ÿWPC  …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw.å4 ' 6 0J> 0Tˆ 0^Ü 0h: 0r¢ 0| 0† 0 1u¦ U, 0dG U,« U>× B)DC> AMU*Î Bø"v~7vÓµ D3ˆ 0@» AOûÆJ 0D D/T Bƒ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù-5©e67E89U:Ó€DDÒ x93|xD2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌJune€28,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  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  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ћрÑÑ7€¶CXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑœJOSEPH›€SEAN€DAMRON€and€wife,à à)ÌMRS.€JOSEPH€SEAN€DAMRON,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àDavidson€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€92C„528ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9511„CV„00502ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€#&";+'h|÷7` ç `€€Lß›BIANKA€DENISE€SADLER,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellee.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€THIRD€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌà@ àHONORABLE€BARBARA€HAYNES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌC.€ALEX€MEACHAMÌ5220€Murfreesboro€RoadÌLaVergne,€Tennessee€€€37086ÌATTORNEY€FOR€PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTSÌÌÌTHOMAS€M.€DONNELL,€JR.ÌDAVID€P.€CANASÌStewart,€Estes€&€DonnellÌSunTrust€Center,€14th€FloorÌ424€Church€StreetÌNashville,€Tennessee€37219„2392ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLEEÌÌÌREVERSED,€VACATED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌœÌDISSENTS€IN€SEPARATE€OPINIONÌWILLIAM›€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌJOSEPH€SEAN€DAMRON€and€wife,à à€)ÌMRS.€JOSEPH€SEAN€DAMRON,à àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àà àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àDavidson€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àNo.€€92C„528ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à à01„A„01„9511„CV„00502ÌBIANKA€DENISE€SADLER,à àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àDefendant/Appellee.à àà àà à€)ÌÌà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€captioned€plaintiffs€have€appealed€from€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€sustainingÏthe€motion€of€defendant€to€dismiss€for€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction€and€insufficient€service€ofÏprocess.ÌÌà àOn€April€3,€1992,€plaintiffs€filed€their€complaint€alleging€that€they€received€personalÏinjuries€in€a€collision€on€April€5,€1991€caused€by€defendantððs€negligence,€and€that€defendantÏwas€a€resident€of€Rutherford€County,€Tennessee.ÌÌà àOn€the€same€date,€April€3,€1992,€a€summons€was€issued€containing€the€address,€4701ÏLebanon€Road€#172,€Hermitage,€Tennessee€37076.€€On€April€8,€1992,€the€summons€wasÏreturned:€ð ðDoes€not€live€here€per€Apt.€Mgr.€€Not€to€be€found€in€my€county.ððÌÌà àThe€record€contains€no€further€proceedings€until€June€8,€1993,€when€an€order€wasÏentered€dismissing€the€suit€for€lack€of€prosecution.ÌÌà àOn€July€2,€1993,€plaintiffs€moved€to€set€aside€the€dismissal.ÌÌà àOn€October€8,€1993,€an€order€was€entered€setting€aside€the€dismissal.ÌÌà àOn€December€1,€1993,€a€summons€was€issued€for€service€upon€defendant€at€theÏfollowing€address:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àWikinger€Weg€23Ìà8 àà8 àW€7000€Stuttegart€40Ìà8 àà8 àGermanyÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€December€21,€1993,€the€Secretary€of€State€reported€service€of€process€by€registeredÏor€certified€mail€with€the€notation€ð ðsee€enclosed€card.