ÿWPC*& …# VUFa %§ 0@­4í w@ P 0„X 0DÜ n­ 0¨Í 0Åu : 0z@ 0›º n­U 0J 0TL 0^  0hþ Bf 0rƒ 0|õ 0†q 0÷ 1u‡ 0dü D3` 0@“U6ÓB) DC2 AMuU*Â1ì:IW” v~4vÓ² AO…$ÆÔ$ 0Dš% D/Þ% B &˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 <¾½Q 9Z ‹.Courier New RegularX(ù$¡¡Ó  ÓÓ  Ó·‚^!¡Ó 3|x1 D D!Ó€"E#$D%&Ó€(4(3DX$¤¤Ý ƒù!ÝÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó«<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@PBÿÿ0HeadingChapter HeadingÇà@ì.. àòòò òÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔˆÌÌóóó ótO ÿÿ4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersàÐ.. àÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€ˆÔ úÿ Ôà0..àÌÌHR& ÿÿ8BibliogrphyBibliographyà0.. àà°..àÌÌL=ÿÿ6SubheadingSubheadingò òÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ôà.. àÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÌÌó ó«<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô d2@ 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)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd€-0Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial 'Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€2ÔÔ€2ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€2XÔÌÌò òDecember€23,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€2ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó 0Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòThe€court€also€found€that€the€lease€contained€a€requirement€that€demandÏof€unpaid€rent,€including€double€rent,€must€be€made€within€five€days€ofÏfailure€to€pay€the€rent€due.€€The€court€found€that€the€landlord's€failure€toÏmake€such€timely€demand€was€not€a€waiver,€however,€since€the€lease€contained€aÏnon„waiver€provision€which€precluded€the€"absence€of€demand€argument"€by€theÏdefendants.ÌÌà àWe€note,€however,€that€demand€is€not€a€requirement€under€the€lease€as€aÏprerequisite€to€collection€of€rent.€€The€notice€provision€simply€provides€thatÏthe€landlord€òòò òmayó óóó€give€notice€and€allow€the€tenant€five€days€to€cure€a€de…fault.óóÌ ?Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòPlaintiff€seeks€to€recover€double€rent€for€the€period€from€the€expira…tion€of€the€last€lease€extension€until€the€defendants€vacated€the€premises.óóÌ ŠÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòSection€1.3(b)€of€the€lease€reads€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:óóÌÌÒ  ÒÒ  Òòòà àTenant€shall€also€pay,€as€additional€rental€hereunder,€allÏtaxes,€insurance€premiums,€utility€expense,€repairs,€charges,Ïcosts€and€expenses€of€every€kind€and€nature€relating€to€the€LeasedÏPremises,€it€being€the€intention€of€the€Landlord€and€Tenant€thatÏthis€be€a€"net,€net,€net"€lease€(triple€net)€to€the€LandlordÏduring€the€term€of€the€Lease,€with€all€costs,€expenses€andÏobligations€of€every€kind€relating€to€the€Leased€Premises€whichÏmay€arise€or€become€due€during€the€term€of€this€Lease€to€be€paidÏby€the€Tenant€and€the€Tenant€agrees€to€indemnify€and€hold€harmlessÏthe€Landlord€against€such€costs,€expenses€and€obligations.óóÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ ¸ ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€IXXdÖXXdÖ7ÑÙ€€ÙßR€130A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌSTEVEN€BROOKS,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àHAMILTON€CIRCUITÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àC.A.€NO.€03A01„9607„CV„00221Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellant€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àL.€MARIE€WILLIAMSÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àJUDGEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌNETWORKS€OF€CHATTANOOGA,€INC.,€€)à àAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€VACATED€INÌD/B/A€CONNECTING€POINT€COMPUTER€)€€œPART,€REVERSED›€IN€œPART€AND›ÌOF€CHATTANOOGA,€ROBERT€KNOWLING€œ)€€REMANDED›Ìand€FRANK€BLAIR,€III,€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Defendants„Appellees€€)ÌÌÌÌÌWILLIAM€H.€HORTON,€Horton,€Maddox€&€Anderson,€œPLLC›,€Chattanooga,Ïfor€Appellants€Networks€of€Chattanooga,€Inc.,€and€Robert€E.ÏKnowling.ÌÌÌFLOSSIE€œWEILL›,€Weill€&€Weill,€Chattanooga,€for€Steven€Brooks.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌà€ àMcMurray,€J.