ÿWPC¶ 4# èU Dó %7 0(= 0”e4ù w@$d 0Dd D3¨U@Ûe 0D 0J`ƪ 0Tp AQÄ 0D 0^Y 0h· 0r 0|‘ 0† 0“ 1u# 0d˜ 0@ü B< D/Y Bˆ B)¥ DCÎ AM U*^ ݈ v~evÓã˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ8§ÖhZŠ,Century-WP RegularX($¡¡(D(2´¤$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóóäzz!3|xà º»¨e¼e½e¾E¿ÀeÁeÂÓ€Ã(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó&&&&'ÿÿdxd ɸ·`(ZapfCalligr BTTT(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  ÔƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$(Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó2, 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("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d**'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd% Line 7 d----7Border 1dd$.Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ÓÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  Ýò òÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ€0ÔÔ eee ÔFILEDÔ€0XÔó óÌò òÔ€0¼ÔÔ"USú ú, úÔÔ ƒ ÔÔ!  Ôó óÔ€0XÔÌÌò òCecil€Crowson,€Jr.Ô€Ôó óÔ  ÔÌÔ€ÂÔÔ€0ÔÔ eee Ôò òAppellate€Court€Clerkó óÔ  ÔÔ€ÔÔ€XÔPtPtHHÚ(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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑœÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌ______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌDARRYL€JONES,€as€survivingà àà àShelby€Circuit€No.€47678€T.D.Ìnext€of€kin€of€GOLDIE€JONES,à àà àC.A.€No.€02A01„9602„CV„00038̜ـÙÙ€ÙßR€/1.A1-j|!Šâ `€€@ÿRß›Deceased,Ìà àà àÌà àPlaintiff,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHon.€Robert€L.€ChildersÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌDANA€A.€WATSON€andÌSHEREE€WATSON,ÌÌà àDefendants.ÌÌERICH€W.€JAMES€and€GEORGE€E.€SKOUTERIS,€SR.,€Memphis,€Attorneys€forÏPlaintiff.ÌÌJOHN€D.€RICHARDSON€and€KEVIN€COMBS,€The€Richardson€Law€Firm,€Memphis,ÏAttorneys€for€Defendants.ÌÌò òòòREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDó óóóÌÌOpinion€filed:Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ó óà@ àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÓÓÔ€Ôà àDarryl€Jones€(hereafter€ð ðPlaintiffðð)€filed€suit€in€the€Circuit€Court€ofÏShelby€County€against€Dana€A.€Watson€and€Sheree€Watson€(hereafterÏð ðDefendantsðð)€to€recover€damages€for€the€wrongful€death€of€his€wife,ÏGoldie€Jones,€as€a€result€of€a€motor€vehicle€accident.€€Defendants€wereÍinsured€by€Allstate€Insurance€Company€(€hereafter€ð ðAllstateðð).€€AllstateÏultimately€entered€into€a€settlement€agreement€with€plaintiff€andÏpursuant€thereto€issued€not€one€but€two€consecutive€settlement€checks€toÏplaintiff.€€Because€the€son€of€the€deceased€wife€incorrectly€filed€aÏwrongful€death€action€on€his€own€behalf,€plaintiff€was€prevented€fromÏconsummating€the€settlement€agreement€with€Allstate.€€Some€three€yearsÏafter€plaintiffððs€suit€had€been€filed,€defendants€filed€a€motion€to€dismissÏon€the€grounds€that€plaintiff€had€failed€to€comply€with€Rules€3€and€4ÏT.R.C.P.€in€that€defendants€had€not€been€served€with€process,€nor€had€anÏalias€summons€been€issued,€nor€had€the€action€been€recommenced€withinÏone€year€of€the€date€of€the€issuance€of€the€original€process,€thusÏplaintiffððs€claim€was€barred€by€the€one€year€statute€of€limitations.€€TheÏtrial€court€granted€the€defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss.€€The€sole€issueÏpresented€by€plaintiff€on€appeal€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€soÏdoing.€€We€find€that€it€did€and€reverse.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€facts€are€really€not€in€dispute.€€Goldie€Jones€was€involved€inÏautomobile€accident€with€a€vehicle€driven€by€Dana€A.€Watson.€€She€laterÏdied€from€injuries€received€in€that€accident.€€Her€husband,€plaintiff€herein,Ïfiled€suit€against€Dana€A.€Watson€and€her€employer,€Sheree€Watson,Ïseeking€to€recover€damages€for€the€wrongful€death€of€his€wife.€€TheÍvehicle€being€driven€by€Dana€Watson€was€registered€in€Sheree€WatsonððsÏname.€€This€vehicle€was€insured€by€Allstate.