WPCI  0~V 0x 0kL 0k 0" 0~ 0: 0 0 0 0  0 01 0C 0V( 0~ 0M 0 0 0X 0 0 0 0KUB %0 0z6 0 1 0 r 0= 0F 0P 1V 0 0O$#Es# 0}u# 0x# 0j$ 0j$ 0ea% 0W% 0W& 0t& 0j& 0b' 0( 0( 0w) 0X* 0L+ 0S, 0-m- 0@. 0/ 00 0#1 01 0^2 03 03 0l4 04 15?6nO6 046 B074M7 0a7^7 0J\88 0@N9 D39w@9 0J: 0TK: 0^: 0h: 0re; 0|; 0S< 0< 1ui=U,= 0d >U,n>U6>B)>DC> AM<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@( T$   dv $(G.29$ FT!   dXX     0  MARVINBERKELESLIEMcWILLIAMS($   0  PRYORJACKSBOROCOKERPearsonGarrettParrish InsS.E.2d W.Va("$    GGGG'dxd *+E,-e.D/U0D12U3Ӏ2 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  WXYZ[\]^ ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 djjjj7Border 1ddMkC << G<  9p`(Arial " F!  #d#`i  mm   YYY FILEDmX June13,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.mAppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco MC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd F! . `&hhXd&#hhXd#i    ћ7OXXdd7\RA'\ `    , 5  j u` ќLlnk;+'h|`  `Lߛ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTIONBENNYGREEN,d/b/a@ ) CAMPBELLCOUNTYK.B.STAVESCOMPANY@ ) 03A019512CV00445 @ ) PlaintiffAppellant@ )@ )@ ) v.@ ) HON.CONRADTROUTMAN, @ ) JUDGÈ@ ) KYLEA.JUSTICE @ )@ ) DefendantAppellant@ )@ )ULTIMATEMANUFACTURING,INC.@ )@ )  Defendant   @ ) VACATEDANDREMANDED VICTORPRYOROFJACKSBOROFORKYLEA.JUSTICEJOSEPHG.COKEROFJACKSBOROFORBENNYGREEN@ OPINION         Goddard,P.J.  BennyGreen,d/b/aK.B.StavesCompany,suesKyleA.Justice,assigneeoftherightsofUltimateManufacturing,Inc.,astoacertaininstrumentdenominatedapurchaseagreement(seeAppendixA)andUltimateManufacturing,Inc.Thesuitsoughtdamagestotaling$25,000becauseoftheDefendants'failuretoreimburseMr.Green$2000,whichtheyhadpromised,aswellasfortheirfailuretopayforfirewoodsoldtotheDefendants.Curiously,thesuitalsosoughtadeclarationthat"nodefiniteorenforceablecontractwaseverenteredintobetweentheparties.̛̜  Afteraveritableavalancheofmotionswithattachedexhibitswerefiled,theTrialJudgeenteredanorderonSeptember21,1995,whichstatedinpartthefollowing:     (1) AllpartiesareproperlybeforetheCourtandallissuesbetweenthePartiesareherebyaddressedinthisOrder. (2)ThattheCourtDeclaresthatthedocumententitled"PurchaseAgreement"datedMarch12,1994,attachedasExhibitOne(1)totheoriginalComplaintheretoforefiledinthiscause,isvagueandislackinginsomanyoftheessentialrequirementsofanenforceablecontractthatthecontractisherebydeclaredasnullandvoid,acopyofwhichdocumentisattachedasExhibitOne(1)heretoandisincorporatedhereinbyreferenceascompletelyandfullyasifcopiedverbatim. (3)TheCourtDeclares,baseduponthepleadings,theexhibits,thedocumentsintheCourtfile,andthestatementsbyandonbehalfoftherespectivepartiesortheircounselinthevariousCourthearingswhichhavebeenheldpertainingtothiscase,andtheentirerecordinthiscause,thatthedocumententitled"PurchaseAgreement"datedMarch12,1994,referencedinParagraphTwo(2)above,wasnotavalidcontract,andtheCourtDeclaresthatnoenforceablecontracteverexisted. (4)TheCourtfurtherfindsthateachpartyiscontendingthatcertainoftheotherpartiesbreachedthesaiddocumententitled"PurchaseAgreement"datedMarch12,1994,referencedinParagraphTwo(2)above;however,inlightoftheDeclaratoryJudgmentoftheCourtassetforthabove,theCourtherebydismissesallactionsbetweentherespectiveparties,exceptastothefindingsandholdingsherein.      Parenthetically,wenotethat,althoughtheDefendantsfilednumerousmotions,theyneveransweredthecomplaintnorϜsofarasweareabletodiscernfiledanycountercomplaint.  UltimateManufacturingdidnotappealtheTrialCourt'sruling,butbothMr.GreenandMr.Justicedid.  Mr.Justice'ssingleissueonappealinsiststheTrialCourtwasinerrorinfindingthatthecontractwasunenforceablebecauseitlackedtheessentialelementsrequiredforavalidcontract.  Mr.Greenappeals,raisinganumberofissues,mostofwhichresistMr.Justice'sappeal.(SeeAppendixB).  Beforeaddressingtheissuesonappeal,wenotethatMr.GreenhasmovedtodismissMr.Justice'sappeal,andhasalsomovedthatweconsidercertainpostjudgmentfacts.Weareoftheopinionthesemotionsarenotwelltakenandtheyareaccordinglydenied.