ÌÌà àThis€appeal€involves€the€interpretation€of€a€written€leaseÏagreement.€€The€plaintiff„appellant,€Steven€Brooks,€purchased€aÏcommercial€building€in€Chattanooga€in€which€Networks€of€Chattanoo…ga€operated€a€computer€store€known€as€Connecting€Point€Computer€ofÏChattanooga.€€Networks€and€its€president,€Robert€E.€Knowling,€were€Ïdefendants€in€the€case€below€and€also€raise€issues€on€appeal.ÌÌà àThe€parties€had€been€operating€under€a€written€lease,€whichÏexpired€on€October€1,€1990.€€Networks€was€a€holdover€tenant€untilÏMarch€1991,€when€an€addendum€to€the€lease€was€signed.€€The€leaseÏagreement€contained€a€holdover€provision€providing€for€double€rentÏduring€any€period€of€holdover.€€The€addendum€signed€in€March€1991Ïwas€for€a€one€year€lease€period€from€January€1,€1991€to€DecemberÏ1,€1991,€and€contained€a€one€year€option.€€That€option€was€exer…cised,€so€the€time€for€expiration€of€the€lease€became€DecemberÍ1992.€€Networks€did€not€sign€a€new€lease€in€December€1992,€al…though€the€parties€discussed€a€new€lease€arrangement€severalÏtimes.€€From€January€to€August€1993,€Networks€continued€to€operateÏits€store€as€a€holdover€tenant.€€Networks€continued€to€make€itsÏmonthly€payments€in€an€amount€equal€to€the€regular€rent€paymentÏdue€under€the€1992€lease.ÌÌà àThe€parties€had€several€discussions€concerning€a€re„leasingÏof€the€original€premises,€re„leasing€a€smaller€portion€of€theÏpremises,€or€relocating€to€another€facility€owned€by€the€plain…tiff.€€In€August€1993,€however,€Networks€ceased€operations€andÏvacated€the€facility.€€The€plaintiff€thereafter€sought€payment€ofÏdouble€rent€for€the€holdover€period.€In€December€1994,€plaintiffÏfiled€suit€to€collect€the€double€rent,€and€other€monies€allegedlyÏdue.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€issued€a€memorandum€opinion€on€December€7,Ï1995,€holding€the€defendants€liable€for€four€months€of€double€rentÏafter€termination€of€the€original€lease€agreement.€€The€courtÏawarded€attorneys'€fees€to€the€plaintiff€in€the€amount€ofÍ$5,000.00€plus€10€percent€of€the€double€rent€for€late€charges€andÏpenalties.€€The€court€also€awarded€$691.36€for€unpaid€taxes€andÏutilities.€€ÌÌà àBoth€parties€have€appealed,€raising€several€issues.€€Plain…tiff's€issues€are€as€follows:ÌÌà8 àà0 àà à1.à àÓÓThe€trial€court€erred€in€arbitrarily€limiting€theÏenforcement€of€defendants'€contractual€obligationÏunder€the€holdover€clause€of€the€lease.ÌÌà8 àà0 àà à2.à àThe€trial€court€erred€in€relieving€defendants€fromÏtheir€contractual€obligation€for€maintenance€andÏrepair€expenses€under€the€lease.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€defendants€submit€the€following€issues€for€our€consider…ation:ÌÌà8 àà0 àà à1.à àÓÓDid€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€defendantsÏliable€for€four€months€of€double€rent€pursuant€to€aÏclause€in€their€lease€with€plaintiff€allowingÏdouble€rent€during€a€holdover?ÌÌà8 àà0 àà à2.à àDid€the€trial€court€err€in€holding€Robert€KnowlingÏpersonally€liable€under€the€lease,€since€he€did€notÏsign€the€original€lease€as€an€individual€and€theÏaddendum€did€not€incorporate€the€guaranty€of€theÏoriginal€lease?ÌÌà8 àà0 àà à3.à àDid€the€trial€court€err€in€awarding€attorney's€feesÏand€a€ten€percent€surcharge€to€plaintiff€if€defen…dants€are€found€not€liable€for€double€rent€underÏthe€lease?ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àWe€will€first€address€the€validity€of€the€award€of€doubleÏrent.€€The€holdover€paragraph€in€the€lease€agreement€provides€asÏfollows:ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒSECTION€9.6€òòSURRENDER€OF€PREMISES€AND€HOLDING€OVERóó.ÌÓÓà àAt€the€expiration€of€the€tenancy€hereby€created,ÏTenant€shall€surrender€the€Leased€Premises€in€the€sameÏcondition€as€the€Leased€Premises€were€in€upon€deliveryÏof€possession€thereof€to€Tenant,€reasonable€wear€andÏtear€excepted,€and€damage€by€unavoidable€casualty€ex…cepted€to€the€extent€that€the€same€is€covered€by€Land…lord's€fire€insurance€policy.ÌÌà àPrior€to€the€expiration€or€sooner€termination€ofÏthis€lease€Tenant€shall€remove€any€and€all€trade€fix…tures,€equipment€and€other€unattached€items€which€TenantÏmay€have€installed€or€stored€in€the€Leased€Premises.