ÿWPCÉ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ 0lH 0D´ 0Jø 0TB 0^– 0hô 0r\ 0|Î 0†J 0Ð 1u` U,Õ 0dU,eU>‘B)ÏDCø AM;U*ˆ²¾²Óp D3C Bvv~“ 0@vÓQ AO$Æs 0D9 D/} B¬˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ Ó Ô Õ Ö ×£ØÙÚDÛÓ€çz!ens€was€maki3|xç((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial öÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òAugust€29,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ´Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€make€this€statement€because€it€is€unclear€whether€an€arbitration€award€can€be€set€asideÏunder€Tennessee€law€when€the€fraud€alleged€is€not€the€fraud€of€the€arbitrator,€but€is€instead€theÏfraud€of€one€of€the€participating€parties.€€€We€have€found€no€authority€in€this€jurisdictionÏaddressing€this€issue.Ì ÉÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝNotwithstanding€the€absence€of€a€valid€arbitration€agreement,€the€Bishofs€continue€to€beÏbound€by€the€arbitration€award€inasmuch€as€it€addresses€the€defects€in€their€septic€and€site€drainageÏsystems€because€they€failed€to€comply€with€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(a)(5)€and€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(b)Ïwhen€they€did€not€seek€to€vacate€the€arbitration€award€within€90€days€of€delivery€of€the€award.€ÏMoreover,€there€is€no€proof€in€the€record€that€the€Bishofs€ever€objected€to€the€arbitration€hearing.€ÏIn€fact,€as€previously€noted,€the€Bishofs€filed€a€request€for€arbitration€and€accepted€the€arbitratorððsÏaward.€€T.C.A.ðð€29„5„313(a)(5)€disallows€the€vacation€of€an€arbitration€award€on€the€ground€thatÏthere€was€no€arbitration€agreement€when€the€party€seeking€the€vacation€participated€in€theÏarbitration€hearing€without€raising€the€objection.Ì++++'ÿÿdxd dPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€!!X„d&ÓÑ#€!!Xd#ÑÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›à@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌJAMES€ROGER€BISHOF€Andó óà à)à àTipton€EquityÌò òMARY€K.€BISHOFó ó,à à)à àNo.€10765Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Plaintiffs/Appellants.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.€A.€NO.€02A01„9411„CH„00256̜ـ€ÙÙ€€ÙßL€%'$;+'h|X` Å `€€Lß›à à)Ìò òYARBROUGH€CONSTRUCTIONó óà à)Ìò òCOMPANY;€WESLEY€YARBROUGH;ó óà à)Ìò òHOME€BUYERS€WARRANTYó óà à)Ìò òCORPORATION;€NATIONAL€HOMEó óà à)Ìò òINSURANCE€COMPANY;€Aurora,ó óà à)Ìò òColorado;€CENTURY€21€A„1ó óà à)Ìò òPROPERTIES;€And€LUPE€LAUGHLINó óà à)Ìò òBEHRENSó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendants/Appellees.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Tipton€County€at€Covington.Ìò òHonorable€John€Hill€Chisolm,€Chancellor€ó óÌÌÌò òDorothy€W.€McArthuró ó,ÌKIM,€WILLCOX€&€McARTHUR,€Memphis,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiffs/Appellants.ÌÌÌò òJ.€Thomas€Caldwelló ó,€Ripley,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendants/Appellees,€Yarbrough€Construction€Company€and€Wesley€Yarbrough.ÌÌò òJefferson€C.€Orró ó,ÌMANIER,€HEROD,€HOLLABAUGH€&€SMITH,€Nashville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendants/Appellees,€Home€Buyers€Warranty€Corporation€and€National€HomeÏInsurance€Company.ÌÌò òA.€Wilson€Wagesó ó,Ìò òAlice€L.€Gallaheró ó,ÌA.€WAGES€LAW€FIRM,€Millington,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€Defendants/Appellees,€Century€21€A„1€Properties€and€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens.ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PART€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌHIGHERS,€J.€ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.€ó ó:€œ(Concurs)ÌÌÓÓÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓà àIn€this€action,€Plaintiffs„Appellants,€James€Roger€Bishof€and€Mary€K.€BishofÏ(ð ðPlaintiffsðð€or€ð ðBishofsðð),€appeal€the€dismissal€of€their€claims€for€rescission,€fraud,€outrageousÏconduct€and€breach€of€warranty€against€Defendants„Appellees,€Yarbrough€Construction€Company,ÏWesley€Yarbrough,€Home€Buyers€Warranty€Corporation,€National€Home€Insurance€Company,ÏCentury€21€A„1€properties,€and€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens,€arising€from€the€Bishofsðð€purchase€of€aÏresidence.€Ìà àÌà àThe€pleadings,€affidavits€and€depositions€reveal€the€following€relevant€facts:€€TheÏBishofs€purchased€a€residence€located€at€9432€Holly€Grove€Road,€Brighton€Tennessee,€on€orÏabout€May€24,€1989,€from€Yarbrough€Construction€Company,€a€sole€proprietorship€owned€byÏWesley€Yarbrough€(ð ðYarbroughðð).€€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens€(ð ðBehrensðð),€an€agent€of€Century€21ÏA„1€Properties€(ð ðA„1€Propertiesðð),€acted€as€the€real€estate€agent€throughout€the€sale€of€the€propertyÏto€the€Bishofs.ÌÌà àOn€January€31,€1989,€the€Bishofs€signed€a€contract€of€sale€in€which€YarbroughÏwarranted€òòò òinter€aliaó óóó€that€the€plumbing€system€in€the€residence€would€be€in€working€order€at€theÏtime€of€the€closing.€€Prior€to€closing,€the€Bishofs€noticed€that€the€toilets€would€not€flush€properlyÏand€that€the€tubs,€sinks,€dishwasher,€and€washing€machine€would€not€drain€properly.€€The€BishofsÏallege€that€both€Behrens€and€Yarbrough€assured€them€that€these€problems€would€clear€up€over€timeÏafter€the€septic€system€had€time€to€ð ðsettle€in.ðð€€They€further€allege€that€Behrens€represented€that€sheÏwould€put€pressure€on€Yarbrough€to€fix€any€problems€that€did€not€clear€up€after€a€short€time.€€€€ÌÌà àAt€closing,€the€Bishofs€received€a€ð ðHome€Buyers€Warrantyðð€issued€by€the€HomeÍBuyers€Warranty€Corporation€(ð ðHBWCðð)€and€insured€by€National€Home€Insurance€CompanyÏ(ð ðNHICðð).€€This€warranty€purported€to€provide€certain€workmanship€coverage€during€the€first€yearÏof€the€warranty,€certain€systems€coverage€for€the€first€two€years€of€the€warranty,€and€certainÏstructural€coverage€for€the€first€ten€years€of€the€warranty.ÌÌà àShortly€after€moving€into€the€residence,€the€Bishofs€noticed€that€the€lot€around€theirÏhouse€would€not€drain€properly€and€that€ð ðpop„upsðð€of€raw€sewage€were€occurring€in€the€backyardÏof€the€property.€€Additionally,€the€Bishofsðð€problems€with€their€toilets€and€the€drainage€of€theirÏtubs,€sinks,€dishwasher€and€washing€machine€did€not€improve€as€Yarbrough€and€BehrensÏrepresented€they€would.€€The€Bishofs€reported€these€problems€to€Yarbrough,€and€he€twice€dug€upÏthe€septic€tank€and€moved€it€in€an€effort€to€remedy€the€problem.€€ÌÌà àUnable€to€receive€satisfaction€from€Yarbrough,€the€Bishofs€submitted€theirÏcomplaints€to€arbitration.