ÿWPCò  UV-¬x?®Z±Ï´ÝŸlH œJLÉÈnÔÕh`L³cÐd\Î-àúsg“÷ÈË(ÙÂ`ÍYøbÑ(vÒ,òñ¤rzxc:Ìu{M¶íµˆBÚÀ<* e‰:ûðñ"¿#‰Ï^}·M BÐ¥´ÃbÒ”Æçr4¿(‡Mèþú+½µ=6+&×?º,ÛùÝÝ‘¾I3ï6£]ÞË…†Û…Ìç gÂìeßу²nݤœy1=vº-‹NkCq½×XU+lˆÿPÆ3Ø’J{cMòmxª( ˜á];íª?íÆ !®ƒ"†äùó+ðjÎ qçôîi} |›Hñ'êÙ4!Fhšâ"õ`ã=g“úû¨tTÕgnf´ h¹™g Æ6 ÕQÓ¸«æ° [$}¢ Úàiå)Ïz8MÑtš7§ƒ~gmi;ˆ¾HŽØˆ›©©IÝ—ù–ùºlP4Ò?£Å›W ;'ŸâÙžì>`e*õvc—‹;§3m:vÑ52ÚE¹QKqxˆNqݦGœM“¾ô o³ž¤¸È¤Ó.]ñ—Z¼’Ì|üSYÁô&1sÐÎÚvñÆgs©C@u‰ ¬Åâ6C\ú$4±Iç€ ì[*# LU:W %‘ 0(—b ¿w@Ë4 .6U:999999999999999999999 AQsÆÄ 0DŠ 0DÎ 0D  D/V B… B¢ D3¿ ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡- ù - èéêë eìr‚íîDïeðñÓ€Õcl&zzzzzz3|xú ùÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ X?¸XXXÔÔ€ X X?¸ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ X?¸X ÔÐ  ÐÌMarch€12,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýññññëñ›ñëññññÑ°ÑÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€?¸XXdæXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñò òÔ€¼¦¼XXÔÓ  Óñññßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@Eô ` 8ttxP,ð  rß›ñññà@  êàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@¦¦(êàAT€NASHVILLEó óÔ€X?¸X¼¼¦ÔˆÐ  ÐÌÌÌÌCHARLES€A.€BUTLER,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð È À Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àPetitioner/Appellant,à 8 àà  à)Ð ”Œ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Ð zr  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9804„CH„00172Ð `X  ÐñëñœñëñVSñëñ›ñëñ.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð F>  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àDavidson€ChanceryÐ ,$  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€97„2826„IIIÐ   ÐTENNESSEE€DEPARTMENT€OFà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àÐ øð  ÐCORRECTION,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð ÞÖ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àRespondent/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)Ð ª¢ ÐÌÌà@U U êàAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYˆÌà@#êàAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEˆÌÌà@Æ Æ êàTHE€HONORABLE€ELLEN€ñëñœñëñHOBBSñëñ›ñëñ€LYLE,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌÌÌÌÌCHARLES€A.€BUTLER€#136479ÌNortheast€Correctional€CenterÌP.€O.€Box€5000ÌMountain€City,€Tennessee€37683Ìà Ø àPro€ñëñœñëñSeñëñ›ñëñ/Petitioner/AppellantÌÌJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌÌMICHAEL€L.€ñëñœñëñHAYNIEñëñ›ñëñÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0488Ìà Ø àAttorney€for€Respondent/AppelleeÌÌÌÌà@¤¤$êàAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDˆÌÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌKOCH,€J.ÌCAIN,€J.Ð  ´9¬28 ÐÓÓò òÔ€„U„XX?¸Ôòòà@tt(êàO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÔ€X?¸X„„UԈР ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àAn€inmate€sentenced€to€seventy„five€years€imprisonment€under€theÏClass€X€law€filed€a€petition€for€writ€of€certiorari€and€for€declaratory€judgment,€claimingÏthat€he€was€entitled€to€have€his€sentence€recalculated€under€the€more€lenient€statuteÏthat€was€enacted€after€he€was€sentenced.€€The€trial€court€dismissed€the€petition.€€WeÏaffirm.ÌÌà@jjêàò òI.€€A€Change€in€the€Sentencing€Lawó óˆÐ d\ ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àCharles€A.€Butler€was€convicted€of€aggravated€assault,€burglary€with€aÏfirearm,€and€robbery€with€a€deadly€weapon.€€The€date€of€these€offenses€was€June€18,Ï1987.€€He€was€sentenced€on€May€26,€1989,€and€was€ordered€to€serve€ten€years€forÏthe€assault,€fifteen€years€for€the€burglary,€and€fifty€years€for€the€armed€robbery,€anÏoffense€which€was€classified€as€a€Class€X€felony€both€at€the€time€the€crime€wasÏcommitted€and€the€time€of€sentencing.