€ÏTenant€shall€repair€any€damage€to€the€Leased€PremisesÏcaused€by€its€removal€of€such€fixtures€and€movable.€ÏTenant€shall€not€remove€any€plumbing€or€electricalÏfixtures€or€equipment,€heating€or€air€condition€equip…ment,€floor€coverings€(including€but€not€limited€to€wallÏto€wall€carpeting),€wall€or€ceilings,€or€anything€elseÏwhich€may€be€deemed€to€constitute€a€part€of€the€freeholdÏand/or€leased€interest€of€Landlord,€nor€shall€TenantÏremove€any€fixtures€or€machinery€that€were€furnished€orÏpaid€for€by€Landlord€(whether€initially€installed€orÏreplaced).ÌÌà àThe€failure€or€refusal€to€surrender€the€LeasedÏPremises€at€the€end€of€the€term€as€set€out€herein,€orÏany€renewal€or€extension€thereof,€and€the€subsequentÏholdover€€shall€result€in€a€òòtenancy€at€will€at€a€monthlyÏrental€of€double€the€amount€payable€by€Tenant€to€Land…lord€for€the€last€month€of€the€term€of€this€leaseóó.€ÏTenant€may€be€required€to€vacate€the€Leased€PremisesÏwithout€further€notice€and€be€removed€by€legal€processÏas€upon€a€forcible€and€unlawful€detainer.€€(EmphasisÏadded).ÌÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÌÓÓà àThe€trial€court€found€the€above€provisions€to€be€clear€andÏunambiguous.€€The€court€found€that€the€provision's€first€paragraphÏmandates€the€surrender€of€the€leased€premises€at€the€expiration€ofÏthe€tenancy,€and€that€the€second€paragraph€contemplates€the€prepa…ration€for€surrendering€of€the€premises€to€take€place€prior€to€theÏexpiration€of€the€lease.€€As€to€the€third€paragraph,€the€courtÏfound€that€the€"very€clear€language"€refers€to€the€failure€orÏrefusal€to€surrender,€and€the€subsequent€holding€over€to€result€inÏa€tenancy€at€will€with€a€monthly€rental€of€double€the€amount€paidÏin€the€last€month€of€the€regular€lease€term.× ƒ4 ××  ×€€The€court,€however,Ífound€that€only€four€months'€double€rent€was€owed€because€theÏconduct€of€the€plaintiff€did€not€constitute€fair€dealing.€€Specif…ically,€the€court€found€that€negotiating€with€the€defendants€for€aÏnew€lease€without€enforcing€the€double€rent€provision€was€reason…able€conduct€for€four€months,€but€continuing€to€accept€rent€andÏacquiesce€in€the€current€arrangement€so€long€as€negotiationsÏcontinued,€and€the€refusal€to€accept€the€rental€proposal€offeredÏby€a€July€27,€1993€letter€from€defendants€was€not€fair€dealing.€ÏThe€court€found€that€continuing€that€conduct€"when€the€absoluteÏright€to€enforce€the€vacating€of€the€premises€existed€is€acquies…cence€which€precludes€Mr.€Brooks€returning€to€the€type€of€perfor…mance€specified€in€the€œcontract."€€The€court€also€found€the€defen…dant,€Robert€Knowling,€to€be€personally€liable€under€the€terms€ofÏthe€lease€agreement.›€€For€the€reasons€set€forth€below,€we€affirmÏin€part€and€reverse€in€part.ÌÌà àAs€to€the€validity€of€the€double€rent€provision,€an€individu…al€is€free€to€bind€himself€by€a€contract€whose€terms€may€not€seemÍreasonable€or€decent€to€an€outside€observer,€and€the€court€willÏnot€concern€itself€with€the€wisdom€or€folly€of€the€contract.€€òòSeeóóÏòòœChapman›€Drug€Co.€v.€œChapman›óó,€207€Tenn.€502,€341€S.W.2d€392€(1961).€ÏDefendants€argue€that€the€double€rent€provision€constitutes€anÏunenforceable€penalty.€€Defendants€correctly€contend€that€Tennes…see€law€disfavors€penalties,€and€an€unreasonable€damages€provi…sion,€regardless€of€whether€it€was€agreed€to€by€the€parties,€willÏnot€be€enforced.€€òòSeeóó€òòœBeasley›€v.€œHorrell›óó,€864€S.W.2d€45,€48€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1993).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòHarmon€v.€œEggers›óó,€699€S.W.2d€159,€163€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1985).ÌÌà àWe€believe,€however,€that€the€facts€of€this€case€are€substan…tially€different€from€the€cases€finding€a€damages€provision€unrea…sonable.€€In€òòœBeasley›óó,€the€terms€of€a€promissory€note€constitutedÏan€unenforceable€penalty€since€they€provided€for€the€cancellationÏof€the€note€if€the€holder€failed€to€make€any€payment€under€leasesÏexecuted€in€conjunction€with€the€note.€€The€court€found€in€òòœBeasley›óóÏthat€the€amount€of€actual€damages€was€grossly€disproportionate€toÏthe€amount€of€the€penalty,€since€the€plaintiff€could€forfeit€theÏentire€amount€of€the€note€plus€$40,000€in€interest€if€they€missedÍor€were€late€one€lease€payment.