ÿWPC  …# VUFa %§ 0@­4í w@ P 0„X 0DÜ  0J( 0Tr 0^Æ 0h$ 0rŒ 0|þ 0†z 0 1u 0dU6iB)Ÿ BÈDCå AM(U*u D3Ÿ-ÒU>ÿ 0@=-}v~ªvÓ( AOûÆJ 0D D/T Bƒ˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLdÒ<¾½Q 9Z ‹.Courier New RegularX(ù$¡¡Ó  ÓÓ  ÓÚƒç"P ¡Ó 3|x. DÓ€+U,î-.(4(3DX$¤¤Ý ƒù!ÝÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d d%%%%7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial&&&&'ÿÿdxd #Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òJuly€25,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò #Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òJuly€25,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{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 ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ ¸ ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€ɶXXdÖdÈ7ÑÙ€€ÙßR€(+'A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌFIRST€TENNESSEE€BANK,€N.A.,€€€€€)à àKNOX€CHANCERYÌformerly€VALLEY€FIDELITY€BANK€€€)à àC.A.€NO.€03A01„9704„CH„00118ÌAND€TRUST€COMPANY,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellant€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àHON.€DAVID€H.€CATEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àCHANCELLORÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌœW.€P.›€BOONE€œDOUGHERTY›,€€€€€€€€€€)à àAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Defendant„Appellee€€€€)ÌÌÌÌÌJ.€MICHAEL€WINCHESTER€and€GORDON€D.€FOSTER,€Lacy€&€Winchester,ÏP.C.,€for€appellant.ÌÌÌW.€P.€BOONE€œDOUGHERTY›,€appellee,€Pro€SeÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌà€ àMcMurray,€J.ÌÌà àà àWe€are€called€upon€on€this€appeal€to€construe€Rule€3€andÏRule€4,€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€in€òòpara€materiaóó.€TheÏtrial€court€determined€that€service€of€process€in€this€case€wasÏnot€timely€returned€in€accordance€with€Rule€3€and€that€the€statuteÏof€limitations€was€not€thereby€tolled.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court.ÌÌà àThe€basic€facts€are€not€disputed.€€The€plaintiff€here,€FirstÏTennessee€Bank,€obtained€a€judgment€against€the€defendant€on€MayÏ17,€1983.€€On€May€13,€1993,€the€plaintiff€initiated€this€action€toÏrenew€the€judgment€and€prevent€the€10€year€statute€of€limitationsÏapplicable€to€judgments€(T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„110)€from€extinguishing€theÏjudgment.ÌÌà àSummonses€were€timely€issued€on€six€occasions.€€The€firstÏfive€did€not€result€in€proper€service.€€The€sixth€summons€wasÍissued€on€November€15,€1994,€and€served€on€the€defendant,€alongÏwith€a€copy€of€the€complaint.€€Service€was€made€on€November€30,Ï1994.€€For€reasons€not€clear€in€the€record,€the€process€server€didÏnot€make€a€return€to€the€court€until€sometime€between€December€19,Ï1994,€and€January€6,€œ1995.›€€The€affidavit€of€the€process€serverÏwas€filed€on€March€8,€1996.ÌÌà àOn€December€27,€1994,€the€defendant€filed€a€lengthy€motion€Ïto€dismiss,€asserting,€among€other€things,€that€the€service€ofÏprocess€was€not€sufficient€to€toll€the€statute€of€limitationsÏreferred€to€above.€€In€making€this€assertion,€the€defendant€reliesÏupon€the€provisions€of€Rule€3,€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€ÏAt€times€material€to€the€issues€here,€Rule€3€provided€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àò òRule€3.€Commencement€of€Actionó ó.€€All€civil€actionsÏare€commenced€by€filing€a€complaint€and€summons€with€theÏclerk€of€the€court.€An€action€is€commenced€within€theÏmeaning€of€any€statute€of€limitations€upon€such€filingÏof€a€complaint€and€summons,€whether€process€be€issued€orÏnot€issued€and€whether€process€be€returned€served€orÏunserved.