WPC 4Vj 0(yw@ 0l 0DU 0J 0T 0^7 0h 0r 0|o 0 0q 1u U,v 0d UB %H U,N U6z B) B DC AM9U*,U D31v~dv 0@ AOD 0D  D/N B}v 3|x ($ R EDQDDEQDӀ((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 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<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d d####7Border 1dd-%C << G<  9p`(Arial " !  #d#"  ''   YYY FILED'X June13,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.'AppellateCourtClerk  K !#d#"   $       "Foralistof independent regionalcommunitycollegesestablishedin0 Tennessee,seeT.C.A.498101,etseq.$$$$'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &!!Xd&#!!Xd#"        \RA'\7XXdd7L&(%;+'h|`  `Lߛ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTION ̛̜THEESTATEOF    )C/ANO.03A019601PB00031WILLIAMWESLEYBURCHFIEL, )      )SEVIERPROBATE PlaintiffAppellant, )      )HON.CHARLESS.SEXTON,v.      )JUDGE      )FIRSTUNITEDMETHODISTCHURCH )OFSEVIERVILLE,TENNESSEE; )THEUNIVERSITYOFTENNESSEEAT)KNOXVILLE;WALTERSSTATE  )COMMUNITYCOLLEGE;TENNESSEE )BOARDOFREGENTSOFTHE  )UNIVERSITYANDCOMMUNITY  )COLLEGESYSTEMSOFTENNESSEE; )andSEVIERCOUNTY,TENNESSEE. )REVERSED      )AND DefendantsAppellees. )REMANDED̛̜ANNEM.McKINNEY,Knoxville,forPlaintiffAppellant.JERRYH.McCARTER,Gatlinburg,forDefendantAppellee,SevierCounty,Tennessee.CHRISTINEMODISHER,Nashville,forDefendantsAppellees,WaltersStateCommunityCollege,TennesseeBoardofRegents.BEAUCHAMPE.BROGAN,andJ.ROBERTWALKER,Knoxville,forAppelleeDefendant,TheUniversityofTennessee.@ OPINION @         Franks.J.  Inthisactiontoconstrueawill,theTrialCourtdeterminedthattheWaltersStateCommunityCollegesproposaltobuildabranchcampuswouldmeettheconditionssetforthintheTestatorswill,andbroadlyheldthat anyexistingentity underthecontroloftheTennesseeBoardofRegentscouldbeusedtomeettheconditionssetforthinthewill.  WilliamWesleyBurchfielofSevierville,SevierCounty,Tennessee,diedonDecember1,1993,andhiswillwasadmittedtoprobate.  ThedisputeconcernstheinterpretationofsectionVI(B)(1)ofdecedentswill.Itreadsinpart:0 0 B.MyTrusteeshallusetheentireamountofmyresiduaryestateforthefollowingpurposesandunderthefollowingconditions: 0  1.Toestablishandbuildacommunitycollegecampusonapproximatelysixtyfive(65)acresoflandwithintheconfinesofSevierCounty,Tennesseeprovidedthefollowingconditionscanbeaccomplished:   (a)Thecollegemustbeanindependent,free0 0 standingandstatesupportedregionalcommunitycollegeontheSevierCountycampus.   (b)EstablishmentoftheSevierCountyCounty0 0 campusshallbeapprovedasapartoftheStateUniversityandCampommunityCollegeSystemasgovernedbytheTennesseeBoardofRegents.0 0    (c)Anydecisionswithregardtotheoperation0 0 continuation,terminationand/orestablishmentandexpansionanddevelopmentofthecommunitycollegecampusshallbeapprovedbytheTennesseeBoardofRegentsasapartoftheStateUniversityandCommunityCollegeSystemofTennessee.   (d)TheCitiesofSevierCounty,theCounty,0 0 itsprivatecitizensandotherpublicorprivatefoundationsshallmatchonadollarfordollarbasistheamountfundedforthistrusttobeusedasconstructionfundsfortheSevierCountyCampusofthecommunitycollegesystem...0 0  (h)Itismypreferencethatthecommunitycollegecampusbenamedthe GreatSmokyMountainsCommunityCollege orsomesimilarnamesuitabletoreflectthesentimentsoftheSevierCountyregion.Thisregionalconceptwouldprecludetheuseofanamelike Walters whichdoesnotreflecttheentireregion.0 0   Thewillthenstatesshouldthematchingmoneynotberaisedwithintheallottedtimeandaccordingtohisterms,thedonationsaretobereturnedtothecontributors.ThebequestwouldthengotowardconstructinganewgeographybuildingattheUniversityofTennesseeinKnoxville.  WaltersStateCommunityCollegeproposedaplantobuildabranchcampusinSevierville,andinsiststhatitsplanqualifiedittoreceivethebequest.TheTrialCourtdeterminedthewilldidnotrequiretheestablishmentofanewcommunitycollege.HefoundthatanyexistingschoolunderthecontroloftheTennesseeBoardofRegentscouldusetheestatetobuildaSevierCountycampus,andinterpretedthephrase thecollegeshallbeindependent,freestanding... asareferencetotheschoolacceptingthegift,notasadescriptionofanewinstitutionthatwouldbecreated.̛  Thebasicruleintheconstructionofwillsisforthecourttodeterminetheintentofthetestators.Stickleyv.Carmichael,850S.W.2d127(Tenn.1992).TheExecutorurgesthecourttohearevidencethatwouldclarifythatintent.HewishestooffertestimonyofBurchfielsfamilyandfriendswhoϜinsistthatdecedentdidnotwanthismoneyusedforabranchcampusofWaltersState.  