€€òòœBeasley›óó,€864€S.W.2d€at€48„49.€€InÏòòHarmonóó,€the€court€found€a€"liquidated€damages"€clause€tantamountÏto€a€forfeiture€clause,€in€that€the€plaintiffs€had€paid€in€excessÏof€50€percent€of€the€purchase€price.€€òòHarmonóó,€699€S.W.2d€at€164.ÏSuch€is€not€the€case€here.€€The€parties€in€this€case€were€workingÏunder€a€month€to€month€tenancy,€which,€the€record€reflects,€wasÏnot€considered€by€the€landlord€to€be€a€beneficial€arrangement.€ÏThis€is€supported€by€the€landlord's€continued€negotiations€withÏthe€tenant€for€a€longer„term€lease.€€We€do€not€believe,€under€theÏfacts€and€circumstances€of€this€case,€that€a€provision€calling€forÏdouble€rent€during€a€holdover€period€was€unreasonable.€€We€noteÏthat€the€common€law€rule€as€set€forth€by€the€Supreme€Court€inÏòòœBrinkley›€v.€œWalcott›óó,€57€Tenn.€22€(1872),€and€followed€by€thisÏcourt€in€òòœRussells›€Factory€Stores,€Inc.,€v.€œFielden›€Furniture€Coóó.,Ï232€S.W.2d€592€(Tenn.€App.€1950)€is€still€viable€law€in€thisÏjurisdiction.€€As€stated€in€òòœRussells›€Factory€Storesóó,€"[œw]here›€aÏtenant€receives€reasonable€notice€of€a€change€in€rental,€hisÏcontinuance€in€possession€beyond€the€rent€period€renders€himÏliable€for€the€new€rent€notwithstanding€any€protest€he€may€make."Ï(Citations€omitted).€€It€would€seem€to€be€enigmatic€to€allow€theÍcollection€of€increased€rentals€on€reasonable€notice€and€denyÏincreased€rents€expressly€contracted€for€in€a€written€contract.€ÏParenthetically,€we€should€note€that€the€Supreme€Court€in€òòAHCI,ÏInc€v.€Lamar€œAdv›.€of€Tenn.,€Incóó.,€898€S.W.2d€191€(Tenn.€1995)Ïreaffirmed€òòBrinkleyóó€and€òòRussellsóó.€€ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àIn€summary,€the€rule€as€enunciated€in€òòBrinkleyóó€andÏòòRussellsóó€continues€to€be€the€law€in€Tennessee€in€situa…tions€where€the€landlord€gives€a€reasonable€notice€ofÏthe€rent€increase€in€the€form€of€a€definite€demand.ÏWhere€there€is€no€agreement€between€the€parties,€theÏtenant€becomes€liable€for€the€fair€market€rental€valueÏfor€the€period€that€it€occupies€the€premises€beyond€theÏterm€of€the€lease.ÌÌòòAHCIóó,€at€page€195.ÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòAHCIóó,€however,€the€court€denied€increased€rentals€claimedÏby€the€lessor€on€the€grounds€that€there€had€been€no€firm€demandÏfor€increased€rentals€but€only€a€negotiable€œoffer.›œ›€The€lessor€wasÏlimited€to€recovery€of€the€fair€market€rental€value€of€the€premis…es.€€òòAHCIóó€is€distinguishable€from€this€case,€however,€since€here,Ïwe€have€a€written€agreement€as€to€the€amount€of€the€holdoverÏrental.€€The€written€agreement€constitutes€reasonable€notice€toÍthe€tenant€that€additional€rents€and€the€amount€thereof€willÏbecome€due€and€payable€on€any€period€of€holdover.ÌÌà àThe€defendants€also€argue€that€they€were€not€holdover€tenantsÏbecause€they€did€not€remain€on€the€premises€against€the€landlord'sÏwill.€€The€holdover€provision€of€the€lease€applied€to€a€tenant'sÏ"failure€or€refusal€to€vacate."€€Defendants€argue€that€the€plainÏlanguage€of€the€term€failure€is€defined€as€the€"nonperformance€ofÏwhat€is€requested."€€€Defendants€presented€this€definition€atÏtrial€from€the€American€Heritage€Dictionary.€€The€defendants,Ïhowever,€€omitted€the€remainder€of€the€definition.€€We€quote€theÏdefinition€from€the€American€Heritage€Dictionary,€Third€Edition:Ï"Nonperformance€of€what€is€requested€òòor€expectedóó."€(EmphasisÏadded).€€Obviously,€when€the€definition€is€read€in€its€totality,Ïit€becomes€clear€that€the€defendants€did€fail€to€vacate€the€pre…mises.€€The€holdover€provision,€which€we€emphasize€was€found€to€beÏclear€and€unambiguous,€states€that€the€tenant€"òòshallóó€surrender€theÏLeased€Premises"€at€the€expiration€of€the€lease.€€(Emphasis€add…ed).€€Clearly,€by€the€terms€of€this€provision,€the€tenant€wasÏexpected€to€surrender€the€premises€when€the€lease€expired.€There…fore,€according€to€the€terms€of€the€holdover€provision,€remainingÏon€the€premises€without€immediately€executing€a€new€lease€consti…tuted€a€failure€to€surrender€the€premises€and€the€holdover€provi…sion€was€triggered.€€We€also€note€that€to€be€a€holdover€the€tenantÏdoes€not€have€to€hold€against€the€will€of€the€landlord.