€€òòIf€process€remains€unissued€for€30€days€or€isÏnot€served€ò òor€is€not€returned€within€30€days€fromÏissuance,€regardless€of€the€reasonó ó,€the€plaintiffÏcannot€rely€upon€the€original€commencement€to€toll€theÏrunning€of€a€statute€of€limitationsóó€unless€the€plaintiffÏeither;ÌÌà8 à(1)€Continues€the€action€by€obtaining€issuance€of€newÏprocess€within€6€months€from€issuance€of€the€previousÏprocess€or,€if€no€process€issued,€within€6€months€fromÏthe€filing€of€the€complaint€or€summons,€orÌÌà8 à(2)€€Recommences€the€action€within€1€year€from€theÏissuance€of€the€original€process,€or€if€no€processÏissued,€within€1€year€from€the€filing€of€the€originalÏcomplaint€and€summons.ÌÌÓÓ(All€emphasis€added).ÌÌà àIt€is€undisputed€that€the€appellant€did€not€comply€eitherÏwith€subparagraph€(1)€or€(2).€The€appellee€argues€that€the€under…lined€provisions€set€out€above€prevent€the€appellant€from€relyingÏon€the€filing€date€of€the€original€complaint€in€this€action€toÏtoll€the€statute€of€limitations.€€The€appellant,€on€the€otherÏhand,€argues€that€Rule€4,€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€isÏcontrolling.€€Rule€4.03€provides€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àò ò4.03€Summons€„€Return.ó ó€(1)€The€person€serving€theÏsummons€shall€promptly€and€òòwithin€the€time€during€whichÏthe€person€served€must€respondóó,€make€proof€thereof€toÏthe€court€and€shall€identify€the€person€served€and€shallÏdescribe€the€manner€of€service.€If€a€summons€is€notÏserved€within€thirty€(30)€days€after€its€issuance,€itÏshall€be€returned€with€the€reasons€for€the€failure€toÏserve€stated€thereon.€The€plaintiff€may€obtain€newÏsummonses€from€time€to€time,€as€provided€in€Rule€3,Íafter€any€prior€summons€has€been€returned€unserved,€orÏin€the€event€that€such€prior€summons€has€not€been€re…turned€within€thirty€(30)€days€after€its€issuance.Ï(Emphasis€added).ÌÓÓ€Ìà àWe€will€begin€our€analysis€by€noting€that€the€œprocess€inÏquestion€here€is€leading€process€and€the€time€during€which€theÏperson€served€must€respond€is€thirty€days€from€the€service€ofÏprocess€on€an€original€complaint.€€Therefore,€any€€process€issuedÏon€an€original€complaint,€properly€served€and€returned€within€30Ïdays€of€service€is€valid€process€for€the€purpose€of€conferringÏpersonal€jurisdiction€upon€the€person€served.ÌÌà àWe€believe€that€under€the€pronouncements€of€our€SupremeÏCourt,€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€are€to€be€construed€in€theÏsame€way€and€manner€as€statutes€are€construed.ÌÌÓÓà8 àà à...€[W]e›€reject€out€of€hand€[the]€conclusion€thatÏthe€"Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€are€not€laws."ÏThese€rules,€along€with€the€Rules€of€Criminal€ProcedureÏand€the€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure,€are€"laws"€of€thisÏstate,€in€full€force€and€effect,€until€such€time€as€theyÏare€superseded€by€legislative€enactment€or€inconsistentÏrules€promulgated€by€this€Court€and€adopted€by€theÏGeneral€Assembly.€Any€other€construction€would€thwart,Ïfrustrate€and€emasculate€these€modern€and€progressiveÏrules€...€.ÌÌòòDepartment€of€Human€Services€v.€œVaughn›óó,€595€S.W.2d€62€(Tenn.Ï1980).ÌÌÓÓÌà àThe€familiar€rule€for€statutory€construction€is€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€cardinal€rule€of€Tennessee€statutory€interpre…tation€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€the€intent€andÏpurpose€of€the€Legislature€in€relation€to€the€subjectÏmatter€of€the€legislation,€€all€rules€of€constructionÏbeing€but€aids€to€that€end.€òòœRippeth›€v.€œConnelly›óó,€60ÏTenn.€App.€430,€447€S.W.2d€380,€381€(1969).€A€statuteÏmust€be€construed€so€as€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€toÏthe€intent€and€purpose€of€the€legislation,€consideringÏthe€statute€as€a€whole€and€giving€words€their€common€andÏordinary€meaning.