ÿWPCÀ â—Ü;—Wã‚1þxf¯ pÄGŒœq6z´ƒA~wI×­@â¢Ç÷Èf¾o¢AKÉH¢ú¬£¢D­˜2ÏÄ1Ø™Œ_7Ëöºb@ém‘—.…jµë¾Àà¾n©;‹¼ÂP9–*Ƚ¿uÂî_DK‚ä#Ò{!3é?²ÅpüLzõM.x~¢jT2ÝèÚ¦/5»–L¹~­Š0 4 vB^ E¡'RØÑ´ò× „Nkߌ ~T"‘'{ÖÊGÑX ¸þÆÜ7`è!Qì„Êþ£8=6örI6‡%ÆIÕ†ª ž‡qPyL#áéâwÜ莒ª½24ˆÄXR¿< ™,"&hO:£æ™X.Uì¨uìtäzKÀÓMÆyòjÕgIêŒ\É¥±ˆÀŽoª=%Ú[˜ÖÒ ŸŠ=Lî!l-_ÿSŠ^‰‰÷‰ä7ÞÕ•Øð"ykÞÛÞ |ÊÔ ÇÄap4Û_´{}™1TìL“D”ÍUPášÍ«æR—ø)}¸¤ç§4YÛñÛ†‡.Ѿ]æÐMü±}nZ*˜„o ¥ê#æF.6ÍLÚ”GƒËŽ‹Ù*š%†VYr¥ÏBH}²j›¬Í´™#™¼6èHÔžuÁ5â™÷eáÒàóÓ;b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë ë N±±±E³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³bµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµ 0ë½½½½ B¨¨ 0¤Å D3i D-œ 0KÉÉ ASÆg 0¤- 0DÑ A«˜HP LaserJet 4Si,ü,,,,,ü0»8eç(L (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularç€4(-  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2›_$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»<»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X¬‹X»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»<»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»<»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»<»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼»<»»»ÔÑ  Ñà@¦ ¦ ìàIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@§§$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ È ÐÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹6#ÔÓ  ÓRAYMOND€DAVISòòóó€v.€CITY€OF€CLARKSVILLEòòóóÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ôó óÐ Ð  ÐÓ|ÓÌà@| | ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyˆÐ Ø ( Ðà@¤ ¤ ìàNo.€C11„409,€James€E.€Walton,€JudgeˆÐ È  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<— ` A߈Ð ˜ è  ÐÌà@ó ó ìàNo.€M1999„00084„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Decided€July€7,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ԈР—ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<v` AßÐ wÇ  Ðó óÌà  àThis€is€a€negligence€suit€under€the€Tennessee€Governmental€Tort€Liability€Act.€€The€plaintiffÐ vÆ  Ðis€a€city€police€officer€who€was€injured€while€rushing€an€armed€robbery€suspect.€€The€plaintiff€rushedÐ f¶  Ðthe€robbery€suspect€when€he€moved€from€a€position€of€cover€to€a€position€closer€to€the€suspect,€afterÐ V¦ Ðhis€supervisor€motioned€him€to€move€forward.€€The€plaintiff€sued€the€city,€alleging€that€his€injuriesÐ F– Ðwere€caused€by€his€supervisor's€negligence.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€supervisor€was€negligentÐ 6† Ðand€awarded€the€plaintiff€$45,000€in€damages.€€The€city€appeals.€€We€reverse,€finding€that€theÐ &v Ðevidence€does€not€support€a€finding€that€the€supervisor€was€negligent.Ð f ÐÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Reversed.ó óÐ öF ÐÌòòHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€J.Ô#†¼»<»àX¬‹¸#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X.¼»<Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,Ð Ö& ÐÔ_ÔW.S.Ô_Ô,óó€and€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Æ ÐÌW.€Timothy€Harvey,€Clarksville,€Tennessee€for€the€Appellant,€City€of€Clarksville.Ð ¦ö ÐÌStacy€A.€Turner,€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee,€Raymond€Davis.Ð †Ö ÐÌà@55'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹Û#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<ԈРf!¶  ÐÌÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹é #ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ôà  àThis€negligence€suit€under€the€Tennessee€Governmental€Tort€Liability€Act€was€brought€byÐ F#–" ÐCity€of€Clarksville€police€patrolman€Raymond€Davis€(ð ðDavisðð),€against€the€City€of€ClarksvilleÐ 6$†# Ð(ð ðCityðð),€to€recover€for€injuries€Davis€received€when€he€broke€his€leg€in€an€attempt€to€apprehend€anÐ &%v $ Ðarmed€robbery€suspect.€€On€December€28,€1995,€Davis€was€on€patrol€duty.€€He€received€a€call€thatÐ &f!% Ðan€armed€robbery€was€in€process€at€a€laundromat€on€Highway€41„A€in€Clarksville.