ðð€€A€copy€of€said€card€is€appended€to€thisÏopinion€as€Exhibit€A.€€It€is€noteworthy€that€the€spaces€for€date€and€postmark€of€destination€areÏblank.€€It€is€also€noteworthy€that€the€card€contains€the€following€instruction:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€This€receipt€must€be€signed€by€the€addressee€or€by€a€personÏauthorized€to€do€so€by€virtue€of€the€regulations€of€the€country€ofÏdestination€.€.€.€.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€April€27,€1994,€the€following€document€was€filed:ÌÓ  ÓÓÓà8 àà8 àòòSPECIAL€NOTICE€OF€APPEARANCEóóÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 à€€The€undersigned€counsel€files€this€Special€Notice€ofÏAppearance€on€behalf€of€defendant,€Bianka€Denise€Sadler,€forÏthe€sole€purpose€of€contesting€jurisdiction€over€the€defendantÏand€to€assert€an€insufficiency€of€process€and€insufficiency€ofÏservice€of€process.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€Said€defendant€resides€in€Germany€and€plaintiffsðð€attempts€toÏserve€her€in€Germany€through€the€Tennessee€Secretary€of€StateÏare€insufficient.€€Defendant€is€thus€not€properly€before€theÏCourt.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€November€18,€1994,€the€Trial€Court€issued€the€following€notice:ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€92C528Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àDAMRON,€JOSEPH€SEAN,€ET€AL,Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àPlaintiffs,Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àV.Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àSADLER,€BIANKA€DENISE,Ìà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àDefendant.ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àòòN€O€T€I€C€EóóÌÌà8 àà8 àBy€Order€of€the€Court,€all€cases€which€have€been€pending€forÏone€(1)€or€more€years€shall€be€dismissed€unless€within€the€nextÏthirty€(30)€days€the€following€takes€place:Ìà8 àà8 à€€(1)€A€motion€to€set€is€filed€and€heard€by€the€Assignment€JudgeÏfor€Jury€Cases€and€for€Non„Jury€and€Divorces€to€be€heard€byÏthe€Trial€Judge;€orÌà8 àà8 à€€(2)€Specific€permission€is€obtained€from€the€Court€for€this€caseÏto€be€exempted€from€this€one€(1)€year€rule.Ìà8 àà8 à€€If€an€Order€setting€the€case€for€trial€is€not€filed€within€thirtyÏ(30)€days,€or€exempted€under€paragraph€two€(2)€above,€this€caseÏshall€be€dismissed.ÌÓÓÌà àOn€December€19,€1994,€plaintiffs€filed€the€following€motion:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€Come€plaintiffs,€Joseph€Sean€Damron,€et€al€and€move€thisÏHonorable€Court€to€set€this€case€for€trial€or€in€the€alternative,€toÏgrant€specific€permission€of€the€Court€for€this€case€to€beÏexempted€from€the€one€year€rule.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€January€20,€1995,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€order€dismissing€this€suit€for€lack€ofÏprosecution.ÌÌà àOn€February€15,€1995,€plaintiffs€moved€the€Trial€Court€to€set€aside€the€dismissal€and€toÏset€the€case€for€trial.ÌÌà àOn€March€31,€1995,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€order€setting€aside€the€dismissal€andÏsetting€the€cause€for€trial€on€July€19,€1995.ÌÌà àOn€April€10,€1995,€defendant€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€for€lack€of€personal€jurisdictionÏand€insufficient€service€of€process.€€The€motion€states:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€Comes€the€defendant,€Bianka€Denise€Sadler,€solely€for€theÏpurpose€of€contesting€jurisdiction€and€the€sufficiency€of€serviceÏof€process€in€this€case,€and€moves€to€dismiss€the€presentÏcomplaint€for€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction€pursuant€to€RuleÏ12.02(2),€insufficiency€of€process€pursuant€to€Rule€12.02(4),Ïand€for€insufficiency€of€service€of€process€pursuant€to€RuleÏ12.02(5)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€.