˙WPC …# VUNa %¯ 0(ĩLŨb) w@1 4q … ” 0Jœ 0Tæ 0^: 0h˜ 0r 0|r 0†î 0t 1u 0dy U>Ũ B)DCD AM‡U*Ô ū B v~&vͤ D3w 0@Ē AOęÆ9 0D˙ D/C Br˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTČÚØÚÚØČÚ0nLLÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($ĄĄC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT- ų- •–D—D˜™š›œĶ€§DŌ 3|x§2 ˙˙0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ˙˙0Indent2ā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ˙˙0Indent3ā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ˙˙0Indent4ā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ˙˙0Indent5ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ˙˙0Indent6ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ˙˙0Indent7ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ˙˙0Indent8ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ˙˙?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ˙˙8Mac DefaultMac DefaultĶ ` °šXĶ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cū˙ << G˙˙< Œ 9p`(Arial Ũ ƒ!ŨŅ  ŅŅ#€d#ŅÔ€ÔŨ  ŨÔ€#ÔÔ€#ÔĶ  Ķō ōÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔĖĖMay€9,€1997ĖĖCecil€W.€CrowsonĖAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôķ ķ dPtPtHHÚ(˙á˙âųFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃĐ ĐĐHHĐĐ  ĐĐ2ĐĐ˙˙¸æ$˙ĐĐHHĐĐĐĐĐĐĐĐ  ĐĐ ĐĐ ĐŅŅŅGenevaŅŅ ŅŅ € ŅŅ<Px–ČŅŌŌŌ443!#4ŌŌ$ *$ŌŌ$*$ŌŌ ˙KK ŌŌ  Geneva ŌŌ  Geneva ŌĶ.,ĶĶĶĶ6ĶĶ ĶßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŅGenevaŅŅ ŅŌ  h HD: Geneva ŌŌ  h HD: Geneva Ō%%%%'˙˙dxd("˙˙$ŖŖŌ  ŌŌ  Ō€-‚ƒCū˙<< C˙˙ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ō ōÚ  Ú1Ú  Úķ ķ„„'÷˙ dxdü˙P PdŨ ƒ!ŨÔ . ÔÔ€ÔŨ  ŨŅ\R AØ'\ŅŅ\R AØ'\ŅŅ€ŅŅ7€6jXXdėdČ7ŅŅ  ŅĶ#` Ü` ä œ ’X#Ķ›Ū ŪĖIN€RE:€€The€Adoption€ofā ā)Ė€€€€€€€€€€€€€€BRANDON€KAIN€DICUSā ā)Ėā āā ā)Ė€€€€€€€€€€€€€€SCOTT€STEEL€and€DARLA€STEEL,ā ā)Ėā āā ā)Ėā āPlaintiffs/Appellees,ā ā)ā āAppeal€No.Ėā āā ā)ā ā01„A„01„9611„CH„00502Ėv.ā āā ā)Ėā āā ā)ā āWayne€Chancery˜Ų€€ŲßR€"$!A1-j|Îæ` į `€€@˙RߛMARY€LOU€DICUS,ā ā)ā āNo.ā ā8735€&€9656Ėā āā ā)Ėā āDefendant/Appellant.ā ā)ĖĖĖĶ  ĶCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĖĖMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEĖĖĖAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€WAYNE€COUNTYĖĖAT€WAYNESBORO,€TENNESSEEĖĖĖTHE€HONORABLE€JIM€T.€HAMILTON,€CHANCELLORĖĶ  ĶĖĖĖĖĖĖĖĖĖBEN€BOSTONĖCHRISTOPHER€V.€SOCKWELLĖBoston,€Bates,€Holt€&€SockwellĖ235€Waterloo€StreetĖP.€O.€Box€357ĖLawrenceburg,€Tennessee€€38464Ėā āATTORNEYS€FOR€PLAINTIFFS/APPELLEESĖĖĖJ.€DOUGLAS€DICUSĖP.€O.€Box€1119Ė210B€South€Main€StreetĖWaynesboro,€Tennessee€€38485Ėā āATTORNEY€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLANTĖĖĖĖĖĖĖĖĶ  ĶAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDĖĶ  ĶĖĖĖĖSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEĖĖōōĶ  ĶÔ€„ÔOPINIONķķĖĶ  ĶĖĶ€ĶÔ€ŧÔā āThis€is€an€appeal€by€defendant,€Mary€Lou€Dicus,€from€the€œdecision€ofĪthe€chancery€court€to€set€aside€the€courtđđs€order€of€18€October€1993€whichĪamended€the€courtđđs€order€of€adoption€filed€on€24€August€1993.€€The€facts€out€ofĪwhich€this€matter€arose€are€as€follows.ĖĖā āIn€December€1981,€Darla€Steele€gave€birth€to€Brandon€Dicus€Kain.€ĪMrs.€Steele€was€not€married€to€the€childđđs€father,€Scott€Steele,€at€the€time€of€theĪchildđđs€birth.