€€En€route€toÐ 'V"& Ðrespond€to€the€call,€Davis€encountered€his€supervisor,€Sergeant€Gary€Hurst€(ð ðSgt.€Hurstðð€or€ð ðHurstðð),Ð ö'F#' Ðthe€officer€in€charge€of€the€shift.€€Hurst€had€received€information€that€the€suspect€had€fled€theÐ æ(6$( ÐÔ_ÔlaundromatÔ_Ô.€€Sgt.€Hurst€told€Davis€to€search€for€the€suspect€along€Birch€Road.€€Davis€then€heardÐ Ö)&%) ÐSergeant€John€Hunt€(ð ðSgt.€Huntðð)€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department€announce€over€the€radio€thatÐ Æ*&* Ðshots€had€been€fired€€at€the€Car€Market,€a€Clarksville€used€car€dealership€located€on€Highway€41„A.€Ð ¶+'+ ÐDavis€immediatelyÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹B #ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€drove€to€the€Car€Market.€€When€he€arrived,€Davis€first€placed€a€civilian€in€theÐ ¦,ö', Ðback€of€his€police€cruiser€for€safety.€€He€then€cautiouslyÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹q#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€beganÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹R#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€to€move€toward€the€area€of€theÐ –-æ(-ý' Ðdealership€lot,€near€the€dealership€building,€where€Sgt.€Hunt€and€the€armed€suspect€were€located,Ð ° Ðeventually€coming€to€a€stop€behind€a€large€pink€statue€of€an€elephant€located€on€a€trailer€on€the€carÐ  ð Ðlot.€€From€his€position€of€cover€behind€the€elephant€statue,€Davis€could€see€the€suspect,€on€his€kneesÐ à Ðin€the€parking€lot,€with€a€pistol€placed€against€his€head.€€He€could€also€hear€Sgt.€Hunt€talking€withÐ €Ð Ðthe€suspect.€€Since€Sgt.€Hunt€was€conversing€with€the€suspect,€he€did€not€speak€to€Davis€and€DavisÐ pÀ Ðdid€not€speak€to€Hunt.Ð ` ° ÐÌà  àFrom€his€position€of€cover,€Davis€watched€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€arrive€and€park€his€car€in€an€adjacentÐ @  Ðparking€lot,€remove€a€rifle€from€the€trunk,€and€begin€to€move€towards€the€suspect.€€As€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_ÔÐ 0 € Ðmoved€forward,€he€made€a€hand€gesture€to€Davis.€€Davis€was€uncertain€of€the€meaning€of€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô'sÐ  p  Ðgesture,€but€interpreted€it€as€a€signal€to€move€forward.€€Davis€then€left€the€cover€of€the€elephantÐ `  Ðstatue€in€order€to€follow€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€to€a€position€behind€a€parked€truck,€several€feet€in€front€of€theÐ P  Ðstatue.€€At€the€time,€the€suspectððs€back€was€turned€to€both€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€and€Davis.€€When€Davis€movedÐ ð@  Ðfrom€behind€the€elephant€statue,€however,€the€suspect€apparently€heard€the€movement€behind€him.€Ð à0  ÐThe€suspect€rose€and€turned€toward€Davis,€with€the€gun€pointed€at€him.€€When€Davis€saw€the€suspectÐ Ð  Ðturn€with€the€gun€pointed€at€him,€Davis€decided€to€charge€and€execute€a€ð ðflying€kickðð€on€the€suspect,Ð À Ðin€an€attempt€to€knock€him€off€his€feet€and€to€avoid€being€shot.Ô#†¼»<»XX¬‹š#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€saw€the€suspect€turn€withÐ ° Ðhis€gun€toward€Davis,€saw€Davis€charge€the€suspect,Ô#†¼»<»XX¬‹»#ÔÔ‡X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€and€believed€that€Davis€was€about€to€be€shot.€Ð  ð ÐSgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€then€raised€and€fired€his€rifle€at€the€suspect,€hitting€him€in€the€shoulder.€€Davis€fell€to€theÐ à Ðground€with€the€suspect€and€suffered€a€broken€leg.€€Although€Davis€initially€believed€that€he€hadÐ €Ð Ðbeen€hit€by€a€bullet,€fired€either€by€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€or€the€suspect,€the€surgeon€who€repaired€the€breakÐ pÀ Ðfound€no€indication€that€Davis€had€been€shot.Ð `° ÐÌà  àOn€March€5,€1996,€Davis€filed€a€lawsuit€against€Sgt.€Ô_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€and€the€City€of€Clarksville,Ð @ Ðseeking€$300,000€for€damages€suffered€in€the€encounter€with€the€armed€suspect.€€Davis€alleged€thatÐ 0€ Ðhis€injuries€had€been€caused€by€Sgt.