€.€.€ÏAccompanying€this€Motion€is€a€Memorandum€with€argumentÏand€citations€to€authority,€and€the€following€materials€attached€asÏexhibits:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àExhibit€A€€Convention€On€the€Service€Abroad€ofÏJudicial€and€Extrajudicial€Documents€in€Civil€orÏCommercial€Matters€(ð ðHague€Conventionðð);ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àExhibit€B€€€Forms€to€be€completed€for€service€ofÏprocess€under€the€Hague€Convention;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àExhibit€C€€€Declarations€of€the€Federal€RepublicÏof€Germany€pursuant€to€the€Hague€convention;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àExhibit€D€€Copy€of€opinion€in€òòDerso€v.ÏVolkswagen€of€America,€Inc.,óó€552€N.Y.S.2dÏ1001€(N.Y.App.€4€Depððt.€1990);€ÌÌNeither€the€Memorandum€nor€the€listed€exhibits€are€cited€or€found€in€this€record.ÌÌÌÓÓà àPlaintiffs€filed€a€response€asserting€service€of€process€was€good,€but€requestingÏadditional€time€to€perfect€service€of€process.ÌÌà àOn€May€25,€1995,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€order€containing€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€This€case€came€before€the€Court€on€May€19,€1995,€for€aÏhearing€on€the€defendant,€Bianka€Denise€Sadlerððs€Motion€toÏDismiss€for€Lack€of€Personal€Jurisdiction€and€InsufficientÏService€of€Process€pursuant€to€Rule€12.02(2),€(4)€and€(5)€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€After€considering€theÏentire€record€in€this€cause,€including€the€Memorandum€filed€inÏsupport€of€the€partiesðð€respective€positions€and€the€oralÏarguments€of€counsel,€the€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€theÏdefendantððs€Motion€is€well€taken€in€that€plaintiff€has€failed€toÏcomply€with€the€Convention€on€the€Service€Abroad€of€JudicialÏand€Extrajudicial€Documents€in€Civil€or€Commercial€MattersÏ(Hague€Convention)€and€further€plaintiffs€have€failed€to€perfectÏservice€of€process€in€a€timely€manner€after€the€issuance€ofÏprocess€under€Rule€3€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure;ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€It€is€therefore€ordered€that€the€defendantððs€Motion€to€Dismiss€isÏgranted€on€the€grounds€of€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction€over€theÏdefendant,€insufficiency€of€process€and€insufficiency€of€serviceÏof€process.€€Itððs€thus€ordered€that€plaintiffsðð€actions€areÏdismissed€with€prejudice.ÌÌÌÓÓà àUpon€appeal,€the€plaintiffs€present€the€following€issues:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à1.€€Whether€plaintiffs,€Joseph€Sean€Damron€and€wife,€Mrs.ÏJoseph€Sean€Damron€should€be€deprived€of€their€right€to€correctÏtheir€error€in€having€served€the€defendant,€Bianka€Denise€Sadler,Ïby€registered€or€certified€mail€through€the€Secretary€of€State€ofÏTennessee€by€the€Trial€Court€Judge,€Barbara€Haynes,€notÏallowing€them€a€reasonable€period€of€time€to€perfect€service€ofÏprocess€under€the€terms€of€the€Hague€Convention,€such€as€hasÏbeen€allowed€in€òòWilson€v.€Honda€Motor€Company,€Ltd.óó,€776ÏF.Supp.€339€(1991€E.D.€Tenn.,€Sixth€Circuit€Court€ofÏAppeals),€wherein€after€ruling€service€not€in€compliance€withÏHague€Convention€allowed€plaintiff€forty„€five€(45)€days.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€2.