€€In€their€request€for€arbitration,€the€Bishofs€alleged€that€they€hadÏexperienced€problems€with€their€septic€system€and€site€drainage€system.ÌÌà àAn€arbitration€hearing€was€conducted€at€the€Bishofsðð€residence€on€September€7,Ï1990.€€The€Bishofs€told€the€arbitrator€about€all€of€the€problems€that€they€were€experiencing€withÏthe€toilets€not€flushing€properly,€the€sinks€and€drains€not€draining€properly,€and€the€pop„ups€ofÏraw€sewage€appearing€in€the€backyard.€€They€also€explained€the€problems€they€were€experiencingÏwith€water€not€draining€from€their€property.€€Ì€€Ìà àThe€Bishofs€allege€that€at€this€hearing€Yarbrough€told€the€arbitrator€that€the€BishofsÏproblems€were€caused€by€excessive€water€usage€occurring€during€their€occupation€of€the€residence.€ÏYarbrough€allegedly€claimed€that€this€excessive€usage€had€created€grooves€in€the€septic€lines€andÏpermanently€ruined€the€Bishofsðð€septic€system.€€The€Bishofs€allege€that€to€support€his€claimÏYarbrough€presented€water€usage€records€which€showed€that€the€Bishofs€had€used€an€unusuallyÍhigh€amount€of€water€during€the€period€that€they€had€occupied€the€home.Ìà àÌà àAfter€inspecting€the€home€and€hearing€the€testimony€of€the€Bishofs€and€Yarbrough,Ïthe€arbitrator€found€on€September€12,€1990,€that€Yarbrough€was€not€responsible€for€the€septicÏsystem€problems,€but€that€he€was€responsible€for€the€lot€drainage€problem.€€The€arbitrator€providedÏthe€Bishofs€with€a€copy€of€the€arbitration€award€and€advised€them€in€a€letter€that€they€could€appealÏthe€award€if€they€so€desired.ò ò€€ó óThe€Bishofs€did€not€appeal€the€arbitration€award,€but€instead€theyÏaccepted€the€award€and€executed€a€document€entitled€ð ðAcceptance€of€Arbitratorððs€Awardðð€in€whichÏthey€agreed€to€ð ðaccept€the€terms€of€said€award,€exactly€as€rendered,€in€full€settlement€of€allÏcomplaints€submitted€for€arbitrationðð€on€October€2,€1990.ÌÌà àSometime€around€January€1,€1991,€the€Bishofs€discovered€that,€contrary€toÏYarbroughððs€statements€during€the€arbitration€hearing,€their€unusually€high€water€usage€was€due€toÏwater€use€by€another€contractor€who€had€hooked€a€hose€up€to€the€Bishofsðð€water€supply€whileÏworking€on€a€neighboring€house.ÌÌà àSubsequent€to€the€arbitration€award,€Yarbrough€did€not€€repair€the€site€drainageÏproblems€to€the€satisfaction€of€the€Bishofs.€€The€Bishofs€reported€Yarbroughððs€noncomplianceÏwith€the€arbitration€award€to€HBWC.€€Consequently,€NHIC,€by€letter€dated€January€30,€1991,Ïoffered€$654€as€a€cash€settlement€to€be€used€to€regrade€the€lot€and€repair€the€site€drainage€problem.€ÏAs€part€of€its€offer€of€settlement,€NHIC€required€the€Bishofs€to€execute€a€Release€and€AssignmentÏagreement€(ð ðReleaseðð),€releasing€HBWC€and€NHIC€from€any€and€all€claims€concerning€problemsÏwith€the€septic€and€drainage€systems€and€assigning€any€claim€arising€from€these€defects€to€NHIC.€ÏThe€Bishofs€executed€the€Release€on€February€5,€1991,€and€subsequently€negotiated€the€settlementÏcheck.€€ÌÌà àOn€July€15,€1991,€the€Bishofs€brought€this€suit,€alleging€that€the€Defendants€hadÍviolated€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,€T.C.A.€ðððð€47„18„101„121,€and€had€committedÏbreach€of€contract,€breach€of€warranties,€negligence,€outrageous€conduct,€fraud€andÏmisrepresentation.€€The€Bishofsðð€Complaint€sought€rescission€of€the€contract€to€purchase€theÏproperty€and€return€of€the€full€purchase€price€in€the€amount€of€$57,000,€together€with€trebleÏdamages€pursuant€to€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,€T.C.A.€ðð€47„18„109.€€Additionally,Ïthe€Bishofs€sought€damages€for€breach€of€warranties,€damages€for€emotional€and€mental€distressÏand€exemplary€damages.€€They€further€sought€special€damages€resulting€from€their€having€toÏvacate€the€premises€and€secure€other€housing.Ìà àà àÌà àOn€June€22,€1993,€the€Bishofs€filed€a€ð ðMotion€to€Vacate€Arbitration€Award€or€inÏthe€Alternative€to€Modify€or€Correct€the€Award,€Stay€Arbitration€and€Hear€the€Caseðð€(ð ðMotion€toÏVacateðð),€alleging€that€the€arbitration€award€had€been€knowingly€procured€by€fraud€on€behalf€ofÏYarbrough.€€In€their€motion,€the€Bishofs€alleged€that€Yarbrough€had€misrepresented€the€cause€ofÏthe€Bishofsðð€problems€in€the€arbitration€proceeding€and€they€further€alleged€that€Yarbrough€knew€atÏthe€time€that€the€Bishofsðð€problems€were€a€result€of€Yarbroughððs€own€ð ðgrossly€inadequateÏworkmanship,€grossly€inadequate€materials€and€inadequate€and€poor€soil€and€geological€conditionsÏexisting€on€the€land.ððÌ€€à àÌà àOn€May€13,€1993,€the€Bishofs€amended€their€Complaint€to€allege€breach€of€theÏimplied€warranty€of€good€workmanship€and€materials.€€Yarbrough,€HBWC€and€NHIC€all€filedÏmotions€for€summary€judgment,€alleging€òòò òinter€aliaó óóó€that€the€Amended€Complaint€failed€to€state€aÏcause€of€action€and€arguing€that€the€Bishofsðð€claims€were€barred€by€the€Uniform€Arbitration€Act,ÏT.C.A.€ðððð€29„5„301„320€and€the€Release€signed€by€the€Bishofs.€€Additionally,€Yarbrough€movedÏto€dismiss€on€the€ground€that€the€action€sounded€in€tort€and€was€a€claim€for€liquidated€damagesÏproperly€triable€in€circuit€court.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€denied€the€Bishofsðð€Motion€to€Vacate,€holding€that€the€Motion€toÍVacate€had€not€been€filed€within€90€days€from€when€the€Bishofs€allegedly€discovered€that€theÏarbitration€award€had€been€procured€by€fraud.€€The€trial€court€also€found€that€the€Bishofs€wereÏestopped€from€setting€the€arbitration€award€aside€because€they€had€accepted€the€arbitration€awardÏand€executed€the€Release€even€though€they€knew€the€arbitration€award€was€based€upon€possibleÏfraud€by€Yarbrough.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€confirmed€the€arbitration€award€and€dismissed€all€of€the€BishofsððÏclaims€concerning€the€septic€system€and€site€drainage€system.€€The€court€determined€that€any€claimÏagainst€the€remaining€defendants€must€be€first€submitted€to€arbitration€and€had€been€prematurelyÏfiled€in€chancery€court.€€Additionally,€the€trial€court€determined€that€the€claims€concerningÏdefectively€installed€plumbing€lines€were€due€to€be€dismissed€against€HBWC€and€NHIC€becauseÏthey€were€discovered€well€after€the€warranty€coverage€for€the€plumbing€system€had€expired.ÌÌà àThe€court€then€granted€Defendantððs€motions€for€summary€judgment€as€toÏoutrageous€conduct,€fraud€and€all€other€claims€asserted€by€Plaintiffs.