€òòMarion€County€Board€of€CommissionersÏv.€Marion€County€Election€Commissionóó,€594€S.W.2d€681Ï(Tenn.€1980).€The€court€should€assume€that€the€Legisla…ture€used€each€word€in€the€statute€purposely€and€thatÏthe€use€of€these€words€conveyed€some€intent€and€had€aÏmeaning€and€purpose.€òòAnderson€Fish€&€Oyster€Company€v.ÏOldsóó,€197€Tenn.€604,€277€S.W.2d€344€(1955).€òòSee€alsoóóÏòòœCrowe›€v.€œFerguson›óó,€814€S.W.2d€721€(Tenn.€1991).€WhereÏthe€language€contained€within€the€four€corners€of€aÏstatute€is€plain,€clear,€and€unambiguous€and€the€enact…ment€is€within€legislative€competency,€"the€duty€of€theÏcourts€is€simple€and€obvious,€namely,€to€say€òòsic€lexÏscriptaóó€[the€law€is€so€written],€and€obey€it."€òòMiller€v.ÏœChildress›óó,€21€Tenn.€(2€Hum.)€320,€321„22€(1841).€ÌÌÓÓÌà àIn€addition€to€the€above€canons€of€construction,€we€must€alsoÏrecognize€that€it€is€the€court's€duty€to€reconcile€provisions€toÍgive€them€a€consistent€meaning€and€harmonize€the€purposes€of€each.€ÏòòœDingman›€v.€œHarvell›óó,€814€S.W.2d€362€(Tenn.€App.€1991);€òòKentucky„Tennessee€Clay€Co.€œv.›€œHuddleston›óó,€922€S.W.2d€539€(Tenn.€App.€œ1995.›€ÏIn€addition,€an€act€should€be€construed€in€òòpara€materiaóó€with€allÏother€acts€on€the€same€subject.€òòState€v.€œMcEwen›óó,€143€Tenn.€591,Ï224€S.W.€167€(1920).€ÌÌà àWe€are€convinced€by€our€reading€of€Rules€3€and€4€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,€that€the€two€rules€can€beÏreconciled€without€forced€or€subtle€construction€that€would€limitÏor€extend€the€meaning€of€the€language€contained€in€either.ÌÌà àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€Rules€3€and€4€address€differingÏconcepts€and€are€not€inconsistent€in€any€way.€€Rule€3€is€directedÏtoward€commencement€of€actions;€when€the€commencement€tolls€theÏstatute€of€limitations;€and€the€circumstances€under€which€theÏplaintiff€may€prevent€the€statute€of€limitations€from€running.€ÏThe€provisions€of€Rule€3€are€clear€and€unambiguous.€€Giving€theÏwords€their€natural€meaning,€if€process€is€not€returned€œwithin›€30Ïdays€from€issuance,€òòò òregardless€of€the€reasonóóó ó€the€plaintiffÍòòò òcannot€rely€upon€the€original€commencement€to€toll€theÏrunning€of€the€statute€of€limitationsóóó ó.€There€are€only€twoÏexceptions,€i.e.,€obtaining€new€process€within€6€months€or€recom…mencement€of€the€action€within€one€year€as€set€out€above€in€sub…paragraphs€(1)€and€(2)€of€Rule€3.€€This€proposition€seems€to€haveÏbeen€settled€by€our€Supreme€Court€in€òòAdams€v.€Carter€County€œMem›.ÏœHospóó.,›€548€S.W.2d€307€(Tenn.€1977),€wherein€the€court€stated:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àThe€Rules€plainly€contemplate€that€a€summons€willÏbe€either€served€within€thirty€days€after€its€issuanceÏor€returned€unserved€promptly€at€the€end€of€that€periodÏof€time.€They€contain€no€express€provision€to€govern€theÏsituation€presented€here,€in€which€the€summons€is€nei…ther€served€nor€returned€unserved€at€the€end€of€theÏthirty€day€period.€Nevertheless,€the€plaintiff€cannotÏsit€idly€by€when€confronted€with€such€a€situation.€WeÏhold€that€when€the€summons€is€not€returned€at€the€end€ofÏthirty€days€following€its€issuance,€the€plaintiff€mustÏapply€for€and€obtain€issuance€of€new€process€within€sixÏmonths,€or€recommence€the€action€within€one€year,€of€theÏend€of€said€thirty€days€period€in€order€to€preserve€theÏoriginal€commencement€of€the€action€as€a€bar€to€theÏrunning€of€a€statute€of€limitations.ÌÌòòAdamsóó,€page€309.€òòSee€Alsoóó€òòLittle€v.€œFranceschini›óó,€688€S.W.2d€91.ÌÌÓÓÌà àOn€the€other€hand,€Rule€4€addresses€the€way€and€manner€and€byÏwhom€process€may€be€served.