€€Here,€aÏholdover€was€expressly€created€by€the€terms€of€the€lease€agree…ment.€We€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€defendants€wereÏholdover€tenants.ÌÌà àWe€now€turn€to€the€trial€court's€decision€that€the€plaintiffsÏwere€liable€for€four€months€of€double€rent€only.€€The€court€foundÏthat€the€plaintiff€was€guilty€of€unfair€dealing€and€allowed€aÏrecovery€of€only€four€months€of€double€rent€despite€the€fact€thatÏthe€defendants€remained€on€the€premises€for€eight€months.€Defen…dants€take€the€position€that€the€award€of€four€months€double€rentÏwas€error.ÌÌà àThe€lease€agreement€contained€a€non„waiver€proviso€which€isÏas€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àò òòòNon„Waiver€Provisionsó óóó.€€The€failure€of€LandlordÏto€insist€on€a€strict€performance€of€any€of€the€terms,Ïconditions€and€covenants€herein€shall€not€be€deemed€toÏbe€a€waiver€of€any€subsequent€breach€or€default€in€theÏterms,€conditions€and€covenants€herein€contained€exceptÏas€may€be€expressly€waived€in€writing.ÌÌÓÓÌà àApplying€the€clear€provisions€of€the€non„waiver€agreement€toÏthis€case,€the€fact€that€plaintiff€accepted€the€monthly€rentalÏchecks€and€did€not€indicate€that€he€intended€to€collect€the€doubleÏrent€until€June€1993€does€not€constitute€a€waiver€of€any€rights€ofÏthe€landlord€under€the€contract€absent€a€written€agreement€to€theÏcontrary.€€The€purpose€of€such€a€provision€is€to€prevent€theÏresult€the€defendants€seek€to€obtain.€€The€argument€that€plaintiffÏdid€not€collect€double€rent€during€previous€holdovers€and€consti…tutes€unfair€dealing€must€fail.€€This€issue€falls€squarely€withinÏthe€non„waiver€provision.€€Additionally,€the€previous€holdoverÏperiods€resulted€in€the€defendants€re„leasing€the€property.€€ThisÏholdover€period€did€not.€€Plaintiff's€failure€to€insist€thatÏdouble€rents€be€paid€during€the€previous€holdover€periods€inuredÏto€the€benefit€of€the€defendants.€€Plaintiff€testified€that€heÏfelt€it€unfair€to€require€the€double€rent€for€the€previous€periodsÏif€the€tenant€executed€a€new€lease,€and€that€he€made€that€sameÍoffer€to€defendants€during€this€period.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€We€are€not€unmindful€ofÏthe€case€of€òòHeritage€Federal€Savings€&€Loan€Association€v.€BegleyÏDrug€Coóó.,€an€unreported€opinion€of€this€court€filed€at€Jackson,ÏSeptember€15,€1992.€€We€think,€however,€that€òòHeritage€Federalóó€hasÏno€application€to€the€facts€in€dispute€in€this€case.€€Were€theÏlandlord€attempting€to€collect€double€rents€for€the€previousÏperiods€between€the€expiration€of€the€lease€and€a€new€agreement,Ïthe€result€might€be€otherwise.ÌÌà àIt€is€well„settled€that€every€contract€contains€an€impliedÏduty€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing€in€its€performance€and€en…forcement.€òòœTSC›€Industries,€Inc.€v.€œTomlin›óó,€743€S.W.2d€169,€173Ï(Tenn.€App.€1987)€and€òòœHurley›€v.€Tennessee€Farmers€Mutual€Ins.€Coóó.,Ï922€S.W.2d€887€(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€In€support€of€the€propositionÏthat€the€plaintiff€was€guilty€of€unfair€dealing,€the€defendantsÏput€forth€the€same€argument,€òòi.eóó.,€that€the€plaintiff€should€beÏestopped€from€collecting€the€double€rent€because€of€his€actions€inÏfailing€to€collect€double€rent€for€the€previous€holdovers.ÌÌà àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€continuation€of€negotiationsÏand€continued€acceptance€of€rent€until€all€negotiations€failedÏdoes€not€constitute€either€estoppel€or€unfair€dealing.€€On€theÏcontrary,€€the€defendants€are€chargeable€with€knowledge€of€theÏholdover€provisions€of€the€lease.€€We€are€of€the€opinion€that€theÏrecord€does€not€support€a€finding€that€the€plaintiff€was€guilty€ofÏunfair€dealing.ÌÌà àThe€defendants€concede€in€their€brief€that€Mr.€Brooks€shouldÏbe€awarded€either€the€entire€amount€of€the€double€rent€for€theÏholdover€period€or€none€at€all.€€We€quote€from€defendants'€brief:Ï"Nothing€in€Mr.€Brooks'€conduct€indicates€that€he€should€be€es…topped€from€collecting€double€rent€for€some€months€and€not€oth…ers."€€We€agree€with€the€defendants€on€this€point.