WPC} 4# UN %A 0(Gw@o4 0l 0D> 0JU@ 0T  0^` 0h 0D& 0rj 0|X 0 0 AQ4 0D 1u 0d> U> 0@ B) D3I DC| D/ AM B; BX U*u e  }cev~,vHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ @ABCDEFGDHӀIzz!3|xI((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  `(ZapfCalligr BTTT2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  (3$ !  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  $(C<< C($$   1    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman("$    % Line 7 d++++'dxd%%%%7Border 1dd**' dxd$'C << GP Pd d<  9p`(Arial  !#  "  #  , eee FILED,X ,"US ,  - !  ,X CecilCrowson,Jr.   , eee AppellateCourtClerk   X !#   $       TheEmpireGallerywasasubsidiaryofNapoleonicPromotions,Inc.,ofwhichGrollnekwasmanagingdirector.  !#   $       See  Byrdv.Hall, 847S.W.2d208,215(Tenn.1993)( Whenthepartyseekingsummaryjudgmentmakesaproperlysupportedmotion,theburdenthenshiftstothenonmovingpartytosetforthspecificfacts,notlegalconclusions,byusingaffidavitsorthediscoverymaterialslistedinRule56.03[T.R.C.P.],establishingthatthereareindeeddisputed,materialfactscreatingagenuineissuethatneedstoberesolvedbythetrieroffactandthatatrialisthereforenecessary.ThenonmovingpartymaynotrelyupontheallegationsordenialsofhispleadingsincarryingoutthisburdenasmandatedbyRule56.05.).  !#   $       Alternatively,affirmanceofthetrialcourtsjudgmentappearstoberequiredbytheSupremeCourtsdecisionof Houghlandv.SecurityAlarms&Services, 755S.W.2d769(Tenn.1988),whereintheCourtstatedthat, [w]henapromiseismadeingoodfaith,withtheexpectationofcarryingitout,thefactthatitsubsequentlyisbrokengivesrisetonocauseofaction,eitherfordeceit,orforequitablerelief. Houghland, 755S.W.2dat774(quotingW.PageKeetonetal., ProsserandKeetonontheLawofTorts 109(5thed.1984)).PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   inion Geneva  inion Geneva ! . #  \RA'\` ` pX\RA'\@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE,WESTERNSECTION@ ATJACKSON@ ___________________________________________________  ) JOHNH.FOURNIER,  ) ShelbyCountyCircuitCourt ) No.61433T.D.̀Plaintiff/Appellant. ) )R).'A1-j|:Q `@RVS. ) C.A.NO.02A019602CV00032 ) M.V.TICHENORand  ) BOWLING,BOWLING&  ) ASSOCIATES,  ) )̀Defendants/Appellees. ) )__________________________________________________________FromtheCircuitCourtofShelbyCountyatMemphis. HonorableRobertA.Lanier,Judge JohnD.Horne ,THEWINCHESTERLAWFIRM,Memphis,TennesseeAttorneyforPlaintiff/Appellant. JamesL.Kirby ,HARRIS,SHELTON,DUNLAP&COBB,Memphis,TennesseeAttorneyforDefendants/Appellees.OPINIONFILED: AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED FARMER,J.HIGHERS,J. :(Concurs) LILLARD,J. :(Concurs)  ` ` X PlaintiffAppellant,JohnH.Fournier( Fournier),appealstheorderofthetrialcourtenteringsummaryjudgmentinfavorofDefendantsAppellees,M.V.Tichenor( Tichenor)andBowling,Bowling&Associates( LawFirm),onFourniersclaimsfornegligentmisrepresentationandbreachofcontract. InMarch1993,FournierenteredintoaconsignmentagreementwithDefendantsclient,MichaelGrollnek( Grollnek),wherebyGrollnekagreedtosellitemsfromFourniersNapoleonicartcollectiononaconsignmentbasis.Asaconditionofenteringintotheconsignmentagreement,FournierinsistedthataUCC1financingstatementbefiledonhisbehalfinordertoprotecthispropertyrightsintheconsigneditems.Grollnek,therefore,askedhisattorney,Tichenor,anassociateoftheLawFirm,topreparealetterstatingthataUCC1financingstatementwasbeingfiledonFourniersbehalf.InaccordancewithGrollneksrequest,onMarch17,1993,TichenorfaxedaletterontheLawFirmsletterheadtoGrollnekwhichstatedthat [t]hisletterwillconfirmthatshortly,wewillbefilingaUCC1onbehalfofJohnFournier.Grollnek,inturn,sentacopyofthelettertoFournier. InrelianceuponTichenorsrepresentationthataUCC1financingstatementwouldbefiledonhisbehalf,FourniersignedtheconsignmentagreementanddeliveredtheitemsfromhiscollectiontoGrollnek.Subsequently,TichenorpreparedaUCC1financingstatement,whichFourniersignedandreturnedatTichenorsrequest.TichenoralsoobtainedGrollnekssignatureontheUCC1,andheinformedGrollnekthatafilingfeeof$242.04wouldberequiredinordertofilethefinancingstatement.Grollnek,however,failedtoprovidetherequiredfilingfee,and,consequently,TichenorneverfiledtheUCC1onbehalfofFournier. GrollnekplacedtheitemsfromFournierscollectionforsaleintheEmpireGallery,whichwaslocatedinthePeabodyHotelinMemphis. /   ׀Grollnekthensoldsomeoftheitemstomembersofthepublicwhocameintothegallery,but,byhisownadmission,GrollnekneverpaidFournierforanyoftheitemssold.InAugust1993,uponlearningofGrollnekspossiblebreachoftheconsignmentagreement,FourniercontactedTichenorbytelephonetoverifythataUCC1hadbeenfiledonFourniersbehalf.TichenorrespondedbyletterdatedAugust11,1993,inwhichheinformedFournierthattheUCC1hadnotbeenfiledbecausetheLawFirmneverreceivedacheckforthefilingfeefromGrollnek. FourniersubsequentlyfiledthislawsuitagainstTichenorandtheLawFirmasserting, interalia ,thetheoriesofnegligentmisrepresentationandbreachofcontract.ThegravamenofFournierscomplaintwasthathehadsuffereddamagesbecause,asaresultofTichenorsfailuretofiletheUCC1financingstatementaspromised,FournierlosttheabilitytoregainpossessionoftheconsigneditemsfromthirdpartieswhohadpurchasedtheitemsfromGrollnek.Onappeal,FourniercontendsthatthetrialcourterredingrantingDefendantsmotionforsummaryjudgment,inlightoftheaffidavitsanddepositionsfiledinthiscase,aswellasthelegaltheoriesallegedinFournierscomplaint. Summaryjudgmentisappropriate onlywhenthereisnogenuineissueastoanymaterialfactandthemovingpartyisentitledtoajudgmentasamatteroflaw. Byrdv.Hall, 847S.W.2d208,214(Tenn.1993).Applyingthisstandard,weaffirmthetrialcourtsentryofsummaryjudgmentbecausetheundisputedevidenceinthiscasedemonstratesthatFourniersdamageswerenotcausedbyTichenorsfailuretofiletheUCC1financingstatement.Wereachthisconclusionbecause,evenifTichenorhadtimelyfiledtheUCC1financingstatementonFourniersbehalf,FournierwouldnothavehadtherighttoregainpossessionoftheitemssoldbyGrollnektothirdparties. UndertheUniformCommercialCode(UCC),abuyerintheordinarycourseofbusiness takesfreeofasecurityinterestcreatedbyhissellereventhoughthesecurityinterestisperfectedandeventhoughthebuyerknowsofitsexistence.T.C.A.479307(1)(Supp.1995).Section471201(9)oftheUCCdefinesabuyerintheordinarycourseas apersonwhoingoodfaithandwithoutknowledgethatthesaletohimisinviolationoftheownershiprightsorsecurityinterestofathirdpartyinthegoodsbuysinordinarycoursefromapersoninthebusinessofsellinggoodsofthatkind.T.C.A.471201(9)(Supp.1995).UndertheUCC, [a]nyentrustingofpossessionofgoodstoamerchantwhodealsingoodsofthatkindgives[themerchant]powertotransferallrightsoftheentrustertoabuyerinordinarycourseofbusiness.T.C.A.472403(2)(Supp.1995).Inanentrustmentsituation,therefore, [a]buyerintheordinarycourseofbusinesstakesgoodtitletothegoodseventhoughthesalebythemerchantviolateshisagreementwiththetrueowner. MidTenn.FordTruckSales,Inc.v.LeasePlanUSA,Inc., 1993WL266865,at*2(Tenn.App.1993). Inthepresentcase,theevidencewasundisputedthatFournierentrustedpossessionoftheitemsinhisNapoleoniccollectiontoGrollnek.AstheoperatorofagallerywhichdealtinNapoleonicart,therefore,GrollnekhadthepowertotransferallrightsofFourniertobuyersintheordinarycourseofbusiness. See T.C.A.472403(2)(Supp.1995).TherecordcontainsnoevidencetocontradictGrollnekstestimonythatthemembersofthepublicwhopurchasedtheitemsfromtheEmpireGallerywerebuyersintheordinarycourseofbusiness. 0   ׀Accordingly,evenifTichenorsfilingoftheUCC1financingstatementwouldhaveperfectedFournierssecurityinterestintheconsigneditems,FournierwouldhavenocauseofactionagainstthethirdpartiestowhomGrollneksoldtheitemsbecausethethirdparties,asbuyersintheordinarycourse,tooktheitemsfreeofFournierssecurityinterest. 1   ׀ See  Jerniganv.Ham, 691S.W.2d553,556(Tenn.App.1984). ThetrialcourtsordergrantingDefendantsmotionforsummaryjudgmentisaffirmed.&  CostsofthisappealaretaxedtoFournier,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.'        _____________________________________      FARMER,J.______________________________HIGHERS,J.(Concurs)______________________________LILLARD,J.(Concurs)