€€Finally,€the€court€ruled€that€itÏdid€not€have€ð ðjurisdiction€of€suits€in€tort€for€unliquidated€damages€to€person€on€[sic]€property€andÏif€Plaintiffs€prevail€at€a€later€time€on€any€of€the€above€issues€the€Court€orders€this€suit€to€beÏtransferred€to€Circuit€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€16„11„102.ððÌÌà àThe€Bishofs€appeal€the€trial€courtððs€decision,€presenting€the€following€issues€forÏour€review:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à1.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€Plaintiffsðð€motionÏto€vacate€the€arbitration€award,€or€in€the€alternative€modify,€correctÏaward[,]€stay€arbitration€and€hear€case.ÌÌà8 àà à2.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€the€motion€toÏvacate€was€not€[timely]€filed.ÌÌà8 àà à3.€€Whether€trial€court€erred€in€confirming€the€arbitrationÏaward.ÌÌà8 àà à4.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€execution€ofÏthe€release€and€acceptance€of€the€arbitration€award€expresslyÏdischarges€and€forever€releases€all€the€Defendants€from€all€claims.€ÌÌà8 àà à5.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€PlaintiffsððÏfailure€to€request€arbitration€as€to€the€plumbing€problems€rendersÏtheir€court€action€improper€at€this€time.ÌÌà8 àà à6.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€all€threeÏ[Defendantsðð]€motions€for€summary€judgment.ÌÌà8 àà à7.€€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€the€PlaintiffsððÏsuit€for€rescission€cannot€be€heard€in€chancery,€but€must€beÏtransferred€to€circuit€court.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àWe€will€consider€the€Bishofsðð€first€three€issues€together.€€The€Bishofs€argue€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€refusing€to€vacate€or€modify€the€arbitration€award€due€to€the€allegedÏmisrepresentations€made€by€Yarbrough€during€the€arbitration€proceedings.€€Judicial€review€ofÏarbitration€decisions€is€statutorily€limited,€and€any€judicial€review€must€be€conducted€within€thoseÏlimits.€€òòò òArnold€v.€Morgan€Keegan€&€Co.ó óóó,€914€S.W.2d€445,€450€(Tenn.€1996).€€In€respect€toÏvacation€of€an€arbitration€award,€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(a)€provides:ÌÌÓÓà8 à(a)€Upon€application€of€a€party,€the€court€shall€vacate€an€awardÏwhere:Ìà8 àà à(1)€The€award€was€procured€by€corruption,€fraud€or€otherÏundue€means;Ìà8 àà à(2)€There€was€evident€partiality€by€an€arbitrator€appointed€asÏa€neutral€or€corruption€in€any€of€the€arbitrators€or€misconductÏprejudicing€the€rights€of€any€party;Ìà8 àà à(3)€The€arbitrators€exceeded€their€powers;Ìà8 àà à(4)€The€arbitrators€refused€to€postpone€the€hearing€uponÏsufficient€cause€being€shown€therefor€or€refused€to€hear€evidenceÏmaterial€to€the€controversy€or€otherwise€so€conducted€the€hearing,Ïcontrary€to€the€provisions€of€ðð€29„5„306,€as€to€prejudiceÏsubstantially€the€rights€of€a€party;€€orÌà8 àà à(5)€There€was€no€arbitration€agreement€and€the€issue€was€notÏadversely€determined€in€proceedings€under€ðð€29„5„303€and€the€partyÏdid€not€participate€in€the€arbitration€hearing€without€raising€theÏobjection.€€Ìà8 àThe€fact€that€the€relief€was€such€that€it€could€not€or€would€not€beÏgranted€by€a€court€of€law€or€equity€is€not€ground€for€vacating€orÏrefusing€to€confirm€the€award.ÌÌÌÌÓÓT.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(a)€(Supp.€1995).€€€Additionally,€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(b)€provides:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à(b)€An€application€under€this€section€shall€be€made€withinÏninety€(90)€days€after€delivery€of€a€copy€of€the€award€to€theÏapplicant,€except€that,€if€predicated€upon€corruption,€fraud€or€otherÏundue€means,€it€shall€be€made€within€ninety€(90)€days€after€suchÏgrounds€are€known€or€should€have€been€known.ÌÌÌÌÓÓT.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(b)€(Supp.€1995).€€ÌÌà àAssuming€òòò òarguendoó óóó€that€Yarbroughððs€statements€during€the€arbitration€hearing€didÏconstitute€fraud€as€claimed€by€the€Bishofs€and€assuming€further€still€that€Yarbroughððs€allegedÏfraudulent€misrepresentations€are€sufficient€to€set€aside€an€arbitration€award€under€the€TennesseeÏUniform€Arbitration€Act,× ƒ( ××  ×€we€believe€that€the€Bishofsðð€Motion€to€Vacate€still€must€be€denied€due€toÏthe€fact€that€the€Bishofs€failed€to€file€their€Motion€to€Vacate€within€90€days€of€the€time€that€theyÏknew€or€should€have€known€about€Yarbroughððs€alleged€fraud€as€required€by€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„313(b).€€€ÌÌà àIn€a€deposition€taken€on€September€14,€1992,€James€Bishof€stated€that€heÏdiscovered€in€January€of€1991€that€Yarbrough€had€incorrectly€attributed€the€unusually€high€waterÏusage€to€the€Bishofs€during€the€arbitration€hearing.€€Despite€this€discovery€in€January€of€1991,€theÏBishofs€filed€their€Motion€to€Vacate€on€June€22,€1993.ÌÌà àThe€Bishofs€argue€on€appeal€that€they€timely€filed€their€Motion€to€Vacate€becauseÏthey€did€not€actually€discover€Yarbroughððs€alleged€fraud€until€December€29,€1993,€when€theÍBishofsðð€expert€witness,€C.€L.€Howell,€revealed€that€the€faulty€installation€of€plumbing€was€theÏsource€of€the€Bishofsðð€problems€during€a€deposition.€€The€Bishofs€argue€that€knowledge€ofÏYarbroughððs€misrepresentations€about€the€Bishofsðð€excessive€water€usage€did€not€constituteÏknowledge€of€Yarbroughððs€fraud€because€they€had€not€discovered€the€actual€cause€of€theirÏproblems€at€the€time€that€they€discovered€Yarbrough€had€misrepresented€the€cause€of€theirÏproblems.€€We€are€not€persuaded€by€the€Bishofsðð€argument€on€this€issue.€€ÌÌà àThe€Bishofs€make€their€argument€notwithstanding€the€fact€that€James€Bishof€statedÏin€his€September€14,€1992€deposition,€taken€well€before€December€29,€1993,€(1)€that€the€BishofsÏfirst€determined€that€the€pipes€in€their€plumbing€system€were€installed€improperly€and€were€notÏdraining€properly€sometime€around€January€of€1991;€and€(2)€that€the€Bishofs€realized€that€theÏarbitration€award€had€been€based€on€Yarbroughððs€fraud€in€January€of€1991.€€Consequently,€weÏfind€the€Bishofsðð€argument€that€they€did€not€discover€Yarbroughððs€fraud€until€December€9,€1993,Ïto€be€somewhat€disingenuous.€€ÌÌà àTherefore,€we€believe€that€reasonable€minds€could€not€differ€with€respect€to€the€trialÏcourtððs€finding€that€sometime€in€January€of€1991€the€Bishofs€knew€or€should€have€known€that€theÏarbitration€award€was€procured€by€Yarbroughððs€fraud.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€that€the€trial€courtÏdid€not€err€in€determining€that€the€Bishofsðð€Motion€to€Vacate€was€not€timely€filed.