€€Whether€trial€courtððs€finding€set€forth€in€the€order€on€BiankaÏDenise€Sadlerððs€Motion€to€Dismiss€for€Lack€of€PersonalÍJurisdiction€and€Insufficient€Service€of€Process€that€ð ðfurtherÏplaintiffs€have€failed€to€perfect€service€of€process€in€a€timelyÏmanner€after€the€issuance€of€process€under€Rule€3€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,ðð€was€proper.€€NothingÏconcerning€Rule€3€of€T.R.C.P.€was€mentioned€in€the€MotionÏbefore€the€court€and€it€was€first€brought€up€in€oral€argument€ofÏthe€motion€before€the€Court.€€Plaintiffððs€attorney€had€noÏopportunity€to€prepare€and€respond€to€this€Rule€3€question€priorÏto€the€hearing.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€3.€€Whether€mistaken€understanding€from€telephoning€theÏCircuit€Court€Clerkððs€Office€that€original€summons€had€beenÏserved€on€Bianka€Denise€Sadler€would€excuse€failure€to€reissueÏsummons€within€six€(6)€months€in€accordance€with€Rule€3€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€when€plaintiffððs€attorneyÏdiscovered€the€mistake€and€diligent€efforts€were€made€to€locateÏand€serve€Bianka€Denise€Sadler,€who€had€moved€from€DavidsonÏCounty,€Tennessee€to€Rutherford€County,€Tennessee,€toÏStuttgart,€Germany,€where€return€receipt€showed€that€sheÏreceived€the€summons€and€complaint€from€the€Secretary€of€StateÏof€Tennessee.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€4.€€Whether€Rule€No.€60.02(1)€providing€for€Mistakes„Excusable€Neglect,€etc.€would€allow€the€alias€Summons€andÏPluries€Summons€to€be€within€time€to€be€served€on€defendant€inÏaccordance€with€Hague€Convention.ÌÌÌÓÓà àDefendant€presents€the€issues€in€the€following€form:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àI.€€€€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€ruling€that€appellants€failed€toÏcomply€with€the€Convention€on€the€Service€Abroad€of€JudicialÏand€Extrajudicial€Documents€in€Civil€or€Commercial€MattersÏ(ð ðHague€Conventionðð)?ÌÌà8 àà8 àII.€€€Did€the€trial€court€err€in€dismissing€appellantsðð€claim€basedÏon€the€appellantsðð€failure€to€comply€with€Rule€3€of€the€TennesseeÏRules€of€Civil€Procedure?ÌÌà8 àà8 àIII.€€Should€this€appeal€be€dismissed€for€appellantsðð€failure€toÏcomply€with€Rule€29ðð€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€AppellateÏProcedure?ÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€Court€elects€to€discuss€first€the€defendantððs€second€issue€which€is€based€uponÏplaintiffsðð€failure€to€comply€with€T.R.C.P.€Rule€3€which€provides:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€If€process€remains€unissued€for€30€days€or€if€process€is€notÏserved€or€is€not€returned€within€30€days€from€issuance,Ïregardless€of€the€reason,€the€plaintiff€cannot€rely€upon€theÏoriginal€commencement€to€toll€the€running€of€a€statute€ofÏlimitations€unless€the€plaintiff€either:€(1)€Continues€the€action€byÏobtaining€issuance€of€new€process€within€6€months€fromÏissuance€of€the€previous€process€or,€if€no€process€issued,€withinÏ6€months€from€the€filing€of€the€complaint€and€summons,€or€(2)ÏRecommences€the€action€within€1€year€from€issuance€of€theÏoriginal€process€or,€if€no€process€issued,€within€1€year€from€theÏfiling€of€the€original€complaint€and€summons.€€[As€amendedÏJuly€1,€1979€and€January€24,€1992,€effective€July€1,€1992,€andÏby€order€adopted€January€28,€1993,€effective€July€1,€1993]ÌÌÌÓÓà àEven€though€defendant€did€not€move€for€dismissal€on€grounds€of€statute€of€limitationsÏand€violation€of€Rule€3,€it€appears€that€the€Trial€Court€ruled€that€the€suit€should€be€dismissedÏfor€this€reason.