€€The€sentences€were€ordered€to€runÏconsecutively,€for€a€total€sentence€of€seventy„five€years.€€On€November€1,€1989,€theÏClass€X€felony€law€was€repealed,€and€was€replaced€by€the€more€lenient€CriminalÏSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„101€et€seq.€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àOn€May€15,€1997,€Mr.€Butler€submitted€a€petition€for€a€declaratory€orderÏto€the€Department€of€Correction,€asking€the€Department€to€release€him€from€custodyÏimmediately.€€He€argued€that€he€was€entitled€to€be€ñëñœñëñresentencedñëñ›ñëñ€under€the€CriminalÏSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989,€on€both€statutory€and€constitutional€grounds;€thatÏunder€the€1989€Act,€the€maximum€penalty€he€could€receive€for€the€armed€robberyÏwould€be€twenty„five€years;€and€that€the€application€to€the€reduced€sentence€of€certainÏâ âsentence€credits€he€had€earned,€and€other€credits€he€claimed€to€be€entitled€to,Ð È6À/4 Ðrendered€him€eligible€for€immediate€release.€€The€Department€denied€his€petition€onÏJuly€21,€1997.Ìâ âÌà Ø àà 0 àOn€August€22,€1997,€Mr.€Butler€filed€a€timely€petition,€styled€as€aÏð ðPetition€for€Judicial€Review,€Declaratory€Judgment€and€Writ€of€Certiorariðð€in€theÏChancery€Court€of€Davidson€County.€His€petition€repeated€the€same€arguments€thatÏwere€contained€in€his€ñïñœñïññíñpñíññîñ[ñîññíññìñ›ñìññíñetition€for€a€declaratory€order,€though€with€a€bit€more€detail,Ïand€added€the€contention€that€the€Department€had€exceeded€its€jurisdiction,€and€hadÏacted€ð ðunconstitutionally,€illegally,€fraudulently€and€arbitrarilyðð€by€denying€his€earlierÏpetition.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€Department€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€the€petition€on€the€ground€thatÏit€failed€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€could€be€granted.€€On€March€3,€1998,€theÏtrial€court€granted€the€defendantððs€motion.€€This€appeal€followed.ÌÌà@­­ êàò òII.€€The€Statutory€Argument€€ó óˆÐ (#  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Butler€argues€on€appeal€that€a€law€in€effect€at€the€time€he€wasÏsentenced€entitles€him€to€receive€the€benefit€of€any€subsequent€statutory€change€inÏsentencing.€€He€also€argues€that€the€Stateððs€failure€to€treat€him€in€the€same€mannerÏas€those€sentenced€after€November€1,€1989€was€a€violation€of€his€constitutional€equalÏprotection€rights.€€Both€of€those€arguments€have€been€examined€by€our€courts€inÏearlier€cases,€and€were€found€to€be€without€merit.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Butlerððs€bases€his€statutory€argument€upon€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„1„¼105.€€This€act,€repealed€in€1989,€and€reenacted€as€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„112€readÏâ âas€follows:Ð È7À04 ÐÒ0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓò òRepealed€or€amended€laws€„„€Application€in€prosecutionÐ  Ðâ âfor€offense.„„ó ó€Whenever€any€penal€statute€or€penalÐ øð Ðlegislative€act€of€the€state€is€repealed€or€amended€by€aÏsubsequent€legislative€act,€any€offense,€as€defined€by€suchÏstatute€or€act€being€repealed€or€amended,€committed€whileÏsuch€statute€or€act€was€in€full€force€and€effect€shall€beÏprosecuted€under€such€act€or€statute€in€effect€at€the€time€ofÏthe€commission€of€the€offense.€€In€the€event€the€subsequentÏact€provides€for€a€lesser€penalty,€any€punishment€imposedÏshall€be€in€accordance€with€the€subsequent€act.ÌÒ€0 ÒÒ„ÒÌÓÓÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€the€case€very€similar€to€this€one,€òòState€ex€rel.€Stewart€v.