€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà àAs€to€modification€of€an€arbitration€award,€T.C.A.€ðð€29„5„314(a)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 àà à(a)€Upon€application€made€within€ninety€(90)€days€afterÏdelivery€of€a€copy€of€the€award€to€the€applicant,€the€court€shallÏmodify€or€correct€the€award€where:Ìà8 àà à(1)€There€was€an€evident€miscalculation€of€figures€or€anÏevident€mistake€in€the€description€of€any€person,€thing€or€propertyÏreferred€to€in€the€award;Ìà8 àà à(2)€The€arbitrators€have€awarded€upon€a€matter€not€submittedÏto€them€and€the€award€may€be€corrected€without€affecting€the€meritsÏof€the€decision€upon€the€issues€submitted;€€orÌà8 àà à(3)€The€award€is€imperfect€in€a€matter€of€form,€not€affectingÏthe€merits€of€the€controversy.ÌÌÌÌT.C.A.€ðð€29„5„314€(Supp.€1995).€€ÌÌÓÓà àThe€Bishofs€have€failed€to€allege€any€facts€that€would€constitute€grounds€for€aÏmodification€of€the€award€under€this€statute.€€As€such,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€properlyÏconfirmed€the€arbitration€award€and€dismissed€the€Bishofsðð€claims€arising€from€problems€with€theirÏseptic€system€and€site€drainage.€€à àÌÌà àAs€their€fourth€issue,€Plaintiffs€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€theirÏexecution€of€the€Release€and€their€acceptance€of€the€arbitration€award€discharged€and€foreverÏreleased€all€the€defendants€from€all€of€the€claims€concerning€the€existing€defects€in€the€septicÏsystem.€€We€disagree€with€Plaintiffsðð€contentions€and€affirm€the€trial€court.€€€€Ìà àÌà àAfter€Yarbrough€failed€to€fulfill€his€obligations€under€the€arbitration€award,€theÏBishofs€made€demand€upon€HBWC€to€satisfy€these€obligations.€€Consequently,€NHIC,€by€letterÏdated€January€30,€1991,€offered€$654€as€a€cash€settlement€to€be€used€to€regrade€the€lot€and€repairÏthe€site€drainage€problem.€€As€part€of€its€offer,€NHIC€required€the€Bishofs€to€execute€the€Release.€ÏThis€document€contained€the€following€provisions:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àIn€consideration€of€the€sum€of€$654.00,€sufficiency€ofÏwhich€is,€hereby€acknowledged,€the€undersigned€homeowner(s)Ïexecute€this€Release€and€Assignment.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€undersigned€homeowners(s),€for€themselves€and€theirÏheirs,€agents,€successors,€and€assigns€expressly€discharge€andÏforever€release€the€Insurer,€(National€Home€Insurance€Company€orÏother€insurer€of€the€warranty),€the€Service€(Home€Buyers€WarrantyÏCorporation€or€any€Builders€Structural€Services€company),€theirÏemployees,€agents,€successors,€and€assigns€from€all€claims€andÏactions,€whether€at€law€or€in€equity,€that€homeowner(s)€now€have€orÏmight€have€in€the€future€arising€as€a€result€of€the€homeownerððsÏsubmittal€of€the€attached€Notice€of€Claim€and€any€additional€noticesÏof€workmanship/systems€defects,€which€notices,€if€any,€are€alsoÏattached€hereto€and€specified€as€follows:€Arbitration€Award€datedÏ9/12/90.ÌÌà8 àà àHomeowner(s)€assign€to€the€Insurer€and€the€Service€allÍrights,€claims,€and€actions,€whether€at€law€or€in€equity,€which€theÏhomeowner(s)€might€have€against€any€person€or€entity€arising€out€ofÏthe€above„referenced€claim.€€Homeowner(s)€agree€to€fully€cooperateÏwith€the€Service€or€Insurer€in€pursuit€of€these€assigned€rights,Ïclaims,€and€actions.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€undersigned€homeowner(s)€understand€and€agree€thatÏthis€document€is€executed€with€the€express€intention€ofÏextinguishing€all€obligations€on€the€part€of€the€Insurer€or€the€ServiceÏwith€regard€to€the€defects€described€in€the€above„referenced€claim.€ÏHomeowner(s)€further€understand€that€this€document€is€not€anÏadmission€of€any€liability€by€the€Service€or€Insurer.€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àA€general€release€covers€all€claims€between€the€parties€which€are€in€existence€andÏwithin€their€contemplation;€a€release€confined€to€particular€matters€or€causes€operates€to€releaseÏonly€such€claims€as€fairly€come€within€the€terms€of€the€release.€€òòò òCross€v.€Earlsó óóó,€517€S.W.2d€751,Ï752€€(Tenn.€1974);€òòò òEvans€v.€Tillett€Bros.€Constr.€Co.,€ó óóó545€S.W.2d€8,€11€(Tenn.€App.€1976).€ÏWhere€a€release€has€been€executed€in€writing€without€fraud,€misrepresentation€or€duress€and€withÏevery€reasonable€opportunity€for€consideration€of€its€terms,€it€will€be€binding.€€ò òòòEvansóóó ó,€545ÏS.W.2d€at€11.€€Ìà àThe€language€of€the€Release€in€this€case€is€clear€and€cogent.€€It€contains€no€termsÏwhich€can€be€deemed€as€a€general€release€or€a€release€of€any€claim€except€those€that€exist€or€laterÏarise€as€a€result€of€the€issues€previously€arbitrated€by€the€parties€to€the€agreement.€€€ÌÌÓÓà8 àA€release€which€is€confined€or€which€is€construed€as€being€confinedÏto€claims€or€demands€arising€from,€or€relating€to,€a€specified€matterÏoperates€to€release€all€the€particular€claims€or€demands€properlyÏembraced€in€the€specifications,€but€it€does€not€release€other€claims€orÏdemands,€.€.€.€€€€ÌÌÌÌòòò òÓÓCrossó óóó,€517€S.W.2d€at€752„53€(quoting€76€C.J.S.€òòò òReleaseóóó ó€ðð€51,€p.€696).€€Because€the€arbitrationÏaward€referred€to€in€the€Release€dealt€specifically€with€liability€for€the€defects€in€the€Bishofsðð€sewerÏsystem€and€site€drainage,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€properly€held€that€the€Bishofs€were€barredÏfrom€bringing€any€claims€arising€from€these€defects.€€€€ÌÌà àInasmuch€as€the€Release€contains€a€provision€assigning€all€claims€arising€fromÏdefects€in€the€septic€and€site€drainage€systems€to€HBWC€and€NHIC,€we€believe€that€the€trial€courtÏproperly€held€that€this€agreement€barred€the€Bishofs€from€bringing€claims€arising€from€theseÏdefects€against€the€other€defendants.€à àà àÌÌà àð ðIn€the€absence€of€statute,€an€obligee€has€a€right€to€assign€a€chose€in€action€and€theÏgeneral€rule€is€that€the€unqualified€assignment€of€such€right€of€action€vests€in€the€assignee€the€titleÏthereto€to€the€same€extent€as€the€assignor€had€it€at€the€date€of€the€assignment.ðð€€òòò òKivett€v.€Mayesó óóó,Ï354€S.W.2d€492,€494€(Tenn.€App.€1961).€€An€assignment€ð ðpasses€the€whole€right€of€the€assignor,Ïnothing€remaining€in€him€capable€of€being€assigned,€and€the€assignor€has€no€further€interest€in€theÏsubject€matter€of€the€assignment.ðð€€6A€C.J.S.€òòò òAssignmentsó óóó€ðð€73€(1975).€€ÌÌà àThe€general€rule€is€that€an€assignee€in€whom€legal€title€is€vested€must€bring€anÏaction€as€he€is€the€real€party€in€interest.€€òòò òNorthwest€Oil€&€Ref.€Co.€v.€Honolulu€Oil€Corp.ó óóó,€195€F.ÏSupp.€281,€287€(D.€Mont.€€1961);€òòò òDuke€v.