WPC # VU:a % 0(b w@4 ) 0l8 0D 0J 2 0T: 0^ 0h 0rT 0| 0B 0 1uX U, 0d U,]U*B)DC AM ly B1 D3Nv~v 0@ AOa 0D' D/k BHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 ,rAZ"Arial RegularX($- - DUUUUDӀD 3|x((3$ !      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<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d$$$$7Border 1dd-%C << G  !  #d##  #   YYY FILED#XJune19,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d##     #       Thechancellordidfindthatapartoftheappellantsdrivewayextendedintotheplaintiffslandandthattheappellantshadacquiredtitletothatareabyadversepossession.Noissueisraisedonappealastothatfinding. d))))'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &""Xd&#""Xd##      \RA'\7XXdd7    ћEARLBURKS,    )      ) Plaintiff/Appellee,   )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019504CH00134̜VS.      )      ) ClayChanceryٜL&'%;+'h|`  `Lߛ      ) No.3323WILLIAMT.BOLESandwife,  )RUTHBOLES,VIRGILTIDWELL )andwife,MABLETIDWELL,and  )EDWARDBUFORD,   )      ) Defendants/Appellants.  )@ COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLEAPPEALEDFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFCLAYCOUNTYATCELINA,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEVERNONNEAL,CHANCELLORCHARLESL.HARDIN117S.JeffersonAvenueCookeville,Tennessee38501 AttorneyforPlaintiff/AppelleeJOHNE.APPMANP.O.Box99Jamestown,Tennessee38556 AttorneyforDefendants/Appellants@ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:TODD,P.J.,M.S.KOCH,J.  @ #OPINION #X  ThisisaboundarylinedisputebroughtpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.1611106.Theappellantsassertonappealthattheactionwasnotproperlybroughtaccordingtothestatute,thattheappelleedidnotprovethatshewastheownerofthelandindispute,andthattheappellantswereentitledtothedisputedpropertybyadversepossession.Weaffirmthetrialcourt.@ I.   ThelandinquestionisroughhilllandinClayCounty.Becauseofadisputewithherneighboringlandownersaboutthelocationoftheirpropertylines,theplaintiffbroughtthisactiontohavethecourtestablishthelines.TheChanceryCourtofClayCountyheardthetestimonyoffoursurveyorsandmanywitnessesandfoundthatthelinesranaccordingtoadescriptioncontainedintheplaintiffssurvey.@ II.   Theappellants,theonlyneighborstoappeal,assertthatthisisreallyanejectmentactionandthattheplaintiffsoughttoestablishtitletothelandmerelybyallegingaboundarylinedispute.Implicitinthisassertion,ofcourse,isaclaimthattheplaintiffmustderaignhertitlefromthestate.SeeUnionTanningCo.V.Lowe,148Tenn.407,255S.W.712(1923).Weareoftheopinion,however,thatthisismerelyasuittolocateandestablishtheboundarylinebetweenadjoininglandowners.Id.;Pattersonv.T.J.MossTieCo.,46Tenn.App.405,330S.W.2d344(1959).Aboundarylinedisputewasthegravamenofthecomplaint,andalthoughtheappellantsanswerallegedtitletopartofthelandbyadversepossession,theanswerdidnotcontainacounterclaim.Thecaseproceededtotrialontheissuesallegedinthecomplaintanddeniedintheanswer.Theplaintiffhadtherightto choosetheforminwhich[her]causeofactionwouldbecast.Id.At354.WearesatisfiedthatthiswassimplyaboundarylinedisputeandthattheplaintiffhadtherighttobringitinthechancerycourtunderTenn.CodeAnn.1611106.0 @ III.   Theappellantsassertthattheplaintiffdidnotclearlyshowthatshewasthetrueownerofthelandindispute.Therequirementof clearproofisinTenn.CodeAnn.1611106(b)whichdispenseswiththerequirementofacompletederaignmentoftitlefromthestateoracommonsource wherethecomplainantprovesclearlythatthecomplainantisthetrueownerofthelandsdescribedinthecomplainantsbill.Wethinkthestandardwasmetandexceededinthiscase.Theplaintiffsproofwasclearandconvincingthatthelandsheclaimedwascoveredbyherdeedandthatthelineshadbeenrecognizedbysurroundinglandownersformanyyears.Theappellantsproofwasnotclearand,therefore,notconvincing.Thechancellorsfindingsarepresumedtobecorrect,Rule13(d),Tenn.R.App.Proc.Webelievetheywereinfactcorrect.@ IV.   Finally,theappellantsassertthattheyestablishedtitletothedisputedareabyadversepossession.Thisclaim,however,wouldrequireafindingthatthedisputedareawaswithinthecallsoftheappellantsdeed.Theprooffallsfarshortoftherequirementsofopen,notorious,andcontinuousϜpossessionofthelandindispute,withoutthebenefitofthepresumptionthattheappellantspossessionextendedtothelimitsoftheirdeed.Thechancellorfoundasafactthattheappellantsdeeddidnotextendintothedisputedareaandwehaveaffirmedthatfinding. (   כTherefore,wefindthatthisissueiswithoutmerit.  ThejudgmentofthelowercourtisaffirmedandthecauseisremandedtotheChanceryCourtofClayCountyfortheenforcementofthedecreeandforanyotherproceedingsthatmaybecomenecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellants.      _____________________________      BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGE̜CONCUR:̜_______________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGEMIDDLESECTION̜_______________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE  @