€€It€seems€abundantly€clear€that€ifÍprocess€is€served€and€proper€return€is€made€as€provided€in€Rule€4,Ïthe€process€possesses€the€necessary€validity€to€bring€the€personÏserved€before€the€court€for€jurisdictional€purposes.€€œProcess›€œmayÏbe›€valid€under€Rule€4,€œbut€still›€insufficient€to€toll€the€statuteÏof€limitations€as€provided€by€Rule€3.€€Rule€4€is€in€no€way€intend…ed€to€toll€the€statute€of€limitations.€€Therefore,€even€if€serviceÏis€complete€and€valid€under€Rule€4,€if€the€requirements€of€Rule€3Ïhave€not€been€met,€the€statute€of€limitations€is€not€tolled.ÌÌà àWe€believe€that€this€interpretation€preserves€the€integrityÏand€efficacy€of€both€rules€without€doing€harm€to€either.€€ToÏinterpret€the€rules€differently€would€result€in€an€irreconcilableÏconflict€between€the€two€rules.€€It€is€this€Court's€duty€to€recon…cile€conflicting€provisions€to€give€them€a€consistent€meaning€andÏharmonize€the€purposes€of€each.€òòœDingman›€v.€œHarvell›óó,€supra,€andÏòòœHuddleston›óó,€supra.ÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€in€all€respects.€ÏCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant€and€sureties€andÏthe€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court.ÌÌÌÓÓà€ à______________________________Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Don€T.€McMurray,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌHerschel€P.€Franks,€Judgeà àÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌWilliam€H.€Inman,€Senior€JudgeÌÌÇœÑ  ÑÒ Ü ÒÒ ° ÒÑ ý ÑÑ7€ɶXXdÖXXdÖ7ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,ŠÔßJ€(.;+'b|` Å `€@ÿJß›€€€€à@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àEASTERN€SECTIONÌó óÌÌÌFIRST€TENNESSEE€BANK,€N.A.,à à)€C/A€NO.€03A01„9704„CH„00118Ìformerly€VALLEY€FIDELITY€BANKà à)ÌAND€TRUST€COMPANY,à àà à)€KNOX€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff„Appellant,à àà àà à)€HON.€DAVID€H.€CATE,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€CHANCELLORÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ì€à àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌW.P.€BOONE€DOUGHERTY,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant„Appellee.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòC€O€N€C€U€œR€R›€I€N€G€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÌÌà@ àÓÓà àà àà àFranks.€J.ÌÌà àà àI€have€concurred€in€Judge€McMurrayððs€opinion€which,€in€my€view,Ïproperly€applies€the€procedural€rules€to€this€case.€€I€write€separately,€however,Ïbecause€œI€strongly€believe€the€Rules›€should€œmake€court€procedures›€simple€andÏefficient.€€Rule€3,€T.R.C.P.€has€been€amended€several€times,€yet€in€my€view€it€remainsÏcomplex€and€contains€pitfalls€for€the€unwary.€€It€œretains›€some€of€the€complexities€ofÏthe€old€common€law€pleadings,€which€the€rules€were€designed€to€avoid.Ìà àà àIn€this€case€the€defendant€œhad›€ostensibly€evaded€service€of€process€onÏnumerous€occasions,€and€the€process€that€was€ultimately€served€upon€him€wasÏproperly€issued€and€served€within€thirty€days€of€issuance,€but€was€not€returnedÏwithin€thirty€days€of€issuance€as€Rule€3€requires€to€toll€the€statute€of€limitations.€€TheÏproblems€this€provision€creates€far€œoutweigh€any›€benefit€it€may€have.€€It€is€anÏanomaly€to€say€on€the€one€hand€the€you€have€thirty€days€to€serve€process,€but€onÏthe€other€to€say€process€has€to€be€returned€within€thirty€days.Ìà àà àI€believe€the€courts€and€litigants€would€be€better€served€if€Rules€3€andÏ4€were€revised€to€more€nearly€track€the€Federal€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€in€thisÏregard.ÌÌÌÓÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.ÌÌ̜Ԁ$ÔÔ€$XÔÌÌ›à@ àœ›