€Brookshire€Grocery€Co.ó óóó,€568€S.W.2d€470,€472€(Tex.ÏApp.€1978).€€Typically,€an€assignor€cannot€bring€an€action€after€he€has€fully€and€completelyÏtransferred€to€another€title€to€a€cause€of€action.òòò ò€€Acme€Blacktop€Paving€Corp.€v.€Brown€&ÏMatthewsó óóó,€294€N.Y.S.2d€826,€827€(N.Y.€App.€Div.€1968);€òòò òBernard€Bake€Shop€v.€Glassmanó óóó,Ï109€N.Y.S.2d€520,€521€(€N.Y.€Sup.€Ct.€1952).€€€ÌÌà àMoreover,€Rule€17.01€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€mandates€thatÏð ð[e]very€action€shall€be€prosecuted€in€the€name€of€the€real€party€in€interest.ðð€€The€assignmentÏlanguage€in€the€Release€is€sufficiently€broad€and€explicit€to€divest€the€Bishofs€of€all€of€theirÏinterests€in€a€cause€of€action€arising€from€defects€in€their€septic€and€site€drainage€systems.€€AsÏsuch,€the€Bishofs€are€no€longer€the€real€parties€in€interest€in€respect€to€those€claims.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€Bishofs€cannot€properly€bring€a€claim€against€any€one€of€the€Defendants€based€on€thoseÍdefects.€€Consequently,€the€trial€court€properly€dismissed€all€claims€brought€by€the€Bishofs€whichÏarose€from€these€two€specific€defects.€ÌÌà àThe€Bishofs€further€argue€that€the€release€is€invalid€because€it€was€procured€throughÏthe€fraud€of€Yarbrough.€€However,€as€discussed€òòò òsupraó óóó,€it€is€clear€from€the€deposition€testimony€ofÏJames€Bishof€that€the€Bishofs€discovered€Yarbroughððs€alleged€fraud€prior€to€their€signing€of€theÏrelease.€€As€such,€we€cannot€see€how€the€Bishofs€can€claim€to€have€reasonably€relied€uponÏYarbroughððs€statements€or€to€have€been€defrauded€when€they€signed€the€release.€€Consequently,Ïwe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€the€release€is€valid.€€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€Plaintiffsðð€claims€concerning€the€plumbing€systemÏwere€distinct€from€their€claims€regarding€their€defective€septic€and€site€drainage€systems.€€Thus,€theÏtrial€court€determined€that€its€confirmation€of€the€arbitration€award€did€not€affect€Plaintiffsðð€claimsÏthat€arose€from€their€defective€plumbing€system.€€The€trial€courtððs€finding€is€supported€by€theÏundisputed€deposition€testimony€of€C.€L.€Howell,€who€testified€that€the€septic€system€and€theÏplumbing€system€were€two€distinct€systems.ÌÌà àConsequently,€we€will€henceforth€consider€only€the€Bishofsðð€claims€that€arise€as€aÏresult€of€their€allegedly€defective€plumbing.€€After€determining€that€they€were€distinct€fromÏPlaintiffsðð€previously€arbitrated€claims,€the€trial€court€dismissed€the€Bishofsðð€claims€regarding€theÏplumbing,€finding€that€they€should€be€arbitrated€pursuant€to€the€Warranty€Agreement€entered€intoÏby€the€Bishofs,€HBWC,€NHIC€and€Yarbrough.€€€The€Bishofs€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdetermining€that€they€were€bound€to€arbitrate€their€claims€against€the€Defendants€when€the€BishofsÏdid€not€sign€or€initial€the€provision€in€the€Warranty€Agreement,€which€required€them€to€submit€anyÏcontroversy€to€arbitration.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðð€29„5„302(a)€of€the€Tennessee€Uniform€Arbitration€Act€provides:€ÌÌÓÓà8 à(a)€A€written€agreement€to€submit€any€existing€controversy€toÏarbitration€or€a€provision€in€a€written€contract€to€submit€to€arbitrationÏany€controversy€thereafter€arising€between€the€parties€is€valid,Ïenforceable€and€irrevocable€save€upon€such€grounds€as€exist€at€lawÏor€in€equity€for€the€revocation€of€any€contract;€€provided,€however,Ïthat€for€contracts€relating€to€farm€property,€structures€or€goods,€or€toÏproperty€and€structures€utilized€as€a€residence€of€a€party,€the€clauseÏproviding€for€arbitration€shall€be€additionally€signed€or€initialed€byÏthe€parties.ÌÌÌÌÓÓT.C.A.€29„5„302(a)€(Supp.€1995).€€€ÌÌà àBecause€the€Bishofs€did€not€sign€or€initial€the€arbitration€agreement€and€there€is€noÏindication€in€the€record€that€they€have€engaged€in€a€separate€agreement€to€arbitrate€any€claim€inÏregard€to€their€plumbing€system,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€the€Bishofsðð€claimsÏin€regard€to€their€allegedly€defective€plumbing€system.× ƒ) ××  ×€€€ÌÌà àThe€court€further€found€that€HBWC€and€NHIC€were€dismissed€from€anyÏsubsequent€claim€because€the€plumbing€defect€was€discovered€after€the€warranty€had€expired.€€It€isÏclear€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€making€this€finding€because€the€warranty€specifically€states€that€itÏapplies€to€all€defects€of€an€item€covered€by€the€warranty€that€occur€during€the€applicable€warrantyÏterm.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€dismissed€NHIC€and€HBWC€from€allÏclaims€arising€from€the€allegedly€defective€plumbing.€€€ÌÌà àWe€turn€now€to€the€issue€of€which€claims€the€Bishofs€will€be€entitled€to€pursueÏupon€remand.€€The€Bishofs€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgment€to€eachÏDefendant€on€the€Bishofsðð€claims€of€fraud,€violation€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,Ïoutrageous€conduct,€and€breach€of€the€implied€warranty€of€good€workmanship€and€materials.€€ÌÌà àWe€will€consider€the€Bishofsðð€claims€òòò òseriatim€ó óóóto€determine€whether€summaryÏjudgment€was€properly€granted.€€A€trial€court€should€grant€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€only€ifÏthe€movant€demonstrates€that€there€are€no€genuine€issues€of€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€partyÏis€entitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Rule€56.03€T.R.C.P.;€òòò òByrd€v.€Halló óóó,€847€S.W.2d€208,Ï210€(Tenn.€1993);€òòò òDunn€v.€Hackettó óóó,€833€S.W.2d€78,€80€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€When€a€motion€forÏsummary€judgment€is€made,€the€court€must€consider€the€motion€in€the€same€manner€as€a€motion€forÏdirected€verdict€made€at€the€close€of€the€plaintiff's€proof;€that€is,€"the€trial€court€must€take€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€nonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonableÏinferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discard€all€countervailing€evidence."€ò òòòByrdóóó ó,€847€S.W.2d€atÏ210„11.€€In€òòò òByrdó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€stated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àOnce€it€is€shown€by€the€moving€party€that€there€is€no€genuine€issueÏof€material€fact,€the€nonmoving€party€must€then€demonstrate,€byÏaffidavits€or€discovery€materials,€that€there€is€a€genuine,€material€factÏdispute€to€warrant€a€trial.€[citations€omitted].