€ñïñœñïñMcWherterñïñ›ñïñóó,Ð 80  Ð857€S.W.2d€875€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),€the€court€analyzed€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„¼1„105,€and€determined€it€to€apply€only€to€active€prosecutions.€€Thus,€only€those€whoÏhad€not€been€sentenced€prior€to€the€effective€date€of€a€law€reducing€the€penalty€forÏtheir€crime€would€receive€the€benefit€of€the€more€lenient€law;€those€who€had€alreadyÏbeen€sentenced€would€not€have€their€sentences€altered.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àAs€the€court€noted,€this€interpretation€is€consistent€with€the€enablingÏlegislation€for€the€1989€Sentencing€Act€which€provides€that€the€ð ðact€shall€not€affectÏrights€and€duties€that€matured,€penalties€that€were€incurred,€or€proceedings€that€wereÏbegun€before€its€effective€date.ñèñððñèñ€€1989€Public€Acts€chñéñ.ñéñ€591€ðð€115.€€ñêñFurther,€ñêñTenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„35„117€specifically€limits€the€application€of€the€Act€to€those€individualsÏsentenced€after€its€effective€date€of€November€1,€1989.ÌÌà@ààêàò òIII.€€The€Constitutional€Argumentó óˆÐ x-p&) ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€appellant€contends€that€the€statute€violates€his€equal€protectionÏrights€under€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€of€the€U.S.€Constitution,€and€under€Article€XI,ÏSection€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€He€argues€that€no€legitimate€governmentalÏpurpose€is€served€by€incarcerating€him€for€fifty€years,€when€another€individualÏsentenced€for€an€identical€crime€could€be€sentenced€to€no€more€than€twenty„fiveÐ ¸8°15 Ðyears,€just€because€he€was€sentenced€after€November€1,€1989.€€Mr.€Butler€argues€(asÏdid€Mr.€Stewart)€that€strict€constitutional€scrutiny€should€be€applied€to€his€claimÏbecause€of€the€liberty€interest€at€stake.€€òòSeeóó€òòDoe€v.€Norrisóó,€751€S.W.2d€834€(Tenn.Ð È À Ð1988).ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€the€alternative,€he€argues€that€even€if€we€do€not€find€a€fundamentalÏright€to€be€at€stake,€and€we€therefore€apply€the€more€relaxed€ð ðrational€basis€testðð€toÏhis€claim,€we€would€still€be€required€to€resentence€him,€because€the€State€can€claimÏno€possible€rational€relationship€between€classifications€based€upon€date€ofÏsentencing,€and€any€legitimate€state€interest.€€òòSee€Massachusetts€Board€ofÐ èà ÐRetirement€v.€ñïñœñïñMurgiañïñ›ñïñóó,€427€U.S.€307€(1976);€òòñïñœñïñPlylerñïñ›ñïñ€v.€Doeóó,€457€U.S.€202€(1982).€Ð ÈÀ ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àIn€the€òòStewart€óócase,€supra,€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals€held€that€theÐ ˆ€ Ðstrict€scrutiny€test€did€not€apply,€because€the€prisoner€had€lost€the€relevant€portion€ofÏhis€fundamental€right€to€personal€liberty€by€virtue€of€his€lawful€conviction.€€We€agreeÏwith€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€court€went€on€to€say,€however,€that€even€if€it€applied€the€strictÏscrutiny€test€to€the€prisonerððs€claim,€it€would€still€have€to€uphold€the€constitutionalityÏof€the€distinction€created€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„117,€because€of€a€compellingÏstate€interest€which€it€explained€as€follows:¹Ò0 €ÒÒ„ÒÓÓThere€is€a€legitimate€state€interest€at€stake€in€not€allowing€theÏreopening€of€a€virtual€Pandora's€box€of€all€cases€involvingÏsentences€imposed€before€November€1,€1989,€but€which€areÏpresently€being€served€by€confinement,€parole€or€probation.€ÏÌSociety€has€a€strong€interest€in€preserving€the€finality€ofÏcriminal€litigation€resulting€in€a€conviction€and€sentence€whichÏwere€valid€at€the€time€of€their€imposition.