̀  AcontracthasbeensuccinctlydefinedbyourSupremeCourtasanagreementuponsufficientconsiderationtodoornotdoaparticularthing.Smithv.PickwickElectricCooperative,212Tenn.62,367S.W.2d775(1963);Johnsonv.CentralNationalInsuranceCo.OfOmaha,Nebraska,210Tenn.24,356S.W.2d277(1962).  ThecontractinquestionspecificallyprovidesthatMr.GreenwillfurnishUltimateManufacturing,Mr.Justice'sassignor,firewoodmeetingcertainspecificationsforacertainpriceifdelivered,andanotherpriceifpickedup.Themutualpromisesofthepartiestothecontractprovidessufficientconsideration.Pearsonv.GarrettFinancialServices,849S.W.2d776(Tenn.App.1992);BillWalker&Associatesv.Parrish,770S.W.2d764(Tenn.App.1989).  Whileweconcedethatthepurchaseagreementisnotamodelofcontractdrafting,itdoesmeettherequirementshereinbeforenoted.  Inconclusionastothispoint,weobservethatwhencounselforMr.Greenwasaskedinoralargumentwhythequestioneddocumentwasnotavalidcontract,hewasunabletosuggestanyreason.  Counsel'sbriefisnomoreenlightening,suggestingthattheconclusoryallegationsofthecomplaintmustbetakenastruebecausenotdenied:    (C) Thatnodefiniteorenforceablecontractwasenteredintoandbetweentheparties(Rpage4,par.9).(SEEABSENCEOFDENIALINTHERECORD).(D) Thattherewasneverameetingofthemindsbetweentheparties(Rpage4,par.9).(SEEABSENCEOFDENIALINTHERECORD).(E) Thattherewasnomutualassentbetweentheparties(Rpage4,par.9).(SEEABSENCEOFDENIALINTHERECORD).(F) Thattherewasamutualmistakeoffact,eachpartyassentingtoadifferentagreement(Rpage4,par.9).(SEEABSENCEOFDENIALINTHERECORD).      AlthoughwefindnoauthorityinthisStatespecificallyonpoint,thereisauthorityfromsisterstatesthatfailuretoappearandansweradeclaratoryjudgmentsuitdoesnotentitleaplaintifftoajudgmentbasedupontheconclusorypleadingsofthecomplaint.St.PaulMercuryIns.Co.v.NationwideMutualIns.Co.,161S.E.2d694(S.Ct.ofAppealsofVa.1961);Hallv.Hartley,119S.E.2d759(S.Ct.OfAppealsofW.Va.1961).  Weaccordinglyvacatethejudgmentfindingavalidcontracthadnotbeenexecuted.  WenowturntotheissuesraisedbyMr.Green:@ IssueOne EvenifMr.JusticehadnotappealedhewouldbeentitledtoraiseissuesbyvirtueofMr.Green'sappeal.Rule13(a),TennesseeRulesofAppellateProcedure.@ IssueTwo Althoughitistruethecontractprovidedthatitsdurationwasoneyear"withtherightofrenewalforbothparties,"anditisalsotruethereisnoproofintherecordtosuggesteitherpartyexercisedtherighttorenew,Mr.Justiceneverthelesswouldbeentitledtoanydamageshemightprovebyreasonofbreachofthecontractfromitsinception,April1,1994,throughMay31,1995.@ IssueThree  EventhoughnoanswerwasfiledbyMr.Justice,Mr.GreenisnotentitledtojudgmentwithoutfirstapplyingforadefaultjudgmentandfollowingtheproceduresfornotificationmandatedbyRule55oftheTennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure.@ IssueFour  Itdoesnotappearthatanytestimonywasintroducedotherthanbyaffidavitsandexhibitsthereto,andinthecaseofissueone,weareinclinedinthecontextofthiscasetopermitMr.JusticetorelyuponthefactssetoutinMr.Green'sbrief.@ IssueFive  WefindtherecordadequateinsofarasthevalidityofthecontracttoaffordthereliefMr.Justicemightappropriatelypleadandprove.@ IssueSix  ThisissuehaspreviouslybeenansweredadverselytoMr.Green'scontention.@ IssueSeven  Inlightofourdispositionofthisappeal,damagesforafrivolousappealwill,ofcourse,bedenied.@ IssueEight    WeagreewithMr.Greenthatthejudgmentofdismissalshouldbevacatedinordertoallowhimtoproveanydamageshemayhavesuffered.̀  FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtisvacatedandthecauseremandedforfurtherproceedingsnotinconsistentwiththisopinion.CostsofappealareadjudgedonehalfagainstMr.GreenandonehalfagainstMr.Justice.̜ӛ      _______________________________      HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.CONCUR:________________________________HerschelP.Franks,J.________________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.̜