€Hurst's€negligence€in€placing€Davis€in€a€dangerous€position€andÐ  p Ðin€firing€his€weapon€while€Davis€was€charging€the€suspect.òòóóÔ#†¼»<»XX¬‹‹#ÔÔ€X¬‹X»¼»<Ô€€On€April€1,€1996,€€Davis€filed€a€noticeÐ ` Ðof€voluntary€dismissal€of€the€action€against€Sgt.€Hurst,€leaving€only€his€claim€against€the€City,€basedÐ P Ðon€the€negligence€of€its€employee,€Sgt.€Hurst.€€In€its€answer,€the€City€denied€that€Sgt.€Hurst€had€beenÐ ð@ Ðnegligent,€or€that€Hurstððs€actions€were€the€proximate€cause€of€Davisðð€injury,€asserted€that€Davis€hadÐ à0 Ðbeen€negligent€in€charging€the€armed€suspect,€and€also€asserted€that€Davisðð€injury€was€the€result€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€intervening€criminal€action€of€the€third€party€armed€robbery€suspect.Ð À! ÐÌà  àThe€City€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€The€City€argued€that€it€was€entitled€toÐ  #ð! Ðjudgment€as€a€matter€of€law€on€Davisðð€claim,€based€on€application€of€the€ð ðpolicemen€and€firemenððsÐ $à" Ðrule,ðð€which€ð ðprecludes€negligence€actions€by€firemen€and€policemen€who€are€injured€by€a€riskÐ €%Ð # Ðpeculiar€to€their€employment.ðð€ò òòòCarson€v.€Headrickóóó ó,€900€S.W.2d€685,€687€(Tenn.€1995).€€The€trialÐ p&À!$ Ðcourt€granted€the€Cityððs€motion€for€summary€judgment,€finding€that€the€firemen€and€policemenððsÐ `'°"% Ðrule€barred€Davisðð€suit.€€Shortly€after€this€ruling,€however,€this€Court€held,€in€ò òòòBridges€v.€City€ofÐ P( #& ÐMemphisó óóó,€952€S.W.2d€841,€848€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997),€that€the€policy€behind€the€firemen€andÐ @)$' Ðpolicemenððs€rule€would€not€be€frustrated€by€allowing€firemen€or€policemen€to€sue€governmentalÐ 0*€%( Ðentities€for€negligence.€€Based€on€the€holding€in€òòò òBridgesó óóó,€the€trial€court€reconsidered€and€ultimatelyÐ  +p&) Ðdenied€the€Cityððs€motion€for€summary€judgement.€ò òòòóóó óÐ ,`'* Їà  àA€bench€trial€was€held€on€January€15,€1999.€€Sgt.€Steve€Poston€(ð ðSgt.€Postonðð)€and€CaptainÐ ° ÐBob€Davis€(ð ðCapt.€Davisðð)€of€the€Clarksville€City€Police€Department,€testified€regarding€theÐ  ð Ðinvestigation€of€the€ð ðshooting€teamðð€assembled€to€investigate€the€incident€at€the€Car€Market.€€Capt.Ð à ÐDavis€testified€that€a€ð ðshooting€teamðð€is€€routinely€assembled€anytime€a€person€is€shot,€for€theÐ €Ð Ðpurpose€of€critiquing€the€actions€of€each€officer€involved€in€the€incident.€€Capt.€Davis€and€Sgt.Ð pÀ ÐPoston€were€members€of€the€shooting€team€that€investigated€the€incident€at€issue.€€Capt.€DavisÐ ` ° Ðtestified€that€the€team€interviewed€all€officers€involved.€€The€teamððs€taped€interview€of€Sgt.€HurstÐ P   Ðwas€introduced€into€evidence.€€Capt.€Davis€stated€that,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€investigation,€theÐ @  Ðshooting€team€issued€a€report€on€each€officer€involved€in€the€incident,€including€Sgt.€Hurst,€Sgt.Ð 0 € ÐHunt,€and€Officer€Davis.€€These€reports€were€also€introduced€into€evidence.Ð  p  ÐÌà  àSgt.€Poston€testified€that€each€officerððs€actions€were€evaluated,€in€part,€in€light€of€theÐ P  Ðestablished€policies€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department,€including€General€Orders€A„10€on€the€useÐ ð@  Ðof€force/firearms,€General€Orders€E„2€on€actions€by€the€tact€team,€and€General€Orders€E„20€onÐ à0  Ðhostage/barricade€situation€responses.€€These€policy€statements€were€introduced€into€evidence.€Ð Ð  ÐGeneral€Order€E„20€states€in€part:Ð À ÐÌà8  àPatrol€responsibilities:€No.€1,€take€up€positions€of€covered€concealment.€€MembersÐ  ð Ðshall€fire€only€at€a€visible€target€which€is€at€the€moment€presenting€an€immediateÐ à Ðdanger€to€human€life.€€Members€shall€fire€only€when€innocent€persons€or€otherÐ €Ð Ðofficers€will€not€be€jeopardized.ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌOther€relevant€portions€of€the€statements€indicated€that€the€first€officer€who€arrives€upon€the€sceneÐ P  Ðof€a€ð ðhostage€typeðð€situation€should€assume€command€until€relieved€of€command€by€a€higherÐ @ Ðranking€officer,€that€each€officer€who€subsequently€arrives€is€to€report€to€the€officer€in€charge,€andÐ 0€ Ðthat€hostage€negotiation€personnel€should,€when€possible,€be€given€the€opportunity€to€perform€theirÐ  p Ðfunctions.€€Both€Sgt.€Poston€and€Capt.€Davis€testified,€however,€that€the€policy€statements€wereÐ ` Ðintended€only€as€general€guidelines,€not€absolute€rules.€€Capt.€Davis€testified€that€each€police€officerÐ P Ðis€expected€to€make€judgement€calls€at€ð ðany€given€time€at€any€given€scene.ðð€€In€addition,€aÐ ð@ Ðmemorandum€issued€by€the€Clarksville€City€Police€Chief€in€connection€with€the€Policy€StatementsÐ à0 Ðwas€introduced€into€evidence.€€It€states:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€the€following€pages€of€this€manual,€as€well€as€the€other€manuals€producedÐ °"  Ðby€the€Clarksville€Police€Department,€it€has€been€attempted€to€construct€guidelinesÐ  #ð! Ðfor€personnel€to€use€in€making€decisions.€€Every€General€Order€has€been€written€asÐ $à" Ðthoroughly€and€precisely€as€is€possible€without€Ô_ÔtieingÔ_Ô€[sic]€the€hands€of€the€LawÐ €%Ð # ÐEnforcement€Officer.€€It€is€the€desire€of€the€Administration€of€this€department€thatÐ p&À!$ Ðeach€employee€learn€and€utilize€these€orders€so€that€the€citizens€Clarksville€[sic]€canÐ `'°"% Ðbe€better€served€and€to€promote€a€better€understanding€between€the€different€units€ofÐ P( #& Ðthe€Department.Ð@)$'Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIt€must€be€pointed€out,€however,€that€this€manual€is€not€all€inclusive.€€Due€toÐ 0*€%( Ðthe€extremely€large€range€of€situations€that€a€Police€Officer€encounters,€this€is€bothÐ  +p&) Ðimpossible€and€impracticable.€€The€Orders€in€this€manual€must€be€applied,€based€onÐ ,`'* Ðthe€situation€as€well€as€the€training€and€good€judgment€of€the€Police€Officer.€€NoÐ ° Ðmanual,€neither€this€one€or€[sic]€any€other,€can€make€the€final€decision€for€the€PoliceÐ  ð ÐOfficer€in€every€situation€you€will€encounter.ÐàÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àSo€with€this€in€mind,€it€is€hoped€that€all€Police€Department€employees€willÐ €Ð Ðtake€this€manual€and€use€it€as€a€tool€to€further€their€professionalism€as€well€as€theÐ pÀ Ðprofessionalism€of€this€Department.€€Ð` °Ð Ð  ÐÌThe€shooting€teamððs€report€on€Sgt.€Hurst€was€also€introduced€into€evidence.€€It€states:Ð @  ÐÌà8  àThe€shooting€team€feels€the€following€problems€happened.Ð p Ð Ð  Ðà8  à1.€€Fail€to€communicate€with€the€first€officer€on€the€scene.Ð` Ð Ð  Ðà8  à2.€Was€the€weapon€choice€correct.ÐP Ð Ð  Ðà8  à3.€Was€Sgt.€Hurst€close€enough€to€Davis€to€tell€him€what€to€do€verses€[sic]€givingÐ ð@  Ðhim€hand€signals.Ðà0 Ð Ð  Ðà8  à4.€What€was€the€hurry€to€rush€this€person.ÐÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  à5.€Why€did€he€not€allow€the€negotiator€to€do€her€job,€since€he€was€the€one€that€calledÐ À Ðher.аРР Ðà8  à6.€Did€he€know€if€the€building€had€people€in€it€or€not€before€firing€a€weapon€thatÐ  ð Ðcould€go€through€it.ÐàÐ Ð  Ðà8  à7.€€Since€he€knew€that€Sgt.€Hunt€was€on€the€lot€somewhere,€should€he€have€first€triedÐ €Ð Ðto€locate€him.ÐpÀÐ Ð  Ðà8  à8.€€Why€could€he€not€hear€Sgt.€Hunt€talking€to€the€w/m.€€Ð`°Ð Ð  ÐÌCaptain€Davis€stated€that€Sgt.€Hurst€had€received€no€discipline,€reprimand€or€ð ðnegative€marksðð€onÐ @ Ðhis€record€as€a€result€of€the€incident.Ð 0€ ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff,€Raymond€Davis,€testified€that,€from€the€position€he€had€taken€behind€theÐ ` Ðelephant€statue,€he€watched€Sgt.€Hurst€arrive€at€the€scene,€remove€a€rifle€from€his€trunk,€and€moveÐ P Ðtowards€the€suspect.€€When€Sgt.€Hurst€turned€toward€Davis,€he€made€a€sideways€motion€with€hisÐ ð@ Ðhand.€€Davis€testified€that€he€did€not€understand€what€Sgt.€Hurst€meant€by€the€hand€gesture,€but€thatÐ à0 Ðhe€interpreted€it€as€a€signal€to€move€forward,€assuming€that€ð ðmaybe€he€[Sgt.