€€There‚fore,€inÏlight€of€our€determination€that€the€plaintiff€was€not€guilty€ofÏunfair€dealing,€we€must€conclude€that€the€plaintiff€is€entitled€toÏdouble€rents€for€the€entire€eight€month€period€in€question.€ÏHaving€reached€that€conclusion,€we€find€no€valid€reason€for€theÏtrial€court€to€limit€the€award€to€four€months€of€double€rent.€€WeÍfind€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€must€be€modified€so€asÏto€award€the€plaintiff€double€rent€for€the€entire€holdover€periodÏof€eight€months.ÌÌà àOur€resolution€of€this€issue€œpretermits›€the€issue€relating€toÏattorney€fees€and€the€surcharge€since€the€premise€upon€which€theÏissue€was€based€was€that€there€was€no€liability€for€the€doubleÏrent.ÌÓÓÓÓÌà àThe€next€issue€we€address€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏholding€Robert€Knowling€personally€liable€on€the€lease.€DefendantsÏargue€that€the€language€of€the€lease€and€addendum€do€not€show€thatÏMr.€Knowling€intended€to€personally€guarantee€the€lease,€and,Ïalternatively,€that€the€guaranty€clause€was€not€within€the€circleÏof€assent€of€Mr.€Knowling.€€In€asserting€this€position,€the€defen…dants€argue€that€òòIn€re:€Estate€of€œDickerson›óó,€600€S.W.2d€714,Ï(Tenn.€1980)€is€controlling.€€In€òòDickersonóó,€a€lease€agreement€wasÏexecuted€purporting€to€be€between€a€limited€partnership€as€land…lord€and€a€corporation€and€its€president€as€tenants.€€No€otherÏparties€were€named€in€the€body€of€the€lease.€€The€lease€was€signedÍon€behalf€of€the€limited€partnership€by€the€general€partner.€€TheÏpre‚sident€of€the€corporation€signed€on€behalf€of€the€corporation.€ÏThe€lease€agreement€also€contained€a€signature€line€and€the€signa…ture€of€Dickerson,€whose€estate€was€under€probate.€€The€landlordÏbrought€an€action€against€the€estate€of€Dickerson€to€recoverÏmonies€alleged€to€be€due€under€the€terms€of€the€lease.€€The€pro…bate€court€held€that€Dickerson€was€personally€liable.€€The€SupremeÏCourt€reversed€the€judgment€of€the€probate€court.€€In€so€doing,Ïthe€œSupreme›€œCourt›€citing€many€authorities€reaffirmed€the€followingÏrule:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àIt€is€a€general€rule€of€interpretation€of€contractsÏthat€when€the€body€of€a€contract€purports€to€set€out€theÏnames€of€the€parties€thereto€and€a€person€not€named€inÏthe€body€of€the€contract€signs€the€contract€and€nothingÏin€the€contract€indicates€that€such€person€signed€as€aÏparty,€then€such€person€is€not€bound€as€a€party€to€theÏÔ&  Ôcontract€and€is€not€liable€thereunder.ÌÌÓÓÔ'  ÔÌÓ ` ÜŽXå)ˆ,‹X Óà àApplying€the€rule€to€the€facts€in€òòDickersonóó,€the€court€spe…cifically€found€that€Dickerson€did€not€incur€liability€as€a€prin…cipal€party€to€the€lease€contract.€€The€court€then€consideredÏwhether€the€signature€created€personal€liability€on€Dickerson'sÍpart€as€a€guarantor.€€The€court€determined€that€since€the€leaseÏdid€not€contain€any€promise€by€Dickerson€to€answer€for€the€debt,Ïdefault€or€miscarriage€of€the€tenant€named€therein,€the€lease€didÏnot€constitute€a€compliance€with€the€Statute€of€Frauds.€€TheÏcourt,€therefore,€concluded€that€Dickerson€was€not€liable€as€aÏguarantor.ÌÌà àWe€are€faced€with€a€strikingly€similar€situation€here.€€TheÏbody€of€the€lease€agreement€as€amended€by€the€addendum€which€Mr.ÏKnowling€signed€as€president€and€individually€does€not€purport€inÏany€way€to€make€Mr.€Knowling€a€party€to€the€contract.€€As€inÏòòDickersonóó,€the€lease€agreement€does€not€contain€any€promise€by€Mr.ÏKnowling€to€answer€for€the€debt,€default€or€miscarriage€of€theÏtenant€named€therein.€On€the€contrary€the€lease€agreement€€con…tains€a€specific€guaranty€provision€which€clearly€indicates€thatÏMr.€Knowling€was€not€a€guarantor€on€the€agreement.€€The€guarantyÏparagraph€in€the€lease€agreement€provides€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à9.12€€ò òòòTenant's€Shareholderóóó ó.€€The€sole€sharehold…er€of€the€Tenant€(hereinafter€referred€to€as€"Sharehold…er")€is€joining€in€the€execution€of€this€lease€agree…ment,€in€consideration€of€financial€accommodationsÍafforded€or€from€time€to€time€to€be€afforded€to€TenantÏby€Landlord.€€The€Shareholder,€hereby€guarantees€theÏfull€and€prompt€payment€and€performance€by€Tenant€of€allÏits€duties€and€obligations€under€this€lease.