Paroleevidenceisadmissibletoexplainalatentambiguity.Stickley.Alatentambiguityisfoundwhere0 0 theequivocalityofexpressionorobscurityofintentiondoesnotarisefromthewordsthemselves,butfromtheambiguousstateofextrinsiccircumstancestowhichthewordsoftheinstrumentrefer,andwhichissusceptibleofexplanationbythemeredevelopmentofextraneousfacts,withoutalteringoraddingtothewrittenlanguage,orrequiringmoretobeunderstoodtherebythanwillfairlycomportwiththeordinaryorlegalsenseofthewordsandphrasesmadeuseof.Weatherheadv.Sewell,28Tenn.(9Humph.)272,295(1848).  Apatentambiguity,forwhichextrinsicevidenceisnotadmissible,isonewhichis0 0 producedbytheuncertainty,contradictoriness,ordeficiencyofthelanguageofaninstrument,sothatnodiscoveryoffacts,orproofofdeclarations,canrestorethedoubtfulorsmotheredsensewithoutaddingideaswhichtheactualwordswillnotthemselvessustain...ambiguitythatmayberemovedbyparolevidenceisnotadoubtthrownupontheintentionofthepartyintheinstrumentbyextrinsicprooftendingtoshowanintentiondifferentfromthatmanifestedbythewordsoftheinstrument.Itmustgrowoutofthequestionofidentifyingthepersonorsubjectmentionedintheinstrument.ӀId.  AnotherexplanationofthedifferenceisstatedinAmericanJurisprudence:     0 A patent ambiguity...isonewhichappearsuponthefaceoftheinstrument,as,forexample,abequestto some ofthesixchildrenofthetestatorsbrother;whilea latent ambiguityisonewhichisnotdiscoverablefromaperusalofthewillbutwhichappearsuponconsiderationoftheextrinsiccircumstances,as,forexample,abequestto mycousinJohn, itappearingthatthetestatorhastwoormorecousinsnamedJohn.    80AmJur2d1281(1975).  ThelackofclarityinthiscaseisduetothetermsusedbytheTestator.Theambiguityiscreatedbyhisalternatingreferencestoa communitycollege,  communitycollegecampus, and communitycollegeontheSevierCountycampus. Duetothe uncertainty,contradictoriness,ordeficiencyofthelanguage, theambiguityispatent.Weatherhead.ExtrinsicevidenceisnotadmissibletoexplainϜhisuseoflanguage.Id.  Theconstructionofthewillisaquestionoflawforthecourt.Presleyv.Hanks,782S.W.2d482,487(Tenn.App.1989).Thestandardofreviewfortheappellatecourtisdenovowithnopresumptionofcorrectness.T.R.A.P.13(d).  Thewillstatesthattheestateistobeusedtobuilda communitycollegecampus. Insubsequentsections,thewillrefersto thecollege, the SevierCountycampus and theSevierCountyCampusofthecommunitycollegesystem. Incommonparlance,theword campus isusedtomeanlocationofaschool.Itisnotnecessarysynonymouswith college, whichreferstothebroaderinstitutionoflearning.Theuseof campus wouldseemtoacknowledgethatthisnewcreationcouldbeoneofmanylocationsofacollege.TheBoardofRegentstakesthispositionandalsoarguesthatthespecificationinthewilltosixtyfiveacresoflandinSevierCountyisareferencetolandrecentlygiventoWaltersState.Theyfurtherinsist,echoingthereasoningofthetrialcourt,thatthephrase independent,freestanding,statesupportedcommunitycollege referstothecollegewhichbuildsthenewschool,notthenewschoolitself.  However,theuseof campus wasmeanttoemphasizetheimportanceofsitingthenewinstitutioninSevierCounty.Theunartfulwordingcannotobscurethedirectivethatthecollegebe independent and freestanding. ContrarytotheBoardsargumentandtheinterpretationoftheTrialCourt,thereisnoindicationthatthesetermsreferredtotheschoolwhichwouldbuildthecampus.Theseterms,likeallconditionsinthissectionofthewill,appeartorefertoanewinstitution.Thisuseof independent and freestanding indicatethattheTestatorintendedtocreatemorethananaffiliatedbranchofalargerentity.TheydemonstratethattheTestatorwantedanewcommunitycollegetobeestablished.Thisinterpretationisfurthersupportedbyhisidentificationofthename Walters asinappropriateforhiscollege.AnindicationϜthathedidnotanticipatethecollegetobeapartofWaltersϜState,buthewascontemplatingatypeofinstitutionanalogoustoWaltersState.Hischoiceof GreatSmokyMountainsCommunityCollege asanexampleofanappropriatenamebelieshisintentthathisestatebeusedtocreatenotabranchcampus,butanewcommunitycollege.Thisintentisreinforcedbythecommunitycollegeconcept. )   ׀  CounselfortheBoardarguesthattheBoardispowerlesstocreateadditionalregionalcommunitycolleges.Whilethisistrue,itwaslikewisepowerlesstocreatealloftheregionalcollegeswhichnowexistinthisState.  WeconcludethattheTrialCourtsdeterminationthatWaltersStatesproposalqualifiedforthebequestwasinerror,andwereversetheTrialCourtsjudgmentandremandforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.ThecostoftheappealisassessedtotheEstate.      ________________________      HerschelP.Franks,J.CONCUR:___________________________DonT.McMurray,J.___________________________CliffordE.Sanders,Sp.J.