€€The€maternal€grandfather,€George€Albert€Dicus,€and€step„grandmother,€Mary€Lou€Dicus,€cared€for€the€child€from€the€beginning.€€TheĪSteeles€married€in€1986.€€On€14€April€1992,€the€Dicuses€and€the€Steeles€signed€aĪconsent€order€granting€custody€of€the€child€to€the€Dicuses.ĖĖā āOn€27€April€1992,€the€Dicuses€filed€a€petition€for€adoption.€€TheĪDicuses€later€amended€their€petition€to€include€an€allegation€that€the€Steeles€hadĪabandoned€the€child.€€The€Chancery€Court€for€Wayne€County€initially€heard€theĪmatter€in€August€1993.€€The€court€found€the€Steeles€had€abandoned€the€childĪdespite€the€fact€they€had€not€turned€their€backs€on€the€child.€€The€court€entered€anĪorder€on€24€August€1993€and€granted€the€adoption€to€Mr.€Dicus.€€The€DicusesĪlater€filed€a€timely€motion€to€amend€seeking€to€have€Mrs.€Dicus€added€as€anĪadoptive€parent.€€The€court€heard€the€motion€and€filed€an€amended€order€ofĪadoption€with€the€clerk€on€18€October€1993€allowing€Mrs.€Dicus€to€adopt€theÍchild.€€The€18€October€1993€order€was€not€served€upon€either€party€or€theirĪcounsel€and€did€not€contain€a€certificate€of€service.ĖĖā āMr.€Dicus€passed€away€in€September€1995.€€On€4€March€1996,€theĪSteeles€filed€a€motion€pursuant€to€Rule€60.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CivilĪProcedure€requesting€the€court€dissolve€the€18€October€1993€amended€order€ofĪadoption€and€restore€custody€to€the€Steeles.€€On€this€same€day,€the€Steeles€filed€aĪcomplaint€requesting€the€court€set€aside€the€18€October€1993€order€of€adoption,Īissue€a€restraining€order€prohibiting€Mrs.€Dicus€from€maintaining€custody€of€theĪchild,€and€restore€custody€to€the€Steeles.€€The€court€entered€a€final€judgmentĪexpressly€addressing€both€the€motion€and€the€complaint€on€31€May€1996.ĖĖā āThe€final€judgment€stated:ĖĶĶĖĶ&` Ü` ä ‡œx‘X&Ķā8 āā āORDERED,€ADJUDGED€AND€DECREED€that€theĪOrder€entered€August€24,€1993,€was€not€the€entire€judgmentĪof€this€Court,€and€it€is€now€my€duty,€to€make€the€record€speakĪthe€truth,€and€I€think€this€is€a€proper€case€to€enter€an€OrderĪnunc€pro€tunc€which€the€proof€clearly€and€convincinglyĪsupports,€not€only€from€the€original€hearings€in€1993,€butĪfrom€the€subsequent€hearings€in€1996,€that€the€judgment€whichĪis€sought€to€be€enforced€is€the€one€that€was€pronounced€in€theĪcause.€€The€Order€entered€August€24,€1993,€should€have€readĪat€the€bottom€of€Page€2,ĖĖā0 āā8 āā āā0 āā āā8 āIt€is,€therefore,€ORDERED€by€the€Court€that€the€child,ĪBrandon€Kain€Dicus,€has€been€abandoned€by€his€naturalĪparents,€Scott€and€Darla€Steel€[sic],€pursuant€to€T.C.A.Īđđ36„1„110,€and€this€adoption€is€granted€to€petitioner,ĪGeorge€Albert€Dicus,€to€adopt€Brandon€Kain€Dicus.ĖĖā8 āā8 āIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED€that€the€soleĪpurpose€for€this€adoption€is€so€that€BrandonĪKain€Dicus€will€be€eligible€for€a€Social€SecurityÍcheck,€and€said€check€shall€be€deposited€in€aĪfinancial€institution,€in€an€interest€bearingĪaccount€and€held€for€Brandon€Kain€Dicus€untilĪhis€18th€birthday€at€which€time€said€funds€shallĪbe€released€to€him€which€will€assure€him€ofĪsome€stability€in€his€future€and€hopefullyĪprovide€him€with€a€college€education.ĖĖā8 āā8 āIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED€that€theĪInterlocutory€Decree€be€waived.