€€After€plaintiff€learned€thatÏhis€wife€was€on€or€about€her€employerððs€business€at€the€time€of€theÏaccident,€he€also€filed€a€workerððs€compensation€death€claim€againstÏGeneral€Accident€Insurance€Company€of€America€(ð ðGeneral€Accidentðð),Ïdefendant€Sheree€Watsonððs€workerððs€compensation€carrier.€€ÌÑ7€]IXXdðXXdð7ÑÓÓÌÓÓà àGeneral€Accident€accepted€the€deceased€wifeððs€claim€as€aÏcompensable€one,€and€paid€all€medical€expenses.€€General€Accident€at€thatÏtime€refused€to€pay€compensation€death€benefits€on€the€ground€thatÏplaintiff€was€not€a€dependent.€€Later,€in€September€1991,€plaintiffÏascertained€that€defendants€had€no€other€assets€out€of€which€a€wrongfulÏdeath€claim€could€be€satisfied€and€agreed€to€settle€with€Allstate€for€theÏpolicy€limits€of€twenty„five€thousand€dollars€($25,000.00).€€In€that€sameÏmonth€Allstate€issued€the€first€of€two€settlement€checks€in€the€amount€ofÏtwenty„five€thousand€dollars€($25,000.00)€to€plaintiff€with€the€notationÏð ðFinal€Settlement€of€Any€and€All€Bodily€Injury€Claims€Arising€FromÏAccident€on€8/6/91."ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àShortly€thereafter,€General€Accident€advised€plaintiff€that€theyÏwould€be€defending€the€workerððs€compensation€death€claim€brought€byÍplaintiff€and€that€plaintiff€should€refrain€from€compromising€any€claimÏthat€plaintiff€might€have€against€defendants€that€could€affect€GeneralÏAccidentððs€right€of€subrogation.€€Because€of€this,€plaintiff€was€preventedÏfrom€giving€Allstate€a€complete€release€regarding€the€accident€claim.€€AsÏof€this€time€General€Accident€had€not€ascertained€that€defendants€were,€inÏeffect,€ð ðjudgment€proofðð,€and€did€not€have€any€assets€from€which€GeneralÏAccident€might€seek€reimbursement€for€any€funds€paid€by€it€to€plaintiff€asÏa€result€of€this€accident.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àIn€addition,€General€Accident€was€contesting€plaintiffððs€suit€againstÏit€wherein€he€sought€workerððs€compensation€death€benefits.€€In€thatÏcontested€litigation,€the€trial€court€found€that€plaintiff€was€indeed€aÏdependent€of€wife€and€was€entitled€to€thirty„five€dollars€and€ninety€oneÏcents€($35.91)€per€week€for€four€hundred€weeks.€€In€the€workerððsÏcompensation€case,€plaintiff€appealed€to€the€Supreme€Court€the€issue€ofÏwhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€limiting€his€benefits€to€only€four€hundredÏweeks.€€During€the€course€of€this€litigation,€General€Accident€repeatedlyÏadvised€counsel€for€plaintiff€that€plaintiff€should€not€compromise€anyÏpossible€subrogation€claim€that€it,€General€Accident,€might€have€againstÏAllstate.€€As€a€result€plaintiff€was€further€precluded€from€executingÍsettlement€papers€with€Allstate€concerning€its€offer.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àIn€May€1992,€inasmuch€as€the€original€check€given€plaintiff€byÏAllstate€in€settlement€of€plaintiffððs€claim€had€not€been€negotiated€priorÏto€its€date€of€expiration,€Allstate€issued€a€second€check,€also€with€aÏmaturity€date€of€six€months,€to€plaintiff€for€its€policy€limits€of€twenty„five€thousand€dollars€($25,000.00).€€We€will€have€more€to€say€about€thisÏlater.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThereafter,Ô€Ô€our€Supreme€Court€reversed€the€trial€court€in€theÏworkerððs€compensation€proceeding,€and€held€that€plaintiff€was€entitled€toÏthe€maximum€benefits€of€one€hundred€seventeen€thousand,€six€hundredÏdollars€($117,600.00),€and€was€not€limited€to€a€four€hundred€weekÏcompensation€period.€€(òòSee€Jones€v.€General€Accident€Ins.€Co.€of€Americaóó,Ï856€S.W.2d€133€(Tenn.€1993)).€€Upon€reaching€the€conclusion€thatÏdefendants€had€few€if€any€assets€upon€which€General€Accident€might€levyÏan€execution,€General€Accident€advised€plaintiff€that€he€could€proceed€andÏfinalize€his€settlement€with€Allstate,€including€the€execution€of€anyÏreleases.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€previously€filed€wrongful€death€action€filed€by€the€deceasedÍwifeððs€son€(hereafter€ð ðPolkðð)€had€placed€Allstate€in€a€predicament€as€toÏwhether€to€pay€plaintiff€or€Polk.