€€In€this€regard,€RuleÏ56.05€provides€that€the€nonmoving€party€cannot€simply€rely€uponÏhis€pleadings€but€must€set€forth€òòò òspecific€factsó óóó€showing€that€there€is€aÏgenuine€issue€of€material€fact€for€trial.ÌÌÌÌòòò òÓÓId.óóó ó€at€211.ÌÌà àThe€summary€judgment€process€should€only€be€used€as€a€means€of€concluding€aÏcase€when€there€are€no€genuine€issues€of€material€fact,€and€the€case€can€be€resolved€on€the€legalÏissues€alone.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€210€(citingòòò ò€Bellamy€v.€Federal€Express€Corp.ó óóó,€749€S.W.2d€31,€33€(Tenn.Í1988)).ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€Complaint€contains€allegations€of€fraud€on€behalf€of€Yarbrough,€A„1ÏProperties€and€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens.€€Although€perhaps€inartfully€drafted,€it€appears€thatÏPlaintiffsðð€seek€rescission€of€their€contract€with€Yarbrough€on€the€basis€of€Behrens€andÏYarbroughððs€fraudulent€or€negligent€misrepresentations€or€alternatively€they€seek€an€award€ofÏdamages€due€to€these€same€misrepresentations.€€€€€ÌÌà àIt€is€clear€that€an€individual€induced€by€fraud€to€enter€into€a€contract€may€electÏbetween€two€remedies.€€He€may€treat€the€contract€as€voidable€and€sue€for€the€equitable€remedy€ofÏrescission€or€he€may€treat€the€contract€as€existing€and€sue€for€damages€at€law.òòò ò€€Vance€v.€Schulderó óóó,Ï547€S.W.2d€927,€931€(Tenn.€1977);€òòò òDerryberry€v.€Hilló óóó,€745€S.W.2d€287,€291€(Tenn.€App.Ï1987);€òòò òGraham€v.€First€Am.€Natððl€Bankó óóó,€594€S.W.2d€723,€726€(Tenn.€App.€1979).€€The€trialÏcourt€granted€summary€judgment€to€Yarbrough,€Behrens,€and€A„1€Properties€finding€that€theÏBishofs€had€failed€to€present€facts€supporting€a€cause€of€action€for€fraud€against€these€defendants.€€€ÌÌà àIn€an€affidavit€filed€in€opposition€to€Defendantsðð€motions€for€summary€judgment,ÏJames€Bishof€states€that:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àShortly€after€moving€into€the€residence€I€noticed€slowÏflushing€and€draining€and€bubbling€of€toilets€and€tubs,€sinks,Ïdishwasher€and€washing€machine.€€When€I€addressed€theseÏoccurrences€with€Wesley€Yarbrough€he€assured€me€that€those€thingsÏwere€experienced€by€all€residences€of€new€houses€with€septicÏsystems€and€that€these€conditions€would€clear€up€on€their€own€onceÏthe€plumbing€and€septic€systems€ð ðsettled€inðð€through€continued€use.€ÏI€had€never€owned€a€house€with€a€septic€system€before€and€knewÏnothing€about€them.ÌÌà8 àà àIn€reliance€on€Mr.€Yarbroughððs€assurances€Mrs.€Bishof€andÏI€met€with€the€realtor,€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens€to€discuss€a€closingÏdate.ÌÌà8 àà àPrior€to€closing,€Lupe€Laughlin€Behrens,€assured€us€that€theÍslow€draining€of€toilets,€tubs,€sinks€and€dishwasher€and€washingÏmachine€would€clear€up€on€their€own€with€consistent€steady€use€andÏif€they€did€not€she€could€put€sufficient€pressure€to€bear€on€theÏcontractor,€Wesley€Yarbrough,€to€correct€the€slow€draining.€€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àFraud€contains€four€elements:€€(1)€an€intentional€misrepresentation€of€material€fact,Ï(2)€knowledge€of€the€representation's€falsity,€and€(3)€an€injury€caused€by€reasonable€reliance€onÏthe€representation.€€òòò òAxline€v.€Kutneró óóó,€863€S.W.2d€421,€423€(Tenn.€App.€1993).€The€fourthÏelement€requires€that€the€misrepresentation€involve€a€past€or€existing€fact€or,€in€the€case€ofÏpromissory€fraud,€that€it€involve€a€promise€of€future€action€with€no€present€intent€to€perform.Ïò òòòAxlineó óóó,€863€S.W.2d€at€423;€òòò òOak€Ridge€Precision€Indus.,€Inc.€v.€First€Tenn.€Bankó óóó,€835€S.W.2dÏ25,€28€(Tenn.€App.€1992);€òòò òSteed€Realty€v.€Oveisi,ó óóó€823€S.W.2d€195,€200€(Tenn.€App.€1991);ò òòòÏStacks€v.€Saundersó óóó,€812€S.W.2d€587,€592€(Tenn.€App.€1990).€€ÌÌà àIn€commercial€transactions,€Tennessee€courts€have€recognized€a€less€stringentÏstandard€of€liability€for€fraudulent€misrepresentations€than€the€common€law€action€for€deceit.€€AsÏour€Supreme€Court€noted€in€òòò òRitter€v.€Custom€Chemicides,€Inc.,€óóó ó912€S.W.2d€128€(Tenn.€1995):ÌÌÓÓà8 àOne€who,€in€the€course€of€his€business,€profession,€or€employment,Ïor€during€a€transaction€in€which€he€had€a€pecuniary€interest,€suppliesÏfalse€information€for€the€guidance€of€others€in€their€businessÏtransactions,€is€subject€to€liability€for€pecuniary€loss€caused€to€themÏby€their€justifiable€reliance€upon€such€information,€if€he€fails€toÏexercise€reasonable€care€or€competence€in€obtaining€orÏcommunicating€the€information.€€ÌÌÌÌò òòòÓÓRitteró óóó,€912€S.W.2d€at€130;€ò òòòHaynes€v.€Cumberland€Builders,€Incó óóó.,€546€S.W.2d€228,€232€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1976);€€òòò òMcElroy€v.€Boise€Cascade€Corp.ó óóó,€632€S.W.2d€127,€130€(Tenn.€App.€1982);€€òòò òKellerÏv.€West„Morr€Investorsó óóó,€òòò òLtd.ó óóó,€770€S.W.2d€543,€546€(Tenn.€App.€1988).€ÌÌà àWhere€a€claim€of€fraud€is€presented,€ordinarily€only€upon€a€full€trial€of€the€actionÍcan€the€issue€properly€be€developed.€€As€a€general€rule,€summary€judgment€is€not€an€appropriateÏprocedure€for€the€disposition€of€such€an€issue.€€òòò òFowler€v.€Happy€Goodman€Familyó óóó,€575€S.W.2dÏ496,€499€(Tenn.€1978).€€However,€it€is€incumbent€upon€the€party€asserting€fraud,€whenÏconfronted€by€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,€to€produce€some€competent€and€material€evidenceÏlegally€sufficient€to€support€his€claim€or€defense.€€òòò òFowleró óóó,€575€S.W.2d€at€499.€ÌÌà àTaking€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€nonmovingÏparty,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Yarbrough.€ÏYarbrough€allegedly€told€the€Bishofs€that€their€drainage€problems€would€clear€up€in€time.€€He€didÏnot€qualify€this€statement€by€telling€the€Bishofs€this€was€merely€his€opinion€or€what€he€believed.€ÏHe€stated€this€belief€as€a€fact€and€the€Bishofs€interpreted€it€as€such.€€His€statements€later€proved€toÏbe€false€when€the€Plaintiffsðð€problems€did€not€clear€up€as€promised€and€an€investigation€revealedÏimproperly€installed€plumbing€lines.€€Because€Yarbrough€built€the€house,€there€is€a€clear€inferenceÏthat€he€was€in€a€position€to€know€that€the€plumbing€lines€were€improperly€installed.€€Finally,ÏPlaintiffs,€who€are€not€experts€in€homebuilding,€had€every€right€to€rely€on€these€representationsÏfrom€the€builder€that€their€problems€would€clear€up€after€use.ÌÌà àAs€such,€we€believe€that€a€question€of€fact€exists€as€to€whether€the€BishofsÏjustifiably€relied€upon€the€fraudulent€or€negligent€misrepresentations€of€Yarbrough€in€respect€to€theÏstatus€of€their€plumbing€when€they€purchased€their€home.