ĖĖā8 āā āIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€ANDĪDECREED€that€the€Amended€Order€filed€October€18,€1993,Īwas€improper€and€shall€be€withdrawn€nunc€pro€tunc.ĖĖĶ€ĶThe€court€then€concluded€it€was€in€the€childđđs€best€interest€to€award€custody€to€theĪSteeles€because€of€the€improper€guardianship€or€control€that€he€had€while€underĪthe€care€of€Mrs.€Dicus.€€Thereafter,€Mrs.€Dicus€filed€a€timely€notice€of€appeal.ĖĖā āThe€resolution€of€the€issues€in€this€case€is€not€a€simple€task.€ĪNevertheless,€we€will€do€our€best€to€properly€and€effectively€address€the€issuesĪpresented€in€this€appeal.ĖĖā āIt€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€the€order€filed€on€18€October€1993Īamending€the€24€August€1993€order€was€never€effective.€€To€explain,€Rule€58€ofĪthe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€provides:€ĖĶĶā8 āā āEntry€of€a€judgment€or€an€order€of€final€disposition€isĪeffective€when€a€judgment€containing€one€of€the€following€isĪmarked€on€the€face€by€the€clerk€as€filed€for€entry:Ėā8 āā ā(1)€the€signatures€of€the€judge€and€all€parties€orĪcounsel,€orĖā8 āā ā(2)€the€signatures€of€the€judge€and€one€party€or€counselĪwith€a€certificate€of€counsel€that€a€copy€of€the€proposed€orderĪhas€been€served€on€all€other€parties€or€counsel,€orĖā8 āā ā(3)€the€signature€of€the€judge€and€a€certificate€of€theÍclerk€that€a€copy€has€been€served€on€all€other€parties€orĪcounsel.Ėā8 āWhen€requested€by€counsel€or€pro€se€parties,€the€clerk€shallĪmail€or€deliver€a€copy€of€the€entered€judgment€to€all€parties€orĪcounsel€within€five€days€after€entry.ĖĶ€ĶĖĶ€ĶTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€58€(West€1996).€€Thus,€an€order€is€not€effective€if€it€does€notĪcomply€with€Rule€58.€€The€18€October€order€failed€to€comply€with€Rule€58Ībecause€the€only€signature€on€the€order€was€the€judgeđđs€and€there€was€noĪcertificate€of€service.€€The€order€was€never€effective.€€ĖĖā āThe€issue€then€becomes:€€How€does€this€conclusion€affect€the€currentĪstate€of€the€case.€€Pursuant€to€Rule€58€the€order€might€as€well€have€never€existed.€ĪThus,€the€result€is€that€the€trial€court€never€ruled€on€the€motion€to€amend€the€24ĪAugust€order€and€that€motion€was€still€pending€before€the€court€when€it€held€theĪmost€recent€hearing€and€filed€the€judgment€currently€before€this€court€on€appeal.€ĪIn€addition,€there€was€no€final€judgment€from€which€the€Steeles€could€appealĪbecause€the€motion€was€still€pending.€€Pursuant€to€Rule€4(b)€of€the€Rules€ofĪAppellate€Procedure€the€thirty€day€time€limit€for€filing€a€notice€of€appeal€neverĪbegan€to€run.€€Thus,€at€the€time€of€the€most€recent€hearing,€the€trial€court€wasĪfaced€with€an€undecided€motion€to€amend€and€the€most€recent€complaint€andĪmotion.ĖĖā āIt€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€the€chancery€court€addressed€theĪmotion€to€amend€in€its€final€judgment€and€that€the€conclusions€reached€by€theĪcourt€were€correct.€€By€withdrawing€the€18€October€order€nunc€pro€tunc,€theĪcourt€clearly€expressed€its€intent€to€award€adoptive€rights€to€Mr.€Dicus€only.€€€InĪaddition,€the€court€expressed€a€need€to€add€certain€language€concerning€theĪchildđđs€receipt€of€social€security€benefits€to€the€24€August€order.€€As€such,€theĪtrial€court,€in€effect,€addressed€the€motion€to€amend€by€adding€findings€to€the€24ÍAugust€order€and€by€denying€Mrs.€Dicusđđs€request€to€be€included€as€an€adoptiveĪparent.