€Hurst]€wanted€me€toÐ Ð  Ðgo€to€the€truck.ðð€€The€amount€of€radio€traffic€going€on€at€the€time€prevented€Davis€from€contactingÐ À! ÐHurst€by€radio€to€determine€exactly€what€Hurst€wanted€him€to€do.€€Davis€acknowledged€that€theÐ °"  Ðheavy€radio€traffic€also€would€have€prevented€Sgt.€Hurst€from€contacting€him.€€Davis€came€out€fromÐ  #ð! Ðbehind€the€elephant€statue€and€saw€the€suspect€turn€towards€him.€€Davis€then€made€the€split€secondÐ $à" Ðdecision€to€charge€the€suspect,€rather€than€to€continue€to€move€toward€the€truck€that€Sgt.€Hurst€wasÐ €%Ð # Ðbehind.Ð p&À!$ ÐÌà  àSgt.€Hunt€testified€as€well.€€When€asked€whether€he€issued€any€instructions€to€Sgt.€Hurst,€orÐ P( #& Ðcalled€for€a€hostage€negotiator,€Sgt.€Hunt€stated€that€he€had€been€too€busy€talking€to€the€suspect€toÐ @)$' Ðget€on€the€radio.€He€testified€that€ð ðI€wasnððt€in€a€position€at€that€time€to€talk€on€the€radio€and€instructÐ 0*€%( Ðâ âthis€individual€who€was€using€deadly€force€as€far€as€myself,€a€threat€towards€me€and€myself,€I€didnððtÐ  +p&) Ðhave€time€to€talk€to„„ðð€€There€was€no€testimony€that€Sgt.€Hunt€issued€commands€to€anyone€on€theÐ ° Ðscene.Ð  ð Ðâ âÌà  àSgt.€Hurst€testified€that,€by€moving€forward€toward€the€suspect,€he€had€been€followingÐ €Ð Ðestablished€police€training€and€protocol€that€calls€for€the€formation€of€a€perimeter€around€an€armedÐ pÀ Ðsuspect.€€The€purpose€of€forming€a€perimeter,€he€said,€is€ð ðto€contain€any€suspects,€to€locate€andÐ ` ° Ðidentify€witnesses,€to€locate€and€identify€suspects,€to€attempt€to€apprehend€the€suspect€when€the€timeÐ P   Ðis€right.ðð€€Sgt.€Hurst€testified€that€it€was€within€police€policy€and€training€to€gradually€move€closerÐ @  Ðto€the€suspect,€in€an€attempt€to€close€the€perimeter.€€Sgt.€Hurst€also€testified€that€motioning€DavisÐ 0 € Ðto€move€forward€with€him€to€the€parked€truck€was€done€in€order€to€form€a€perimeter.€€Sgt.€Hurst€triedÐ  p  Ðto€contact€Davis€on€the€radio€when€he€arrived€at€the€scene,€but€had€been€unable€to€get€throughÐ `  Ðbecause€of€the€heavy€radio€traffic€at€the€time.€€Sgt.€Hurst€testified€that€he€intended€for€Davis€to€moveÐ P  Ðto€a€position€of€cover€closer€to€the€suspect,€but€did€not€intend€for€him€to€attack€the€suspect.€€He€wasÐ ð@  Ðsurprised€when€Davis€began€to€charge€the€suspect.€€Sgt.€Hurst€fired€his€rifle€at€the€suspect€when€heÐ à0  Ðsaw€the€suspect€turn€towards€Davis€with€his€gun€hand€raised€as€if€to€shoot€Davis.€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,€the€trial€court€found€that€Sgt.€Hurst€had€been€negligent€and€thatÐ ° Ðhis€negligence€was€the€proximate€cause€of€Davisðð€injuries.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Davis€had€notÐ  ð Ðbeen€negligent.€€Accordingly,€judgment€was€entered€against€the€City€for€Davis,€and€he€was€awarded€Ð à Ð$45,000€in€damages.€€From€this€entry€of€judgment,€the€City€now€appeals.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€City€raises€four€issues€on€appeal.€€The€City€first€argues€that€the€policemen€and€firemenððsÐ `° Ðrule€precludes€Davisðð€recovery€against€the€City€for€the€non„intentional€conduct€of€a€fellow€employeeÐ P  Ðwhile€in€the€course€and€scope€of€his€employment.€€The€City€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÐ @ Ðfinding€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€negligent,€in€finding€that€Davis€was€not€negligent,€and€in€finding€that€theÐ 0€ Ðnegligence,€if€any,€of€Sgt.€Hurst€was€the€proximate€cause€of€Davisðð€injuries.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àOur€review€of€this€case€is€governed€by€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€13(d),€whichÐ P Ðprovides€that€review€of€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court€shall€be€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€trialÐ ð@ Ðcourt,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€factual€findings,€unless€the€evidenceÐ à0 Ðpreponderates€otherwise.€€Ô_ÔT.R.A.P.