ÌÌà àFrom€the€above€narration,€it€appears€that€the€suit€is€for€personal€injuries€sustained€onÏApril€5,€1991;€that€process€was€issued€on€April€3,€1992,€and€returned€unserved€on€April€8,Ï1992,€and€that€no€further€summons€was€issued€within€six€months€thereafter,€nor,€so€far€as€thisÏrecord€shows,€was€a€new€action€commenced€within€one€year€thereafter.€€Therefore,€accordingÏto€Rule€3,€plaintiffs€ð ðcannot€rely€upon€the€original€commencement€to€toll€the€statute€ofÏlimitationsðð€of€one€year€for€actions€for€personal€injury,€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„104.ÌÌà àThe€plea€of€statute€of€limitations€is€a€special€plea€personal€in€its€nature€which€may€beÏwaived€or€asserted;€and€a€party€relying€upon€it€affirmatively€must€set€it€up€in€his€pleadings.€ÏòòWhittaker€v.€Monterey€Spoke€Co.,óó€6€Tenn.€Civ.€App.€(Higgins)€26,€1915.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòGoss€v.ÏHutchins,€óóTenn.€1988,€751€S.W.2d€821;€òòSteed€Realty€Co.€v.€Oveisi,óó€Tenn.€App.€1991,€823ÏS.W.2d€195.€€The€Trial€Court€was€not€justified€in€dismissing€the€suit€on€the€ground€of€statuteÏof€limitation€without€an€affirmative€defense€on€this€ground.ÌÌà àDefendantððs€first€issue€challenges€the€validity€of€the€service€of€process€in€Germany.€ÏWhere€the€return€is€proper€on€its€face,€the€burden€is€on€the€defendant€to€show€that€he€was€notÏproperly€served.€€òòD.H.€May€Co.€v.€Guttmanððs,€Inc.,€óó2€Tenn.€App.€43€(1925).€€òòSeeóó€òòHomer€v.ÏDuncan,€óó7€Tenn.€App.€43€(1927),€wherein€the€person€served€brought€a€separate€action€toÏchallenge€service€and€was€held€to€have€the€burden€of€disproving€service.ÌÌà àHowever,€in€the€present€case,€defendant€argues€that€the€defect€in€service€appears€on€theÏface€of€the€return€in€that€it€does€not€bear€the€signature€of€the€addressee€or€her€duly€authorizedÏagent.ÌÌà àAs€previously€stated,€the€documents€exhibited€to€defendantððs€Trial€Court€memorandumÏwere€not€included€in€this€record.€€T.C.A.€ðð24„6„207€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àò ò24„6„207.€Judicial€notice€of€foreign€law€in€appellateÏcourt.€„ó ó€€It€shall€not€be€necessary,€in€a€case€carried€from€anÏinferior€to€an€appellate€court,€to€have€the€statutes€of€a€state€readÏas€evidence€in€the€inferior€court,€transcribed€into€the€record,Ïexcept€where€it€is€directed€to€be€done€by€the€inferior€court;€butÏthe€appellate€Court€may€take€judicial€notice€of€such€laws€andÏstatutes.€€[Code€1858;€ðð€3801€(derive.€Acts€1839„1840,€ch.€45,Ïðð€1);€Shan.€ðð€5586;€mod.€Code€1932,€ðð€9767;€T.C.A.€(orig.ÏEd.),€ðð€24„613.]ÌÌÌÓÓà àAppellate€courts€can€take€judicial€notice€of€foreign€law€when€included€in€the€record€onÏappeal.€€òòDeSoto€Hardwood€Flooring€Co.€v.€Old€Dominion€Table€&€Cabinet€Works,óó€163€Tenn.Ï532,€43€S.W.2d€1069€(1931);€òòKaset€v.€Freedman,€óó22€Tenn.€App.€213,€120€S.W.2d€977Ï(1938).ÌÌà àT.R.E.€Rule€201€states:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àðð€A€court€shall€take€judicial€notice€if€requested€by€a€party€andÏsupplied€with€the€necessary€information.ÌÌÌÓÓà àT.R.E.€Rule€202€states:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€(b)€Optional€Judicial€Notice€of€Law.€„€Upon€reasonable€noticeÏto€adverse€parties,€a€party€may€request€that€the€court€take,€andÏthe€court€may€take,€judicial€notice€of€(1)€all€other€duly€adoptedÏfederal€and€state€rules€of€court,€(2)€all€duly€published€regulationsÏof€federal€and€state€agencies€and€proclamations€of€the€TennesseeÏWildlife€Resources€Agency,€(3)€all€duly€enactedòò€óóordinances€ofÏmunicipalities€or€other€governmental€subdivisions,òò€óó(4)€anyÏmatter€or€law€which€would€fall€within€the€scope€of€thisÏsubsection€or€subsection€(a)€of€this€rule€but€for€the€fact€that€it€hasÏbeen€replaced,€superseded,€or€otherwise€rendered€no€longer€inÏforce,€and€(5)€treaties,€conventions,€the€laws€of€foreignÏcountries,€international€law,€and€maritime€law.