€€ĖĖā āAfter€addressing€the€motion€to€amend,€the€court€turned€to€the€custodyĪissue€and€determined€it€was€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child€to€remain€in€theĪcustody€of€the€Steeles.€€The€court€stated:ĖĶĶā8 āā āIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€ANDĪDECREED€that€the€best€interest€of€Brandon€Kain€Dicus€willĪbe€served€if€he€is€placed€in€the€home€of€his€natural€parents,ĪScott€and€Darla€Steel€[sic].€€(Darla€Steel€[sic]€is€legally€hisĪsister€because€of€the€granting€of€the€adoption€to€George€AlbertĪDicus.)€€There€is€no€question€in€the€Courtđđs€mind€and€theĪCourt€is€convinced€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€sinceĪthe€death€of€George€Albert€Dicus€that€when€Brandon€has€beenĪin€the€home€of€Mary€Lou€Dicus€that€he€is€in€such€a€conditionĪof€want€and€suffering€and€is€under€improper€guardianship€andĪcontrol€that€he€is€endangering€the€morals€and€health€of€himselfĪand€others.€€This€conclusion€is€clearly€and€convincinglyĪsupported€by€the€testimony€of€Brandon€Kain€Dicus,€andĪOfficers€Rich€and€Jerrolds.€€When€he€is€in€the€home€of€ScottĪand€Darla€Steel€[sic],€he€has€no€disciplinary€problems,€hisĪgrades€and€school€attendance€are€good,€and€he€is€happy.€€ThatĪhis€school€attendance€is€habitually€and€without€justificationĪpoor,€and€he€is€habitually€disobedient€of€the€reasonable€andĪlawful€commands€of€Mary€Lou€Dicus€and€is€ungovernableĪwhen€with€her.Ėā8 āā āIT€IS€FURTHER€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€ANDĪDECREED€that€placing€Brandon€Kain€Dicus€with€his€naturalĪparents,€Scott€and€Darla€Steel€[sic],€presents€the€least€drastic€orĪrestrictive€alternative€and€would€be€in€his€best€interest€to€placeĪhim€in€their€home.ĖĶ€ĶĖĶ€ĶĖā āOur€review€of€the€findings€of€facts€in€this€case€is€đ đđđōōde€novoķķ€upon€theĪrecord€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€theĪfinding,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.đđđđ€€ōōō ōHass€v.ÍKnightonķķķ ķ,€676€S.W.2d€554,€555€(Tenn.€1984)€(quoting€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d)).€ĪIt€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theĪfindings€of€the€trial€court.€€Mrs.€Dicus€argues€in€her€brief€that€the€court€could€notĪaward€custody€to€the€Steeles€unless€it€terminated€her€parental€rights.€€TheĪproblem€here€is€that€neither€Mrs.€Dicus€nor€the€Steeles€had€any€legallyĪrecognized€parental€rights€as€to€the€child.€€Instead,€Mrs.€Dicus€is€technically€theĪchildđđs€step„mother€and€Mrs.€Steele€is€his€sister.€€Taking€these€facts€intoĪconsideration€along€with€the€evidence,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€theĪchancery€court€did€not€err€when€it€awarded€legal€custody€to€the€Steeles.ā āĖĖā āIt€results€that€the€judgment€is€affirmed,€and€the€cause€is€remanded€to€theĪtrial€court€for€any€further€necessary€proceedings.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€toĪthe€defendant/appellant,€Mary€Lou€Dicus.ĖĖĖĶĶÔ€XÔā āā āā ā_______________________________________Ėā āā āā āSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEĖĖĖCONCUR:ĖĖĖ_____________________________________ĖBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEĖĖĖ_____________________________________ĖWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEĖā āĖĖĖ