€€€Consequently,€we€hold€that€the€trialÏcourtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment€in€respect€to€Yarbrough€on€the€issue€of€fraudulent€andÏnegligent€misrepresentation€was€improper.€€ÌÌà àIn€regard€to€Behrens€and€A„1€Properties,€the€Bishofs€have€presented€no€proof€toÏsupport€their€allegations€of€fraudulent€or€negligent€misrepresentation€on€behalf€of€Behrens€or€A„1ÏProperties.€€The€Bishofs€relied€solely€on€James€Bishofððs€affidavit€to€oppose€Defendantsðð€motionsÏfor€summary€judgment.€€€The€Bishofs€have€offered€no€proof€that€Behrens€and€A„1€Properties,€asÍrealtors,€knew€or€should€have€known€that€defectively€installed€plumbing€was€at€the€source€of€theÏPlaintiffsðð€problems.ÌÌà àFurthermore,€any€representation€by€Behrens€that€she€would€put€pressure€onÏYarbrough€to€fix€any€slow€drainage€problems€would€not€constitute€a€misrepresentation€of€anÏexisting€or€past€fact.€€Therefore,€such€a€statement€does€not€meet€the€definition€of€actual€fraud.€€ToÏconstitute€promissory€fraud,€Plaintiffs€would€be€required€to€show€that€the€statement€involved€aÏpromise€of€future€action€with€no€present€intent€to€perform.€€òòò òOak€Ridge€Precision,ó óóó€835€S.W.2d€atÏ29.€€There€is€no€proof€that€Behrens€did€not€intend€to€perform€when€she€told€Plaintiffs€that€sheÏwould€put€pressure€on€Yarbrough€to€fix€any€slow€drainage€problems.€€Consequently,€we€believeÏthat€the€trial€court€properly€granted€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Behrens€and€A„1€Properties€inÏrespect€to€the€Bishofsðð€claims€of€fraudulent€or€negligent€misrepresentation.€Ìò òà àó óÌà àThe€trial€court€also€granted€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€€Yarbrough,€Behrens,€A„1€Properties,€NHIC€and€HBWC€on€the€issue€of€their€alleged€violation€of€the€Tennessee€ConsumerÏProtection€Act.€€T.C.A.€ðð€47„18„104(b)(27)€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act€of€1977Ïprovides€that€ð ð[e]ngaging€in€any€other€act€or€practice€which€is€deceptive€to€the€consumer€or€anyÏother€personðð€is€unlawful€and€in€violation€of€the€Act.€€T.C.A.€ðð€47„18„109(a)€provides€in€pertinentÏpart:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à(a)(1)€Any€person€who€suffers€an€ascertainable€loss€ofÏmoney€or€property,€real,€personal,€or€mixed,€or€any€other€article,Ïcommodity,€or€thing€of€value€wherever€situated,€as€a€result€of€theÏuse€or€employment€by€another€person€of€an€unfair€or€deceptive€actÏor€practice€declared€to€be€unlawful€by€this€part,€may€bring€an€actionÏindividually€to€recover€actual€damages.Ìà8 àà à.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 àà à(3)€If€the€court€finds€that€the€use€or€employment€of€the€unfairÏor€deceptive€act€or€practice€was€a€willful€or€knowing€violation€of€thisÏpart,€the€court€may€award€three€(3)€times€the€actual€damagesÏsustained€and€may€provide€such€other€relief€as€it€considers€necessaryÏand€proper.ÌÌÌÌÓÓT.C.A.€ðð€47„18„109(a)€(1995).€€ÌÌà àThe€unfair€or€deceptive€act€does€not€have€to€be€fraudulent€or€intentional€to€imposeÏliability€under€the€Act€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Negligent€misrepresentations€which€are€unfair€orÏdeceptive€to€the€consumer€can€also€be€deemed€violations€of€the€Act.òòò ò€€Smith€v.€Scott€LewisÏChevrolet,€Inc.ó óóó,€843€S.W.2d€9,€13€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Once€again,€taking€the€strongestÏlegitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€nonmoving€party,€we€believe€that€the€Bishofs€haveÏpresented€sufficient€proof€to€create€a€question€of€fact€as€to€whether€Yarbrough€engaged€in€an€unfairÏor€deceptive€act€when€he€sold€the€house€to€the€Bishofs.€€Under€the€same€reasoning€as€above,€weÏbelieve€that€Plaintiffs€have€failed€to€present€proof€sufficient€to€create€an€inference€that€Behrens€andÏA„1€Properties€acted€unfairly€or€deceptively€in€respect€to€the€sale€of€the€house.€€ÌÌà àMoreover,€we€cannot€find€any€evidence€in€the€record€which€would€support€aÏfinding€that€HBWC€or€NHIC€acted€unfairly€or€deceptively€in€any€way.€€As€such,€we€hold€that€theÏtrial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgment€to€Yarbrough€in€respect€to€his€alleged€violation€ofÏthe€Consumer€Protection€Act,€but€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment€toÏBehrens,€A„1€Properties,€HBWC€and€NHIC.€€€€ÌÌ€€à àAs€to€Plaintiffsðð€cause€of€action€for€outrageous€conduct,€this€cause€of€action€wasÏfirst€recognized€in€the€case€of€òòò òMedlin€v.€Allied€Investment€Coó óóó.,€398€S.W.2d€270€(Tenn.€1966).€ÏIn€òòò òMedlinó óóó,€the€Court,€adopting€the€rule€as€expressed€in€the€Restatement€(Second)€of€Torts€ðð€46,Ïstated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àThese€factors€are€set€out€in€the€Restatement€of€Torts€(2d),€ðð€46,Ï"Outrageous€Conduct€Causing€Severe€Emotional€Distress".€€ÌÌà8 àà8 àð ð(1)€One€who€by€extreme€and€outrageous€conductÍintentionally€or€recklessly€causes€severe€emotionalÏdistress€to€another€is€subject€to€liability€for€suchÏemotional€distress,€and€if€bodily€harm€results€from€it,Ïfor€such€bodily€harm."€€ÌÌà8 àClarification€of€this€statement€is€found€in€the€following€comment:ÌÌà8 àà8 àð ðd.€€òòò òExtreme€and€Outrageous€Conductó óóó.€€The€casesÏthus€far€decided€have€found€liability€only€where€theÏdefendantððs€conduct€has€been€extreme€andÏoutrageous.€€It€has€not€been€enough€that€theÏdefendant€has€acted€with€an€intent€which€is€tortiousÏor€even€criminal,€or€that€he€has€intended€to€inflictÏemotional€distress,€or€even€that€his€conduct€isÏcharacterized€by€'malice',€or€a€degree€of€aggravationÏwhich€would€entitle€the€plaintiff€to€punitive€damagesÏfor€another€tort.€€Liability€has€been€found€only€whereÏthe€conduct€has€been€so€outrageous€in€character,€andÏso€extreme€in€degree,€as€to€go€beyond€all€bounds€ofÏdecency,€and€to€be€regarded€as€atrocious,€and€utterlyÏuntolerable€in€a€civilized€community.€€Generally,€theÏcase€is€one€in€which€the€recitation€of€the€facts€to€anÏaverage€member€of€the€community€would€arouse€hisÏresentment€against€the€actor,€and€lead€him€to€exclaim,Ï'Outrageous.'ððÌÌÌÌò òòòMedlinóóó ó,€398€S.W.2d€at€274.ÌÌÓÓÌà àPursuant€to€òòò òMedlinó óóó,€liability€for€the€tort€of€"outrageous€conduct"€exists€only€whereÏ(1)€the€conduct€of€the€defendants€has€been€so€outrageous€in€character,€and€so€extreme€in€degree,€asÏto€be€beyond€the€pale€of€decency,€and€to€be€regarded€as€atrocious€and€utterly€intolerable€in€aÏcivilized€society,€and€(2)€the€conduct€results€in€serious€mental€injury.€€òòò òId.