€€ThisÏguaranty€shall€be€continuing,€absolute€and€uncondition…al,€and€shall€apply€to€and€cover€all€of€the€obligationsÏof€the€Tenant€under€this€Lease€Agreement,€and€shallÏremain€in€full€force€and€effect€during€the€Term€of€thisÏlease€and€any€renewals€or€extensions€thereof.ÌÌÓÓÓ ` °œXÓÌà àBoth€the€lease€agreement€and€the€addendum€(which€plaintiffÏargues€establishes€the€liability€of€Mr.€Knowling)€œwere›€signed€byÏFrank€Blair€as€Shareholder.€€There€is€nothing€to€indicate€that€anyÏof€the€parties€intended€Mr.€Knowling€to€be€a€guarantor.€€ApplyingÏthe€rule€enunciated€in€òòDickersonóó€to€the€facts€of€this€case,€Mr.ÏKnowling€is€not€personally€a€party€to€the€lease€agreement€and€theÏStatute€of€Frauds,€as€applied€in€òòDickersonóó€precludes€liability€onÏthe€part€of€Mr.€Knowling€as€a€guarantor.€€The€use€of€the€wordÏindividually€after€the€signature€of€Mr.€Knowling€does€not€changeÏthe€result.€€We,€therefore€reverse€and€vacate€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court€finding€Mr.€Knowling€to€be€personally€liable.ÌÔ% € ÔÌà àPlaintiff€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€relieving€theÏdefendants€from€their€contractual€obligation€for€maintenance€andÍrepair€expenses€under€the€express€provisions€of€the€lease.€€TheÏcourt€found€that€the€installation€of€awnings,€œpainting,›€sealingÏthe€parking€œlot›€and€the€installation€of€lights€were€capital€œim…provements›€for€which€the€tenant€was€not€liable€under€the€lease.€ÏPlaintiff€argues€that€the€lease€was€a€"triple€net€lease,"€whichÏprovided€that€the€lessee€must€pay€its€share€of€the€operating€costÏof€maintaining€the€common€areas€and€building,€as€well€as€allÏrepairs€and€maintenance.€Plaintiff€presented€evidence€that€theÏpainting€of€the€exterior€of€the€building€was€maintenance.€€Plain…tiff€further€claims€that€the€sealing€of€the€parking€lot€"amountsÏto€little€more€than€painting,"€and€as€such€was€a€repair€to€aÏcommon€area.€€Furthermore,€the€installation€of€the€lights€was€doneÏby€the€Electric€Power€Board€of€Chattanooga,€for€which€no€capitalÏexpense€was€required.€€Rather,€plaintiff€received€a€monthly€ser…vice€bill€for€the€lights,€and€was€thus€part€of€the€utility€serviceÏfor€which€the€tenant€was€responsible.€€As€to€the€awnings,€plain…tiff€claims€that€the€awnings€were€not€capital€improvements€sinceÏthey€were€replacements€for€existing€awnings€that€had€become€worn.ÌÌà àThe€defendants€seek€to€characterize€these€items€as€capitalÏimprovements€based€on€the€testimony€of€an€accountant€as€to€how€theÏexpenditures€would€be€handled€for€tax€purposes.€€Ms.€Tamra€œMurr›,€aÏcertified€public€accountant€testified€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àNormally€the€expenditureð"ðyou€have€to€determineÏwhether€the€expenditure€will€add€a€more€useful€life€toÏthe€building€on€major€improvements.ÌÌà8 àà àAn€on€repairs,€they're€normally€expensed€œ(sic)›€ifÏthey€are€something€that€is€general€maintenance€that€mayÏhave€to€have€actually€repaired€something,€but€consider…ing€a€majorð"ðyou€know€a€capital€improvement,€if€it€addsÏto€the€physical€life€of€the€building€are€expensed€(sic).ÌÌÓÓÌà àMs.€œMurr›€further€testified€that€the€items€for€which€paymentsÏare€sought€by€the€plaintiff€were€capital€improvements.€€We€do€notÏfind€the€explanation€of€Ms.€œMurr›€to€be€persuasive.€€Common€senseÏdictates€that€maintenance,€such€as€painting€the€structure€andÏresealing€the€parking€lot€adds€to€the€physical€life€of€the€build…ing,€yet€without€question€these€activities€are€no€more€than€ordi…nary€maintenance.€€We€are€further€of€the€opinion€that€replace‚mentÏof€damaged€awnings€as€opposed€to€the€installation€of€new€awningsÏfalls€within€the€purview€of€maintenance.€€Such€activities€areÍnothing€more€than€expenditures€which€are€required€to€keep€theÏbuilding€in€a€state€of€good€repair.€€In€sum€and€substance,€weÏbelieve€that€the€expenditures€for€which€the€plaintiff€claims€proÏrata€reimbursement€are€purely€maintenance.ÌÌ€€We,€therefore,€agree€with€plaintiff€that€these€items€were€notÏcapital€improvements,€but€were€in€fact€maintenance€and€repairs,Ïand€thus€should€have€been€paid€pro€rata€by€the€tenant,€as€contem…plated€in€section€1.3(b)€and€2.3€of€the€Lease€Addendum.