Ô_Ô€13(d);€ò òòòUnion€Carbide€Corp.€v.€Ô_ÔHuddlestonÔ_Ôó óóó,€854€S.W.2d€87,€91Ð Ð  Ð(Tenn.€1993).Ð À! ÐÌà  àWe€address€first€the€issue€of€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Sgt.€Hurst€wasÐ  #ð! Ðnegligent.€€The€portion€of€the€trial€courtððs€order€addressing€this€issue,€entitled€ð ðWas€Sergeant€HurstÐ $à" Ðat€fault?ðð€states:Ð €%Ð # ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€plaintiff€alleges€that€Sergeant€Hurst€was€negligent€and€that€his€negligenceÐ `'°"% Ðwas€the€legal€and€factual€cause€of€the€plaintiffððs€injuries.€€The€plaintiff€says€thatÐ P( #& ÐSergeant€Hurst€was€negligent€because€(1)€he€shot€the€plaintiff,€and€(2)€he€did€notÐ @)$' Ðfollow€established€police€department€procedure.Ð0*€%(Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ  +p&) Ðà8  àà ` àIt€was€first€thought€that€the€plaintiff€had€suffered€a€gun€shot€wound.€Ð ° Ðâ âHowever,€Dr.€Cooper€Ô_ÔBeasleyÔ_Ô,€the€physician€who€operated€on€plaintiffs€[sic]€leg,€saidÐ  ð Ðthe€injury€was€not€from€a€gun€shot.€€Mr.€William€S.€Best,€a€forensic€chemist,€foundÐ à Ðtraces€of€gun€powder€and€bullet€fragments€in€the€plaintiffððs€sock.€€Dr.€RichardÐ €Ð ÐÔ_ÔFishbeinÔ_Ô,€an€orthopedic€surgeon€who€examined€the€plaintiff,€said€that€the€injury€wasÐ pÀ Ðconsistent€with€the€plaintiff€having€been€struck€a€glancing€blow€by€a€bullet.€€On€thisÐ ` ° Ðissue,€Dr.€Beasley€is€the€more€credible€witness.€€The€plaintiff€has€not€carried€theÐ P   Ðburden€of€proof€to€establish€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€a€bullet€fired€byÐ @  ÐSergeant€Hurst€struck€him.Ð0 €Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€plaintiff€alleges€that€Sergeant€Hurst€violated€established€police€policy€inÐ  p  Ðthe€following€ways:Ð` Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€à0¸ ` x` xàby€taking€control€of€the€operation€when€Sergeant€Hunt,€anÐ P  Ðofficer€of€equal€rank,€was€first€on€the€scene€and€had€beenÐ ð@  Ðtalking€with€the€suspect€for€approximately€20€minutes€beforeÐ à0  ÐSergeant€Hurst€arrived.ÐÐ ¸ x¸ x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€à0¸ ` x` xàDirecting€the€plaintiff€forward,€into€an€unprotected€position,Ð À Ðwhen€the€suspect€had€a€weapon.а¸ x¸ x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€à0¸ ` x` xàFiring€his€rifle€at€the€suspect€when€the€plaintiff€was€so€nearÐ  ð Ðthe€suspect€as€to€put€the€plaintiff€in€danger.€Ðภx¸ x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.€à0¸ ` x` xàFor€failing€to€have€voice€communication€with€the€officer€inÐ €Ð Ðcharge€at€the€scene€and€with€the€plaintiff.ÐpÀ¸ x¸ x Ðà8  àà ` àThe€defendant€denies€that€Sergeant€Hurst€was€negligent,€but€says€the€plaintiffÐ `° Ðwas€negligent€for€following€the€command€of€Sergeant€Hurst.ÐP Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àSergeant€Hunt€was€in€charge€when€Sergeant€Hurst€arrived€on€the€scene.€€AllÐ @ Ðother€officers€were€carrying€out€their€responsibilities€to€support€the€operation€asÐ 0€ Ðdirected€by€Sergeant€Hunt.€€Sergeant€Hunt€felt€that€he€was€establishing€a€rapport€withÐ  p Ðthe€suspect,€that€time€was€on€their€(police)€side€and€that€the€suspect€might€drop€theÐ ` Ðpistol.€€Sergeant€Hunt€did€not€know€that€Sergeant€Hurst€had€arrived€on€the€scene.€€HeÐ P Ðcould€not€know€that€Sergeant€Hurst€was€proceeding€with€his€own€plan€to€apprehendÐ ð@ Ðthe€suspect.€€Sergeant€Hunt€was€astonished€when€the€plaintiff€rushed€the€suspect€andÐ à0 ÐSergeant€Hurst€fired€a€shot.€€ÐÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àClearly,€Sergeant€Hurst€did€not€communicate€with€Sergeant€Hunt€at€the€scene,Ð À! Ðby€radio€or€by€any€other€means.а" Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€plaintiff€was€injured€after€he€moved€from€behind€cover€as€directed€byÐ  #ð! ÐSergeant€Hurst.€€Sergeant€Hurst€intended€for€the€hand€signal€to€be€a€command€to€theÐ $à" Ðplaintiff€to€move€closer€to€the€suspect€and€behind€the€truck€where€Sergeant€Hurst€was€Ð €%Ð # Ðlocated.