ÌÌÌÓÓà àDefendant€concedes€that€international€service€of€process€is€authorized€by€Article€1€of€ÏThe€Hague€Conventions,€but€relies€upon€limiting€words€therein,€ð ðProvided€the€State€ofÏdestination€does€not€object.ðð€€Defendant€asserts€that€the€Federal€Republic€of€Germany€ð ðhasÏobjected.ðð€€However,€defendant€offers€no€satisfactory€evidence€that€the€government€ofÏGermany€ð ðhas€objected.ððÌÌà àOpinions€of€courts€in€other€cases€in€other€jurisdictions€are€not€satisfactory€evidence€ofÏthe€state€of€statutory€law€in€Germany€at€the€time€material€to€this€appeal.ÌÌà àDefendant€asserts€that€she€never€signed€for€or€received€the€summons.€€Under€theÏholdings€of€our€Tennessee€courts,€cited€above,€defendant€has€the€burden€of€introducingÏevidence€that€she€was€not€served€and€did€not€sign€the€receipt€for€service.€€Defendant€hasÏoffered€no€proof€in€this€regard€and€has€thus€failed€to€carry€the€burden€of€sustaining€her€defenseÏof€non€service€of€process.ÌÌà àDefendantððs€third€issue€seeks€dismissal€of€the€appeal€for€failure€of€plaintiffs€to€timelyÏfile€their€brief€in€this€Court.€€The€record€was€filed€with€this€Court€on€November€8,€1995.€€OnÏDecember€13,€1995,€the€time€for€filing€appellantððs€brief€was€extended€to€and€including€JanuaryÏ8,€1996.€€Appellantððs€brief€was€mailed€to€the€Clerk€by€certified€mail€on€that€date.€€The€briefÏwas€timely€filed.€€T.R.A.P.€Rule€20(a).ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€first€issue€complains€of€the€Trial€Courtððs€refusal€of€additional€time€to€serveÏprocess.€€Plaintiffs€cite€no€part€of€the€record€showing€a€request€to€the€Trial€Court€for€additionalÏtime€or€refusal€of€such€request,€as€required€by€Rule€6(a)(1)€of€the€Rules€of€this€Court.€ÏGenerally,€questions€not€raised€in€the€Trial€Court€will€not€be€considered€on€appeal.€€òòSimpsonÏv.€Frontier€Community€Credit€Unionóó,€Tenn.€1991,€810€S.W.2d€147.€€Moreover,€if€the€requestÏhad€been€made,€the€grant€of€additional€time€would€have€rested€within€the€sound€discretion€ofÏthe€Trial€Court.€€After€setting€aside€two€dismissals€for€failure€to€prosecute,€the€Trial€CourtÏcould€not€be€held€in€error€for€refusing€further€indulgence€even€if€requested.€€ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€second€issue€points€out€what€has€already€been€discussed€„€Rule€3€is€not€aÏbasis€of€dismissal€until€invoked€by€proper€pleading.ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€third€issue€relies€upon€alleged€facts€of€which€there€is€no€evidence€in€theÏrecord.ÌÌà àPlaintiffsðð€fourth€issue€invokes€Rule€60.02(1)€which€is€inapplicable€to€the€facts€in€thisÏrecord.€€ÌÌà àIn€summary,€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€dismissing€under€T.R.C.P.€Rule€3,€because€itÏhad€not€been€invoked,€and€in€quashing€service€of€process€without€sufficient€evidentiaryÏshowing€by€defendant.€€However,€the€suit€is€subject€to€dismissal€upon€proper€presentation€ofÏthe€affirmative€defense€of€statute€of€limitations.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€reversed€and€vacated.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxedÏagainst€the€appellee.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€Court€for€further€proceedings.Ìà àReversed,€Vacated€and€Remanded.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌSEPARATE€DISSENTING€OPINION