œ× ƒ6 ××  ×›€€We€areÏfurther€of€the€opinion€that€the€expenses€claimed€fall€clearlyÏwithin€the€purview€of€paragraph€2.3€of€the€Lease€Addendum€whichÏprovides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à2.3€ò òòòCommon€area€and€Other€Chargesóóó ó.ÌÌà@ à*€€€€*€€€€*€€€€*ÌÌà8 àà àLandlord€shall€maintain€the€common€areas€in€goodÏorder,€condition€and€repair.€€Tenant€hereby€agrees€toÏpay€Landlord€a€share,€computed€as€hereinafter€providedÏof€the€operating€costs€(as€hereinafter€defined)€ofÏmaintaining€the€common€areas€and€building€in€whichÏLeased€Premises€are€located.€€"Operating€Costs"€shallÏmean€the€total€cost€and€expense€incurred€in€operating,Ïmaintaining,€repairing€and€replacing€the€common€areasÏand€building€in€which€Leased€Premises€are€located€(butÏthere€shall€be€excluded€initial€costs€of€equipmentÏproperly€chargeable€to€capital€account€consisting€ofÏitems€real€estate€in€nature€and€the€original€cost€ofÏconstructing€the€common€areas).€€Tenants€share€of€suchÏoperating€costs€shall€be€computed€and€paid€in€the€sameÏmanner€as€provided€with€respect€to€taxes€in€section€2.2Ïabove,€substituting€the€amount€of€operating€costs€forÏthe€amount€of€real€estate€taxes€for€the€purpose€ofÏmaking€such€computation.ÌÌÓÓÌà àOur€review€of€the€record€convinces€us€that€nothing€in€theÏrecord€establishes€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€any€ofÏthe€items€for€which€the€plaintiff€seeks€compensation€fall€withinÏthe€exclusion€set€out€above.€€On€the€contrary,€we€are€of€theÏopinion€that€the€evidence€preponderates€œotherwise.€€We€reverse€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€on€this€issue.›ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€above,€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt€is€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part€and€vacated€in€part.€ÏThe€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€determination€of€theÏamount€of€the€judgment€that€should€be€entered€in€accord€with€thisÏopinion.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are,€in€our€discretion,€assessedÏequally€between€the€plaintiff€and€the€defendants€against€whom€aÏjudgment€is€obtained.ÌÌÓÓ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€________________________________Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Don€T.€McMurray,€JudgeÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌHouston€M.€Goddard,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÌÇÑ  ÑÑ7€«XXd×XXd×7Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌÌÌÌÌÌSTEVEN€BROOKS,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àHAMILTON€CIRCUITÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àC.A.€NO.€03A01„9607„CV„00221Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellant€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àL.€MARIE€WILLIAMSÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àJUDGEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌNETWORKS€OF€CHATTANOOGA,€INC.,€€)à àAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€VACATED€INÌD/B/A€CONNECTING€POINT€COMPUTER€)€œ€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PART€AND›ÌOF€CHATTANOOGA,€ROBERT€KNOWLING€œ)€€REMANDED›Ìand€FRANK€BLAIR,€III,€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Defendants„Appellees€€)ÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòORDERóóó óÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€appeal€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€from€theÏCircuit€Court€of€Hamilton€County,€briefs€and€argument€of€counsel.€ÏUpon€consideration€thereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€thatÏthere€were€some€reversible€errors€in€the€trial€court€as€to€certainÏissues€and€none€as€to€others.Ìà àAccordingly€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€inÏpart,€reversed€in€part€and€vacated€in€part.€€The€case€is€remandedÏto€the€trial€court€for€a€determination€of€the€amount€of€the€judg…ment€that€should€be€entered€in€accord€with€œthe›€œopinion€of€thisÏcourt.›€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are,€in€our€discretion,€assessedÏequally€between€the€plaintiff€and€the€defendants€against€whom€aÏjudgment€is€obtained.ÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€PER€CURIAMÌ