€€This€meant€that€the€plaintiff€must€move€from€a€position€of€cover€through€anÐ p&À!$ Ðunprotected€area,€to€the€truck.€€The€plaintiff€did€not€understand€exactly€what€SergeantÐ `'°"% ÐHurst€wanted€him€to€do€or€where€he€wanted€him€to€go.€€However,€the€plaintiffÐ P( #& Ðunderstood€he€had€received€an€order€from€a€superior€officer€and€that€he€must€followÐ @)$' Ðthe€order.€€Once€the€plaintiff€moved€into€the€open,€all€of€the€above€described€eventsÐ 0*€%( Ðâ âtook€place€very€quickly.Ð +p&)Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€duties€of€a€police€officer€involve€great€danger.€€This€was€a€dangerousÐ ° Ðâ âsituation.€€Given€all€the€evidence,€Sergeant€Hurst€violated€several€police€departmentÐ  ð Ðpolicies.€€When€he€arrived€at€the€scene€and€interfered€with€the€operation€beingÐ à Ðconducted€by€Sergeant€Hunt,€he€placed€all€other€officers€in€danger.€€In€this,€SergeantÐ €Ð ÐHurst€was€negligent.€€When€he€directed€the€plaintiff€to€move€from€a€position€of€safetyÐ pÀ Ðto€one€of€immediate€danger,€under€the€circumstances€then€present,€Sergeant€HurstÐ ` ° Ðwas€negligent.€€Except€for€the€negligent€actions€of€Sergeant€Hurst,€the€plaintiff€wouldÐ P   Ðnot€have€been€injured.€€The€negligence€of€Sergeant€Hurst€was€the€legal€cause,€and€theÐ @  Ðcause€in€fact,€of€the€plaintiffððs€injury.Ð0 €Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€City€argues€that€there€was€no€evidence€that€Hurstððs€conduct€fell€below€the€standard€of€Ð `  Ðreasonable€care€under€the€circumstances€as€they€existed€at€the€time.€€It€argues€that€the€actions€of€Sgt.Ð P  ÐÔ_ÔHurstÔ_Ô€upon€which€the€findings€of€negligence€are€based,€namely,€Hurstððs€failure€to€communicate€withÐ ð@  ÐSgt.€Hunt€and€his€use€of€a€hand€gesture€to€motion€Davis€forward,€do€not€constitute€negligence€on€theÐ à0  Ðpart€of€Sgt.€Hurst.€€The€City€points€out€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€indicated€thatÐ Ð  Ðcommunication€was€extremely€difficult,€if€not€impossible,€due€to€the€heavy€radio€traffic.€€The€CityÐ À Ðalso€notes€Davisðð€admission€at€trial€that,€although€he€was€confused€by€Sgt.€Hurstððs€hand€signal,€heÐ ° Ðdid€not€interpret€it€as€a€command€to€rush€the€suspect.€€The€City€argues€that€even€though€Sgt.€HurstððsÐ  ð Ðchosen€course€of€action€may€not€have€been€the€best€one,€judged€with€the€benefit€of€hindsight,€hisÐ à Ðconduct,€given€the€stresses€and€exigencies€of€the€situation€at€the€time€he€acted,€simply€does€not€riseÐ €Ð Ðto€the€level€of€negligence.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àConsequently,€we€must€examine€the€evidence€on€which€the€trial€court€based€its€finding€thatÐ P  ÐSgt.€Hurst€was€negligent.€€The€trial€court€found€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€negligent€in€failing€toÐ @ Ðcommunicate€with€Sgt.€Hunt€when€he€arrived€at€the€scene€and€in€taking€actions€not€directed€by€Sgt.Ð 0€ ÐHunt.€€It€also€concluded€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€negligent€in€directing€Davis€to€move€from€his€positionÐ  p Ðof€cover.€€These€findings€were€based€on€the€Clarksville€City€Police€Policy€Statements€and€the€reportÐ ` Ðof€the€shooting€team.€€The€only€expert€testimony€on€whether€Sgt.€Hurst's€actions€violated€theÐ P Ðapplicable€standard€was€Sgt.€Hurst's€own€testimony€that€his€actions€comported€with€establishedÐ ð@ Ðpolice€procedures.ò òòòó óóóÐ à0 ÐÌà  àThe€Clarksville€City€Police€Policy€Statements€indicate€that€the€first€officer€who€arrives€onÐ À! Ðthe€scene,€in€this€case€Sgt.€Hunt,€should€assume€command,€and€that€officers€who€arrive€subsequently,Ð °"  Ðsuch€as€Sgt.€Hurst,€should€report€to€the€officer€in€charge,€Sgt.€Hunt.€€The€Policy€Statements€alsoÐ  #ð! Ðindicate€that€officers€should€ð ðtake€up€positions€of€covered€concealment.ðð€€However,€the€testimonyÐ $à" Ðof€Sgt.€Poston€and€Capt.€Davis€is€undisputed€that€the€Policy€Statements€were€intended€only€asÐ €%Ð # Ðgeneral€guidelines,€and€that€each€police€officer€is€expected€to€make€a€judgment€call€in€the€givenÐ p&À!