€€The€wholesaleÏunsettling€of€final€judgments€of€conviction€and€sentenceÏwhich€would€occur€if€the€1989€Act€were€applicable€as€theÏpetitioner€claims€is€a€price€the€legislature€was€justified€in€notÏpaying€when€it€provided€that€the€Act€would€not€apply€toÏpreviously€sentenced€offenders.Ð ¨9 26 ÐÒ€0 ÒÌÓÓ857€S.W.2d€at€877.ÌÌÒ„Òà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Butler€criticizes€this€reasoning.€€He€cites€the€statutes€creating€theÏParole€Eligibility€Review€Board€and€permitting€Class€X€offenders€to€sign€waivers€andÏreceive€sentence€reduction€credits€under€new€law€as€two€examples€of€the€legislativeÏwillingness€to€open€ð ða€pandoraððs€boxðð€of€old€cases,€and€thus€implies€that€theÏlegislature€itself€has€found€the€governmental€interest€discussed€above€less€thanÏcompelling.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àHowever,€we€disagree.€€We€regard€the€legislatureððs€actions€as€anÏattempt€to€balance€competing,€but€equally€legitimate€governmental€interests.€€ItÏwished€to€relieve€prison€overcrowding€without€endangering€the€public,€while€at€theÏsame€time€preserving€the€finality€of€validly€imposed€sentences.€€To€accomplish€this,Ïit€enacted€statutes€that€are€far€more€narrowly€focused€than€would€be€the€wholesaleÏñïñœñïñresentencingñïñ›ñïñ€of€those€convicted€under€the€Class€X€laws.€€It€opened€the€lid€ofÏpandoraððs€box€to€the€extent€it€believed€necessary,€and€cannot€be€compelled€by€virtueÏof€that€action€to€open€it€further.€ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Butler€argues€that€the€appelleeððs€interpretation€of€the€SentencingÏReform€Act€of€1989€undermines€the€legislatureððs€stated€goal€of€reducing€prisonÏovercrowding.€€He€refers€us€to€the€case€of€òòState€v.€ñïñœñïñAshbyñïñ›ñïñóó,€823€S.W.2d€166€(Tenn.Ð x-p&) Ð1991),€in€which€our€Supreme€Court€reversed€a€sentence€of€incarceration€after€a€broadÏdiscussion€of€sentencing€considerations,€including€the€Stateððs€interest€in€reducingÏovercrowding.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àHowever€the€òòñïñœñïñAshbyñïñ›ñïñóó€case€involved€the€proper€application€of€theÐ Ø6Ð/3 ÐSentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€to€a€defendant€who€had€been€sentenced€under€thatÐ ¸8°15 ÐAct€on€November€15,€1989.€€The€Supreme€Court€asserted€that€the€question€of€prisonÏovercrowding€should€have€been€part€of€the€equation€considered€by€the€trial€court€inÏits€original€sentence.€€That€case€did€not€involve€the€assertion€of€a€right€to€beÏñïñœñïñresentencedñïñ›ñïñ€because€of€a€change€in€the€law.€€Thus€the€opinion€in€òòñïñœñïñAshbyñïñ›ñïñóó€does€notÐ ¨   Ðconflict€with€òòStewart,óó€despite€Mr.€Butlerððs€argument€to€the€contrary.€€The€two€cases€areÐ ˆ€ Ðeasily€distinguishable€on€the€facts,€as€well€as€on€the€law€which€is€under€examination.€ÏÌà@ÿÿêàò òIV.€€Sentence€Reduction€Creditsó óˆÐ (  ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àFinally,€the€trial€court€dismissed€Mr.€Butlerððs€claim€that€he€was€entitledÏto€Good€Conduct€Sentence€Credits,€Prisoner€Performance€Credits,€and€additionalÏsentence€credits€under€the€Inmate€Incentive€Program,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðððð€41„21„228,€229€and€230.€€As€the€trial€court€pointed€out,€each€of€these€statutes€wasÏrepealed€in€1985,€prior€to€the€date€of€his€offense,€and€therefore€they€did€not€apply€toÏhim.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àMr.€Butler€again€brings€up€sentence€reduction€credits€on€appeal,€but€nowÏbases€his€argument€on€whether€or€not€he€was€ð ðððfully€informedðð€of€his€right€to€sign€(orÏnot€to€sign)€a€waiver.ðð€€This€argument€was€not€presented€in€the€trial€court,€and€as€it€isÏbeing€raised€for€the€first€time€on€appeal,€this€court€is€not€required€to€consider€it.