€€Notwithstanding€the€fact€that€in€MayÏ1992€Allstate€had€issued€its€second€check€to€plaintiff€in€an€effort€toÏsettle€this€wrongful€death€claim,€in€November€1992,€Allstate€wroteÏletters€to€the€attorneys€representing€plaintiff,€Polk€and€General€Accident,Ïwhereby€it€proposed€to€pay€the€twenty„five€thousand€dollars€($25,000.00)Ïinto€court€in€exchange€for€a€full€release€from€all€three€parties.€€This€moveÏwas€unsuccessful.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àSometime€thereafter,€Allstate€filed€its€motion€for€summaryÏjudgment€against€Polk€and€a€motion€to€dismiss€against€plaintiff€in€orderÏto€bring€this€matter€to€closure.€€The€trial€court€treated€Allstateððs€motionÏagainst€plaintiff€as€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€which€wasÏsubsequently€granted.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àDefendant€contends€that€plaintiff€failed€to€comply€with€theÏprovisions€of€Rule€3€T.R.C.P.,€specifically€as€it€pertains€to€the€issuance€ofÏnew€process€in€a€timely€manner,€after€it€had€been€determined€that€thereÏwas€no€service€of€original€process,€and€having€failed€to€do€so€resulted€inÏplaintiffððs€claim€being€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations.€€TheÏprovisions€of€Rule€3€as€it€existed€at€the€time€this€action€was€filed€is€asÍfollows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àAll€civil€actions€are€commenced€by€filing€a€complaint€with€theÏCourt.€€An€action€is€commenced€within€the€meaning€of€anyÏstatute€of€limitations€upon€such€a€filing€of€a€complaint,Ïwhether€process€be€returned€served€or€unserved;€but€if€theÏprocess€is€not€served€or€not€returned€within€30€days€fromÏissuance,€regardless€of€the€reason,€plaintiff,€if€he€wishes€toÏrely€upon€the€original€commencement€as€a€bar€to€the€running€ofÏthe€statute€of€limitations,€must€either€prosecute€and€continueÏthe€action€by€applying€for€or€obtaining€issuance€of€new€processÏfrom€time€to€time,€each€new€process€to€be€obtained€within€sixÏmonths€from€issuance€of€the€previous€one,€or€plaintiff€mustÏrecommence€the€action€within€one€year€from€the€issuance€ofÏthe€initial€process€not€served€or€not€returned€within€30€daysÏfrom€issuance.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€record€reflects€that€plaintiffððs€wife€was€injured€in€theÏautomobile€accident€in€question€on€August€6,€1991€and€died€from€theÏinjuries€sustained€therein€some€four€days€later.€€Following€employment€byÏplaintiff€in€that€same€month,€counsel€for€plaintiff€began€negotiations€withÏAllstate,€defendantððs€insurer,€in€late€August,€1991.€€At€that€time,€AllstateÏfurnished€plaintiffððs€counsel€with€a€copy€of€the€defendantððs€policyÏdeclaration€with€Allstate€showing€coverage€in€the€amount€of€$25,000.€€InÏlate€September€1991,€plaintiff€and€Allstate€agreed€to€settle€the€wrongfulÏdeath€action€for€Allstateððs€policy€limits€of€$25,000.€€Allstate€issued€aÏcheck€to€plaintiff€and€his€counsel€dated€September€30,€1991Ô€Ô€in€the€amountÍof€$25,000,€that€stated€on€its€face:€ð ðIn€Payment€of€Final€Settlement€ofÏAny€and€All€Bodily€Injury€Claims€Arising€From€Accident€on€8/6/91.ðð€€ThisÏcheck€also€provided€on€its€face€that€it€was€void€if€not€presented€withinÏone€hundred€eighty€days€of€the€date€of€issuance.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àOn€April€22,€1992€Allstate€issued€another€check€for€$25,000€payableÏto€plaintiff€and€his€counsel.€€The€purpose€of€issuing€this€check€containedÏon€its€face€the€same€language€as€the€earlier€check€of€September,€1991.€ÏDuring€this€same€period,€General€Accident€continued€to€refuse€to€releaseÏdefendants€and€Allstate€on€its€subrogation€claim.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àOn€July€27,€1992€Allstate,€on€its€fax€stationery,€sent€plaintiffððsÏcounsel€a€message€regarding€the€ð ðGoldie€Jonesðð€claim,€from€ð ðVickieÏHarris,€Allstate€Claims.ðð€€The€message€read€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àð ðGeorge,€This€note€confirms€that€Goldie€Jones€claim€wasÏsettled€for€bodily€injury€in€the€amt€of€$25,000.00.€€The€checkÏwas€written€on€4/22/92.€€It€is€good€until€10/22/92.€€If€youÏneed€it€reissued€after€that€date,€let€me€know.€(s)Vickie€HarrisððÌÌÌÓÓà àTwo€days€later,€on€July€29,€1992,€within€one€year€of€the€date€of€theÏfatal€accident,€plaintiffððs€counsel€filed€a€wrongful€death€action€on€behalfÏof€plaintiff€against€defendants€Watson.€€Process€was€issued€that€sameÍdate€for€Sheree€Watson.€€It€was€returned€by€the€Sheriffððs€Department€ofÏShelby€County€ð ðnot€foundðð€on€August€20,€1992.€€There€is€nothing€in€theÏrecord€to€indicate€that€an€alias€summons€was€issued€thereafter.€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àIn€òòSparks€v.€Metro€Government€of€Nashville€and€Davidson€Countyóó,€771ÏS.W.2d€430€(Tenn.€App.€1989),€and€relied€upon€by€defendants,€this€courtÏdiscussed€the€applicability€of€the€doctrine€of€equitable€estoppel€whenÏapplied€to€the€statute€of€limitations.€€The€court€therein€stated:ÌÓÓÌà8 àWhere€by€promises€or€appearances€one€party€is€induced€toÏbelieve€that€the€other€party€is€going€to€pay€a€claim€orÏotherwise€satisfy€the€claims€of€the€first€party,€and€in€relianceÏon€that€representation€the€first€party€delays€filing€suit€withinÏthe€applicable€statute€of€limitations,€the€party€making€theÏrepresentations€may€be€estopped€to€raise€the€statute€ofÏlimitations€as€a€defense.€€òòId.óó€at€433.ÌÌà@ à****ÌÌà8 àThe€doctrine€[of€equitable€estoppel]€is,€of€course,€most€clearlyÏapplicable€where€the€aggrieved€partiesðð€delay€in€bringing€suitÏwas€caused€by€his€opponentððs€intentional€misrepresentation;Ïbut€deceit€is€not€an€essential€element€of€estoppel.€€It€isÏsufficient€that€the€aggrieved€party€reasonably€relied€on€theÏwords€and€conduct€of€the€person€to€be€estopped€in€allowing€theÏlimitations€period€to€expire.€€òòId.óó€at€433.€€òòQuotingóó€òòCity€ofÏBedford€v.€James€Leffel€&€Co.óó,€558€F.2d€216,€218€(4th€Cir.Ï1977).ÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòSparksóó,€the€court€found€that€an€essential€element,€that€ofÍreliance,€was€missing,€noting€that€plaintiff€had€rejected€multiple€offersÏmade€by€defendant€to€complete€the€repair€work€done€on€plaintiffððs€house.€ÏThe€court€stated:€ð ðWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€[plaintiff]€cannot€reject€anÏoffer€of€completion€of€the€contract€and€then€say€that€she€relied€on€thatÏpromise€to€her€detriment.ðð€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àIn€the€case€under€consideration€the€facts€are€substantially€different.€ÏThis€record€clearly€demonstrates€that€Allstate€issued€its€check€toÏplaintiff€and€his€counsel€for€the€full€amount€of€its€policy€limits€with€itsÏinsured€defendant€indicating€thereon€that€it€was€in€full€payment€of€GoldieÏJonesðð€claim€against€the€Allstate€insured€as€a€result€of€this€accident.€ÏSuch€a€check€was€issued€not€once,€but€twice.€€In€addition,€an€AllstateÏclaims€representative€confirmedÔ€Ô€by€letter€not€that€negotiations€wereÏcontinuing,€but€that€a€settlement€had€in€fact€been€made€and€in€additionÏthereto,€offered€to€reissue€the€check€in€the€future€should€the€then€currentÏcheck€not€be€negotiated€prior€to€the€deadline€stated€thereon.€€There€isÏnothing€in€this€record€in€the€way€of€affidavits€or€otherwise€on€the€part€ofÏAllstate€indicating€that€settlement€negotiations€were€still€ongoing.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àIt€appears€to€this€court€that€almost€four€years€after€the€initialÏsettlement€check€was€issued€by€Allstate,€it€sought€to€play€the€game€ofÍð ðGotchaðð,€in€filing€and€pursuing€to€conclusion€its€motion€to€dismiss.€€WeÏare€of€the€opinion€that€defendants€under€these€facts€are€equitablyÏestopped€from€asserting€that€plaintiffððs€cause€of€action€is€barred€by€theÏapplicable€statute€of€limitations€for€failure€to€comply€with€the€provisionsÏof€Rules€3€and€4€T.R.C.P..€€ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€dismissing€plaintiffððsÏcause€of€action€against€defendants€is€reversed.€€This€cause€is€remanded€toÏthe€Circuit€Court€of€Shelby€County€for€further€proceedings€notÏinconsistent€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€defendants,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô€Ôà àÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCRAWFORD,€P.€J.à àà à(CONCURS)ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHIGHERS,€J.à àà àà à(CONCURS)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