$ Ðcircumstances€at€the€time.€€This€is€corroborated€by€the€memorandum€issued€by€the€Clarksville€CityÐ `'°"% ÐPolice€Chief€in€connection€with€the€Policy€Statements.€€There€was€no€testimony,€expert€or€otherwise,Ð P( #& Ðò òòòó óóóthat€Sgt.€Hurst's€failure€to€communicate€with€Sgt.€Hunt€when€he€arrived€at€the€scene,€and€hisÐ @)$' Ðdirective€to€Davis€to€move€forward,€violated€the€applicable€standard€of€conduct€under€òòtheseóóÐ 0*€%( Ðcircumstances€at€this€time.€€Indeed,€the€testimony€is€undisputed€that€communication€with€Sgt.€HuntÐ  +p&) Ðwas€not€possible,€and€that€Davis€did€not€do€so€when€he€arrived€for€the€same€reason.€€Moreover,€theÐ ,`'* ÐPolicy€Statements,€since€they€are€general€guidelines€only,€do€not€contradict€Sgt.€Hurst's€testimonyÐ ° Ðthat,€under€the€circumstances€presented€in€òòthisóó€case,€police€standards€called€for€him€to€establish€aÐ  ð Ðperimeter€around€the€suspect,€and€that€ordering€Davis€to€move€forward€in€order€to€form€such€aÐ à Ðperimeter€was€consistent€with€standard€procedure.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àDavis€also€points€to€the€report€of€the€shooting€team,€which€was€also€introduced€into€evidence.€Ð ` ° ÐThe€report€states€that€the€shooting€team€ð ðfeels€the€following€problems€happened,ðð€and€notes€that€Sgt.Ð P   ÐHurst€failed€ð ðto€communicate€with€the€first€officer€on€the€scene.ðð€€It€questioned€whether€Sgt.€HurstÐ @  Ðwas€ð ðclose€enough€to€Davis€to€tell€him€what€to€doðð€instead€of€relying€on€hand€signals.€€However,Ð 0 € ÐCapt.€Davis'€testimony€was€undisputed€that€the€shooting€team€report€merely€raised€questions€aboutÐ  p  ÐSgt.€Hurst's€actions€and€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€neither€disciplined€nor€reprimanded€for€his€actions.€€ThisÐ `  Ðis€consistent€with€the€language€used€in€the€shooting€team€report,€which€appears€to€raise€issues€andÐ P  Ðpoint€to€ð ðproblemsðð€but€does€not€reach€conclusions€on€whether€the€officers€being€critiqued€wereÐ ð@  Ðnegligent.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€report€of€the€shooting€team€is€not€sufficient€evidence€uponÐ à0  Ðwhich€to€base€a€finding€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€negligent.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àTherefore,€the€Policy€Statements€are€insufficient€evidence€of€Sgt.€Hurst's€negligence€becauseÐ ° Ðthey€are€general€guidelines€only€and€do€not€establish€that€Sgt.€Hurst's€actions€violated€acceptedÐ  ð Ðpolice€standards€under€these€circumstances.€€The€report€of€the€shooting€team€is€insufficient€evidenceÐ à Ðbecause€it€only€raises€questions€regarding€Sgt.€Hurst's€actions€and€reaches€no€conclusion€that€hisÐ €Ð Ðconduct€violated€accepted€police€standards.€€Indeed,€the€only€testimony€regarding€whether€Sgt.Ð pÀ ÐHurst's€actions€violated€accepted€police€standards€under€the€exigencies€of€òòthisóó€situation€is€Sgt.€Hurst'sÐ `° Ðtestimony€that€his€actions€comported€with€police€training€and€protocol.€€Under€these€circumstances,Ð P  Ðwe€must€conclude€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€a€finding€that€Sgt.€Hurst€was€negligent.€Ð @ ÐThis€holding€pretermits€consideration€of€the€other€issues€raised€on€appeal.Ð 0€ ÐÌÒe°Òà ½ àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed,€and€judgment€is€entered€for€the€Appellant,€City€ofÐ ` ÐClarksville.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€against€the€Appellee,€Raymond€Davis,€for€which€executionÐ P Ðmay€issue,€if€necessary.€Ð ð@ ÐÌò òà ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u àà Í àHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ð Ð  Ðó óà ½ àò òà0  àà0m  (# (#àà0Å m (#m (#àà0Å (#Å (#àà0u(#(#àà0Íu(#u(#àòòóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.€J.,€Ô_ÔW.S.Ô_ÔÐÀ!Í(#Í(# Ðà ½ àà  àà m àà Å àà  àà u àà Í àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ó óÐ °"  Ð