€òò€IrvinÐ ¨* #& Ðv.€ñïñœñïñBinkleyñïñ›ñïñóó,€577€S.W.2d€677€(Tenn.€App.€1979).Ð ˆ,€%( ÐÌà Ø àà 0 àHowever€it€appears€that€Mr.€Butler€is€referring€to€the€fact€that€theÏDepartment€of€Correction€is€authorized€to€continue€calculating€sentence€creditsÏaccording€to€the€scheme€established€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€41„21„121€through€41„¼21„233,€for€inmates€who€have€not€waived€that€right€in€order€to€receive€the€benefits€ofÏsentence€reduction€credits€under€the€later„enacted€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€41„21„236.€€ButÏthe€right€to€receive€credits€under€the€repealed€statutes€(and€thus€the€right€to€sign€aÐ ¨9 26 Ðwaiver)€is€limited€to€those€whose€offenses€occurred€when€those€statutes€were€still€inÏeffect.€€Thus€the€argument€is€without€merit.€€ÌÌà@‹‹-êàò òV.ó óˆÐ ¨   Ðà Ø àÌà Ø àà 0 àThe€order€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Remand€this€cause€to€theÏChancery€Court€of€Davidson€County€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€thisÏopinion.€€Tax€the€costs€on€appeal€to€the€appellant.€€€€ÌÌÓÓÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # à¼à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à_________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEÌÐ  ˜+$' ÐÑ  ќԀ¼gæ¼XX¹9Ôñðñò òà@ú ú êàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@™™(êàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌÌÌó óÔ‡X¹9X¼¼gæÔCHARLES€A.€BUTLER,à à àà 8 àà  à)Ð v n Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àPetitioner/Appellant,à 8 àà  à)Ð VN Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àAppeal€No.Ð F> Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è à01„A„01„9804„CH„00172Ð 6.  ÐñïñœñïñVSñïñ›ñïñ.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð &  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àDavidson€ChanceryÐ   Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNo.€97„2826„IIIÐ þ  ÐTENNESSEE€DEPARTMENT€OFà  à)à è àà @ àà ˜ àà ð àà H! àà  # àÐ öî  ÐCORRECTION,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àñðññïñAfffirmedñïññðññïñAffirmedñïñ€andÐ æÞ  Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àRemandedÐ ÖÎ Ðà Ø àRespondent/Appellee.à 8 àà  à)Рƾ ÐÔ#†¼gæ¼XX¹9 @#ÔÔ€X¹9X¼¼gæÔÌÌÔ€¼gæ¼XX¹9Ôò òòòà@uu'êàJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€Tóóó óˆÐ –Ž ÐÌÓÓÔ€X¹9X¼¼gæÔÌà Ø àà 0 àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€theÏChancery€Court€of€Davidson€County,€and€briefs€of€the€parties;€upon€considerationÏwhereof,€this€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€in€the€decree€of€the€Chancellor€there€is€noÏreversible€error.Ìà Ø àà 0 àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€of€the€Court€filed€herein,€it€is,€therefore,Ïordered€and€decreed€by€this€Court€that€the€decree€is€affirmed.€€The€cause€isÏremanded€to€the€Chancery€Court€of€Davidson€County€for€the€enforcement€of€theÏdecree€and€for€the€collection€of€the€costs€accrued€below.Ìà Ø àà 0 àCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€against€Charles€A.€Butler,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓÓÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 à______________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€PRESIDING€JUDGE,€M.S.Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àà @ àÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 à______________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 à______________________________________Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àñðññçññæñWBCñæññçññðññçñWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEñçñ€ñðñ›