óóó ó;ò ò€òòSwallows€v.€WesternÏElec.€Co.,€ó óóó543€S.W.2d€581,€582€(Tenn.€1976);€òòò òDunn€v.€Moto€Photo,€Incó óóó.,€828€S.W.2d€747,Ï752€€(Tenn.€App.€1991).€€ÌÌà àIt€is€the€trial€courtððs€responsibility€to€determine,€in€the€first€instance,€whether€theÏdefendantððs€conduct€as€a€matter€of€law€is€so€extreme€and€outrageous€as€to€permit€recovery.€Ïòòò òAlexander€v.€Inmanó óóó,€825€S.W.2d€102,€105€(Tenn.€App.€1991)€(citingò òòò€Medlin,€óóó ó398€S.W.2d€atÏ275)ò òòò.€óóó óÌà àÌà àWe€have€concluded€that€the€allegations€of€Plaintiffs,€if€true,€do€not€rise€to€the€levelÏof€outrageous€conduct.€€Consequently,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€properly€granted€summaryÏjudgment€to€all€Defendants€on€Plaintiffsðð€claims€of€outrageous€conduct.ÌÌà àIn€respect€to€the€Bishofsðð€claim€for€breach€of€the€implied€warranty€of€goodÏworkmanship€and€materials,€we€note€that€this€implied€warranty€was€recognized€in€this€state€inòòò òÏDixon€v.€Mountain€City€Construction€Co.ó óóó,€632€S.W.2d€538€(Tenn.€1982).€Quoting€from€theÏNorth€Carolina€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€in€òòò òHartley€v.€Ballouó óóó,€209€S.E.2d€776€(N.C.€1974),€theÏcourt€stated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àð ð[w]e€hold€that€in€every€contract€for€the€sale€of€a€recently€completedÏdwelling,€and€in€every€contract€for€the€sale€of€a€dwelling€then€underÏconstruction,€the€vendor,€if€he€be€in€the€business€of€building€suchÏdwellings,€shall€be€held€to€impliedly€warrant€to€the€initial€vendeeÏthat,€at€the€time€of€the€passing€of€the€deed€or€the€taking€ofÏpossession€by€the€initial€vendee€(whichever€first€occurs),€theÏdwelling,€together€with€all€its€fixtures,€is€sufficiently€free€fromÏmajor€structural€defects,€and€is€constructed€in€a€workmanlikeÏmanner,€so€as€to€meet€the€standard€of€workmanlike€quality€thenÏprevailing€at€the€time€and€place€of€construction;€€and€that€this€impliedÏwarranty€in€the€contract€of€sale€survives€the€passing€of€the€deed€orÏthe€taking€of€possession€by€the€initial€vendee.ððÌÌÌò òÌÓÓòòDixonóóó ó,€632€S.W.2d€at€541.ÌÌà àThe€court€in€òòò òDixonó óóó€further€reasoned€that€this€warranty€is€implied€only€when€theÏwritten€contract€is€silent.€€Builder„vendors€and€purchasers€are€free€to€contract€in€writing€for€aÏwarranty€upon€different€terms€and€conditions€or€to€expressly€disclaim€any€warranty.€€òòò òAxline,€ó óóó863ÏS.W.2d€at€424.€€However,€any€disclaimer€of€this€warranty€must€be€in€clear€and€unambiguousÏlanguage.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€€ÌÌà àIn€òòò òDewberry€v.€Maddoxó óóó,€755€S.W.2d€50€(Tenn.€App.€1988),€this€Court€held:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àBecause€the€buyer€is€completely€relying€on€the€skills€of€theÏvendor„builder€in€this€situation,€we€think€that€in€order€to€have€a€validÏdisclaimer€of€the€implied€warranty,€it€must€be€in€clear€andÏunambiguous€language.€€The€buyer€must€be€given€"adequate€noticeÏof€the€implied€warranty€protections€that€he€is€waiving€by€signing€theÏcontract."€€òòò òTyus€v.€Restaó óóó,€328€Pa.Super.€11,€476€A.2d€427,€432Ï(1984).€€In€addition,€such€a€"disclaimer"€must€be€strictly€construedÏagainst€the€seller.€€òòIdóó.€€This€is€generally€the€law€in€other€jurisdictionsÏwhich€have€adopted€this,€or€a€comparable,€implied€warranty€of€goodÏworkmanship€and€materials.€€See€òòò òBelt€v.€Spenceró óóó,€41€Colo.€App.Ï227,€585€P.2d€922€(1978);€€òòò òHesson€v.€Walmsley€ConstructionÏCo.ó óóó,€422€So.2d€943€(Fla.App.1982);€€òòò òGriffin€v.€Wheeler„LeonardÏ&€Co.ó óóó,€òòò òInc.ó óóó,€290€N.C.€185,€225€S.E.2d€557€(1976).€€ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òDewberryó óóó,€755€S.W.2d€at€55.Ìà àÌà àThe€Warranty€Agreement€in€the€instant€case€does€not€contain€an€express,Ïunambiguous€disclaimer€of€the€implied€warranty€of€good€workmanship€and€materials.€€Therefore,Ïthe€Plaintiffs€should€be€allowed€to€seek€damages€against€Yarbrough€for€the€breach€of€this€impliedÏwarranty€upon€remand€for€their€allegations€of€defectively€installed€plumbing.€€ÌÌà àIn€regard€to€Plaintiffsðð€final€issue,€chancery€courts€have€both€statutory€and€inherentÏjurisdiction€involving€suits€for€rescission.€ò òòòSeeó óóó€òòò òTucker€v.€Simmonsó óóó,€287€S.W.2d€19,€21€(Tenn.Ï1956).€€As€we€believe€the€reason€for€this€lawsuit€and€the€gravamen€of€this€lawsuit,€as€stated€in€theÏBishofsðð€Complaint,€is€for€rescission€of€the€underlying€contract,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏdismissing€the€Bishofsðð€claim€due€to€lack€of€jurisdiction.€€When€a€chancery€court€has€jurisdictionÏfor€one€purpose,€it€will€take€jurisdiction€for€all€purposes€incidental€to€its€jurisdiction€of€the€mainÏsubject.€€òòò òTuckeró óóó,€287€S.W.2d€at€21;€òòò òMartin€v.€Martin,ó óóó€755€S.W.2d€793,€797€(Tenn.€App.Ï1988).ÌÌà àIn€summary,€we€hold€(1)€that€the€trial€court€properly€confirmed€and€upheld€theÏarbitration€award€in€this€case;€(2)€that€the€Plaintiffs€cannot€maintain€an€action€against€any€one€of€theÏDefendants€for€the€defects€in€their€septic€and€site€drainage€systems€that€were€previously€arbitratedÏsince€they€effectively€assigned€all€claims€arising€out€of€the€defective€septic€and€site€drainageÏsystems€to€NHIC€and€HBWC;€(3)€that€the€alleged€defects€of€the€Plaintiffsðð€plumbing€system€areÏdistinct€from€those€of€the€septic€and€site€drainage€systems;€(4)€that€the€Plaintiffs€are€not€bound€toÏarbitrate€their€claims€concerning€the€plumbing€system€in€the€absence€of€a€signed€arbitrationÏagreement;€(5)€that€the€trial€court€improperly€granted€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Yarbrough€onÏPlaintiffsðð€claims€of€misrepresentation€and€violation€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act;€(6)Ïthat€the€trial€court€properly€granted€summary€judgment€to€all€Defendants€on€Plaintiffsðð€claims€ofÏoutrageous€conduct;€(7)€that€the€trial€court€improperly€granted€summary€judgment€in€favor€ofÏYarbrough€for€breach€of€the€implied€warranty€of€good€workmanship€and€materials;€€and€(8)€that€theÏchancery€court€has€jurisdiction€to€hear€this€case€since€the€gravamen€of€Plaintiffsðð€Complaint€isÏbased€on€the€equitable€remedy€of€rescission.€€Ì€Ìà àIt€results€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part€andÏthis€cause€is€remanded€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€on€appeal€areÏtaxed€Ìequally€to€Appellants€and€Appellees,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓÓ` Ü` È“XÓà à_______________________________Ìà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.€(Concurs)›Ì