibilityofthewitnesses.Insuchacase,atrialcourtsfindings areentitledtogreatweight. Galbreathv.Harris ,811S.W.2d88,91(Tenn.App.1990).Ourdenovoreviewoftherecorddoesnotpersuadeusthattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsfactuallydrivenfindings.Thejudgmentbelowisaffirmed.Costsonappealareassessedagainsttheappellantandhersurety.Thiscaseisremandedforenforcementofthejudgmentandcollectionofcostsassessedbelow,allpursuanttoapplicablelaw.      ______________________________      CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.CONCUR:____________________________HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.____________________________HerschelP.Franks,J.