WPC # VUNa % 0( 0w@ 4   m  b  0J 0T 0^@ 0h 0r 0|x 0 0z 1u  0dU>B)! BJDCg AMU*#! D3Dv~wv 0@ AOW 0D D/a BHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0nLHw() Z6Times New Roman Regular($(c(2$ !  XX   `   0   DDӀD 3|xUPet. Reh. Draper v. Reaver   ' IB011C10IB011C1 .   - -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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d d$$$$7Border 1dd-&C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d###  ((   YYY FILED(XApril23,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  %%%%'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . ##         \RA'\  \RA'\7 dd7    ћ @ # INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLE̜R')&A1-j|J`  `@Rߛ# PAULGLENDRAPER,   )      ) Plaintiff/Appellant,  )      ) DavidsonCircuit      ) No.95C3755VS.      )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019609CV00394CURTREAVERand   )RICHARDALANTACEY,JR., )      ) Defendants/Appellees.  )@  # OPINIONONPETITIONFORREHEARING#    CurtReaverhasfiledapetitionforrehearingpursuanttoTenn.R.App.P.39requestingthiscourttoreconsidertheportionofitsApril11,1997opinionvacatingthetrialcourtssummaryjudgmentdismissingPaulDraperspropertydamageclaimagainsthim.HecorrectlypointsoutthatourearlieropiniondidnotspecificallyaddresshisdefensethathiscollisionwithMr.ϢTaceysvehicledidnotcausepropertydamagetoeitherMr.Draperorhisvehicle.Wegrantthepetitionforthepurposeofaddressingthisissue.@ I.  Mr.ReaversFebruary8,1996motionforsummaryjudgmentassertedthatMr.DraperscomplaintfailedtostateaclaimforpropertydamageuponwhichreliefcouldbegrantedandthatMr.Draperspersonalinjuryclaimwasbarredbythestatuteoflimitations.Mr.ReaverassertedinhisaffidavitsupportingthemotionthattwocollisionsoccurredonOctober22,1994(thefirstbetweentheDraperandTaceyvehiclesandthesecondbetweentheϢReaverandTaceyvehicles)andthat8 8 NeithermyvehiclenortheTaceyVehicletouched,hit,orotherwisecameintocontactwithorcauseddamagetotheDraperVehicleasaresultofthissecondcollision.Inresponse,Mr.Draperfiledanaffidavitstatingthat8 8 ShortlyafterIexitedmyvehicle,anautomobiledrivenbyCurtReavercollidedwitheithermyvehicleand/orMr.Taceysvehicleandasaresultoftheforceoftheimpactofthissecondcollision,IwashitbyeithertheReavervehicleortheTaceyvehicleorbothasIstoodbesidetheguardrailattheroadside.ThetrialcourtsordergrantingthesummaryjudgmentrecitesthattherearenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthatMr.Reaverisentitledtoajudgmentasamatteroflaw.WhiletheorderdoesnotstatethatitwasactingonbothgroundsofMr.Reaversmotion,wecanreasonablypresumethatitdid. Motionsforsummaryjudgmentshouldnotbegrantedwhentherearematerialfactualdisputes.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.03.Becausemotionsforsummaryjudgmentarenotintendedtobesubstitutesforatrialofdisputedfactualissues,Blockerv.RegionalMedicalCtr.,722S.W.2d660,66061(Tenn.1987),thecourtsmustviewtheevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothenonmovingparty,Haynesv.HamiltonCounty,883S.W.2d606,613(Tenn.1994),andmustalsodrawallreasonableinferencesinthenonmovingpartysfavor.Pittmanv.UpjohnCo.,890S.W.2d425,428(Tenn.1994).Thecourtsshouldnotaffirmasummaryjudgmentifanydoubtoruncertaintyexistswithregardtothematerialfactsortheconclusionstobedrawnfromthefacts.Carvellv.Bottoms,900S.W.2d23,26(Tenn.1995). TheaffidavitssubmittedbyMessrs.DraperandReavercreateagenuineuncertaintywithregardtotheoccurrencesonOctober22,1994.EventhoughMr.ReavercategoricallydeniesthateitherhisvehicleorMr.TaceysvehiclestruckMr.Drapersvehicle,Mr.DraperassertsthatMr.ReaversvehiclecollidedeitherwithhisvehicleorwithMr.TaceysvehicleandthateitherMr.ϢTaceysvehicleorMr.Reaversvehiclestruckhim.Mr.Drapersuncertaintygoestotheweightofhistestimony,anditisnotthecourtsprerogativetoweighthetestimonyatthesummaryjudgmentstage. Mr.DrapersaffidavitdoesnotexcludethepossibilitythatMr.Reaversvehiclestruckhimandhisvehicle.Accordingly,therecordcontainsgenuineuncertaintyconcerningwhetherornotMr.ReaversvehiclestruckMr.Draperorhisautomobile.Withtheproofinthisstate,thetrialcourtshouldnothavesummarilydismissedMr.DraperspropertydamageclaimagainstMr.Reaver.@ II.  WevacatetheportionofthesummaryjudgmentdismissingMr.DraperspropertydamageclaimforthereasonsstatedhereinaswellasforthereasonsstatedinourApril11,1997opinion.WealsotaxthecostsofthispetitionforrehearingagainstCurtReaverforwhichexecution,ifnecessary,mayissue.       ____________________________       WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGECONCUR:________________________________HENRYF.TODD,P.J.,M.S.________________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE