ÿWPCi …# VUFa %§ 0@­4í  w@ P 0JX 0T¢ 0^ö 0hT 0r¼ 0|. 0†ª 00 1uÀ 0d5 U6™ B)Ï DCø AM; BˆU*¥1Ïv~vÓ~ D3Q 0@„ AOÄÆ 0DÙ D/ BL˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 <¾½Q 9Z ‹.Courier New RegularX(ù$¡¡Ó  ÓÓ  Ó·‚^!¡Ó 3|xV BDCDEFDGeHIDJÓ€V2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d< Œ 9p`(Arial 'Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òNovember€20,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  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  ÑÑ7€ùìXXdÖXXdÖ7Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÙ€€ÙßL€$'#;+'h|½Ã` Å `€€LßWINSTON€T.€KNOWLES€and€LINDA€€€€)à àHAMILTON€CHANCERYÌKNOWLES,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àC.A.€NO.€03A01„9606„CH„00209Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiffs„Appellants€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àHON.€R.€VANN€OWENSÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àCHANCELLORÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€CHATEM,€€€€€)à àAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌINCORPORATED,€PHILIP€E.€COX€€€€€)Ìand€EMILY€B.€COX,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Defendants„Appelees€€€)ÌÌÌÌÌJOHN€C.€CAVETT,€JR.,€Cavett€&€Abbott,€Chattanooga,€for€Appellants.ÌÌÌDAVID€W.€NORTON,€and€WM.€SHELLEY€PARKER,€JR.,€Chattanooga,€forÏAppellees.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓà@ àòòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌà€ àMcMurray,€J.ÌÌà àThis€action€was€originally€filed€against€the€defendantsÏlisted€in€the€caption.€€The€complaint€was€later€amended,€however,Ïand€The€City€of€Chattanooga€and€Hamilton€County€were€added€asÏdefendants€and€the€defendant,€State€of€Tennessee€was€dismissedÏfrom€the€action.€€The€complaint€sought€to€have€a€tax€sale€ofÏcertain€properties€claimed€by€the€plaintiffs€set€aside.€€The€trialÏcourt€denied€relief.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àThe€sole€issue€presented€in€this€appeal€is€whether€there€wasÏproper€service€of€process€on€the€plaintiffs€before€the€propertyÏwas€sold.ÌÌà àThe€plaintiffs€were€the€owners€of€several€tracts€of€landÏlocated€in€Chattanooga€and€Hamilton€County€which€were€ordered€soldÏfor€delinquent€taxes€by€the€chancery€court.€Included€were€theÏtracts€which€are€the€subject€of€this€action.€€The€properties€aboutÍwhich€the€plaintiffs€complain€are€Lot€3,€Rawlings€Subdivision€andÏLot€3,€Chattanooga€Medicine€Company.ÌÌà àThe€plaintiffs€here€were€named€defendants€in€the€chanceryÏcourt€suit.€€The€plaintiffs€did€not€respond€to€the€complaint€and€aÏdefault€judgment€was€entered€against€them.€€The€property€in€ques…tion€was€then€offered€for€sale€pursuant€to€an€order€of€the€chan…cery€court.€€The€City€of€Chattanooga€and€Hamilton€County€purchasedÏboth€parcels.€€The€plaintiffs€failed€to€exercise€their€right€ofÏredemption€within€the€time€permitted€by€law.€€Thereafter,€the€CityÏof€Chattanooga€and€Hamilton€County€conveyed€Lot€3,€Rawlings€Subdi…vision€to€the€defendants,€Philip€E.€Cox€and€Emily€B.€Cox.€€Lot€No.Ï3,€Chattanooga€Medicine€Company€was€conveyed€to€Chatem,€Incorpo…rated.ÌÌà àIt€is€insisted€by€the€plaintiffs€that€the€plaintiff,€Ms.ÏKnowles,€was€not€properly€served€with€process€as€to€either€tract.€ÏMr.€Knowles€insists€that€he€was€not€served€with€proper€process€on€ÏLot€No.€3,€Chattanooga€Medicine€Company.ÌÌà àService€of€process€in€delinquent€tax€suits€is€controlled€byÏT.C.A.€ðð€67„5„215€which€provides€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:ÌÌÓÓà8 àò ò67„5„2415.€Notice€to€taxpayer€of€suitó ó.€ð"ð€(a)€TheÏdefendant,€when€served€in€any€manner€according€to€theÏRules€of€Civil€Procedure,€either€by€mail€or€in€person,Ïdoes€not€have€to€be€served€with€a€copy€of€the€complaintÏand€exhibit€and€instead,€the€clerk€may€issue€a€notice€toÏaccompany€the€summons.ÌÌà8 àà à(b)€€The€notice€shall€identify€the€suit€mentionedÏin€the€summons€sufficiently€to€enable€the€taxpayer€toÏknow€what€delinquent€taxes€the€taxpayer€is€being€suedÏfor€and€what€property€is€being€subject€to€the€lien.ÌÌà8 àà à(c)€€The€summons€and€notice€may€be€for€more€thanÏone€(1)€suit€where€suits€have€been€consolidated.ÌÌà8 àà à(d)€€Constructive€service€of€process€shall€be€madeÏas€now€provided€by€law.Ì€Ìà8 àà à(e)€€In€all€counties,€personal€service€of€processÏon€the€defendant€may€be€dispensed€with€and€the€summonsÏand€notice€may€be€sent€by€certified€or€registered€mail,Ïreturn€receipt€requested.Ì€Ìà8 àà à(1)€The€return€of€the€receipt€signed€by€the€defen…dant,€spouse,€or€other€person€deemed€appropriate€toÏreceive€summons€or€notice€as€provided€for€in€the€RulesÏof€Civil€Procedure,€or€its€return€marked€"refused,"Ïevidenced€by€appropriate€notation€of€such€fact€by€theÏpostal€authorities,€and€filed€as€a€part€of€the€record€byÏthe€clerk,€with€notation€on€the€docket€of€the€trueÏfacts,€shall€be€evidence€of€personal€notice.ÌÌà8 àà à(2)€In€the€event€the€return€receipt€does€not€estab…lish€that€it€was€signed€by€the€defendant€or€the€defen…dant's€authorized€agent€or€that€the€notice€was€refused,Ïthen€the€court€may€find€through€independent€proof€thatÏthe€defendant€had€actual€notice€in€compliance€withÏnotice€requirements.Ì€Ìà8 àà à(3)€If€the€court€does€not€find€that€the€defendantÏhad€actual€notice,€it€may€order€such€other€and€furtherÏaction€to€be€taken€to€give€the€defendant€notice.ÌÌÓÓÌà àThe€appellant€insists€that€this€case€involves€only€an€issueÏof€law€and€concludes€that€our€standard€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€with…out€any€presumption€of€correctness.€€Since€there€are€no€disputedÏmaterial€facts€regarding€Lot€No.€3€of€Rawlings€Subdivision,€weÏagree€that€the€issue€may€be€disposed€of€as€a€matter€of€law.€TheÏresolution€of€the€service€of€process€issue€relative€to€Lot€No.€3,ÏChattanooga€Medicine€Company,€however,€was€based€upon€findings€ofÏfact€by€the€trial€court.€€Therefore,€our€standard€of€review,€as€toÏthat€tract,€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record,€accompanied€by€a€presump…tion€of€correctness€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€ÏRule€13(d),€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.ÌÌà àAs€to€Lot€No.€3,€Rawlings€Subdivision,€service€was€attemptedÏby€certified€mail,€return€receipt€requested.€€A€summons€and€noticeÏaddressed€to€"Knowles,€Winston€T.€&€Linda€was€issued€and€mailedÍ"certified€mail,€return€receipt€requested."€€The€plaintiff,€Mr.ÏKnowles,€received€the€summons€and€notice€and€signed€the€receipt.ÏMrs.€Knowles€argues€that€since€she€was€not€signatory€to€the€re…ceipt€for€the€mail€and€did€not€individually€receive€a€notice,€sheÏwas€not€served.€€We€respectfully€disagree.€€"The€return€of€theÏreceipt€signed€by€the€...€spouse€...€shall€be€evidence€of€personalÏnotice."€€òòSeeóó€T.C.A.€ðð€67„5„2415€above.€€Further,€Rule€4.03€pro…vides€that€"[i]f€the€return€receipt€is€signed€by€the€defendant,€òòorÏby€a€person€designated€...€by€statuteóó,€service€on€the€defendant€isÏcomplete.€€(Emphasis€added).€€Since€T.C.A.€ðð€67„5„2415€specifical…ly€designates€a€spouse€as€a€person€who€may€sign€a€receipt€andÏwhose€signature€shall€consitute€evidence€of€personal€service,€weÏare€of€the€opinion€that€the€service€of€a€summons€and€notice€wasÏcomplete€as€to€both€plaintiffs€on€Lot€No.€3,€Rawlings€Subdivision.€ÏWe€find€no€error€in€dismissing€the€suit€against€the€defendants,ÏPhilip€E.€Cox€and€Emily€B.€Cox.ÌÌà àAs€to€Lot€No.€3,€Chattanooga€Medicine€Company,€an€evidentiaryÏhearing€was€held€by€the€chancellor.€€At€the€conclusion€of€theÍtrial,€the€court€found€that€the€plaintiffs€had€been€properlyÏserved€and€accordingly,€the€plaintiff's€action€was€dismissed.ÌÌà àThe€record€reflects€that€the€plaintiffs€were€the€owners€of€20Ïto€25€parcels€of€land€in€Hamilton€County.€€Property€taxes€were€notÏtimely€paid€on€several€of€the€parcels.€€The€plaintiff,€Mr.€KnowlesÏadknowledges€receiving€ten€or€twelve€summons€concerning€the€taxÏsale.€€He€admitted€receiving€a€summons€on€his€home€and€signing€aÏreceipt€for€the€certified€mail.€€He€denied,€however,€that€heÏreceived€a€summons€on€the€Chattanooga€Medicine€Company€property.€ÏHe€specifically€denied€that€the€summons€was€contained€in€theÏenvelope€in€which€the€summons€on€his€residence€was€dispatched€toÏhim.€€He€further€admitted,€however,€that€he€had€other€parcels€ofÏland€in€the€sale,€that€he€attended€the€sale,€and€he€redeemed€someÏof€the€properties.€€He€admitted€that€he€received€a€copy€of€aÏmotion€for€a€default€judgment€in€the€tax€suit.€€In€response€to€aÏquestion€asked€on€cross€examination€Mr.€Knowles€stated:€€"...€theÏdefault€judgment€is€not€invalid.€€I€still€stipulate€I€owe€theÏtaxes.€€I€intended€to€pay€them€before€the€redemption€period€was€upÏand€that's€where€things€went€wrong."ÌÌà àAdditionally,€Mr.€Knowles€admitted€receiving€a€letter€from€aÏtenant€advising€him€that€the€property€was€being€acquired€by€Hamil…ton€County.€€He€also€acknowledged€receiving€a€letter€from€Ms.ÏRebecca€Browder,€Real€Property€Manager€for€Hamilton€County€advis…ing€him€that€the€property€had€been€acquired€by€Hamilton€County.€ÏThe€letter€was€dated€August€31,€1992.€€The€letter€advised€Mr.ÏKnowles€that€the€property€could€be€redeemed€by€paying€the€taxes€byÏJuly€2,€1993.€€He€stated€that€he€intended€to€redeem€the€propertyÏand€knew€that€he€had€a€year€to€do€so.€€He€failed€to€do€so.ÌÌà àIt€was€clearly€demonstrated€by€his€own€admission€that€Mr.ÏKnowles€was€a€poor€record€keeper.€€He€knew,€however,€that€he€wasÏdelinquent€on€his€1988€taxes€and€that€the€only€property€that€heÏwas€concerned€about€was€his€home.€€He€specifically€denies€that€heÏever€received€a€summons€regarding€the€Chattanooga€Medicine€CompanyÏproperty.ÌÌà àOn€the€other€hand,€the€defendants€assert€that€the€summons€forÏthe€property€in€question€was€mailed€to€the€plaintiffs€in€the€sameÍenvelope€that€contained€the€summons€regarding€the€other€tract€ofÏland€involved€in€this€case.ÌÌà àMr.€Jessee€Potter,€process€server€for€the€Clerk€and€Master€ofÏthe€chancery€court€testified€that€he€was€the€only€person€who€sentÏout€the€summonses€in€delinquent€tax€cases.€€He€explained€thatÏthere€was€a€customary€and€routine€procedure€in€place€in€the€ClerkÏand€Master's€office€for€the€issuance€of€service€of€process€in€backÏtax€cases.€€He€explained€in€detail€how€the€procedure€operated.€ÏSpecifically,€Mr.€Potter€explained€that€if€two€parcels€of€landÏcontained€›consecutiveœ€parcel€numbers€and€were€going€to€the€sameÏaddress,€they€were€placed€in€the€same€envelope€for€mailing.€€SuchÏwas€the€case€here.ÌÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€all€the€proof€the€chancellor€found€asÏfollows:Ìà@ à*€€€€€*€€€€€*€€€€€*ÌÓÓà8 àà àUnder€all€these€circumstances,€the€court€ð"ð€afterÏhearing€the€numerous€summons€that€the€plaintiff€re…ceived,€he's€admitted€sloppy€record€keeping€on€his€taxesÏð"ð€is€of€the€opinion€and€finds€that€the€preponderance€ofÏthe€evidence€is€to€the€effect€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€KnowlesÏdid€receive€the€summons€on€the€property€in€question;€itÍdid€not€have€a€specific€legal€description€or€address,Ïbut€it€did€have€the€item€number€pertaining€to€thisÏproperty€in€question€which€is€the€subject€of€this€law…suit.ÌÌà8 àà àThe€court€not€only€finds€that€he€was€actuallyÏserved€as€to€this€item€number,€that€if€not,€he€certainlyÏhad€constructive€service€by€the€inclusion€of€this€beingÏone€of€many€pieces€of€property€for€which€Mr.€and€Mrs.ÏKnowles€were€admittedly€served.ÌÌà8 àà àIf€it€was€not€actual€service,€there€was€construc…tive€service.€€And€in€fact,€in€this€situation€due€pro…cess€was€served,€because€he€was€before€the€court,€heÏcertainly€had€notice€from€which€he€could€ascertain€anyÏand€all€details€in€regard€to€the€suit€of€the€county€andÏthe€city€to€sell€the€property.ÌÌà@ à*€€€€€*€€€€€*€€€€€*ÌÌÓÓÌà àIt€is€well„settled€law€that€a€taxpayer€must€be€before€theÏcourt€either€on€actual€or€constructive€service,€else€the€judgmentÏis€of€no€effect.€€òòRast€v.€Perryóó,€532€S.W.2d€555€(Tenn.€1976).€€ItÏis€also€well„settled€that€"where€the€taxpayer€is€not€properlyÏbefore€the€court,€the€resulting€decree€and€sale€is€a€nullity€as€toÏhim€and€may€be€assailed€at€any€time."€€òòMarlowe€v.€Kingdom€Hall€ofÏJehovah's€Witnessesóó,€541€S.W.2d€121€(Tenn.€1976).€€Of€course,€theÏconverse€is€true.€€Notice,€whether€formal,€actual,€or€constructiveÏis€sufficient€so€long€as€it€is€of€such€character€as€to€make€theÍtaxpayer€aware€of€the€proceedings€and€give€him€an€opportunity€toÏpay€the€taxes€and€make€his€defenses.€€òòEsch€et€al€v.€Wilcox,€et€alóó,Ï178€S.W.2d€770€(Tenn.€1944).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòMarloweóó,€supra.ÌÌà àThere€is€no€doubt€that€in€this€case€the€defendant€had€actualÏnotice€of€the€pending€litigation€and€he€was€served€with€multipleÏsummonses.€€He€was€aware€of€the€proceedings,€however,€he€neglectedÏto€appear€and€take€advantage€of€his€opportunity€to€pay€his€taxesÏor€make€his€defenses€within€the€time€prescribed€by€law.ÌÌà àOur€review€of€the€record€does€not€persuade€us€that€the€evi…dence€preponderates€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.€ÏAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment.€€Costs€are€taxed€to€theÏappellant€and€this€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€theÏcollection€thereof.ÌÌÓÓà€ à______________________________Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Don€T.€McMurray,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌHouston€M.€Goddard,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÇÑ  ÑÑ7€«XXd×XXd×7Ñà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALSÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌWINSTON€T.€KNOWLES€and€LINDA€€€€)à àHAMILTON€CHANCERYÌKNOWLES,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àC.A.€NO.€03A01„9606„CH„00209Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiffs„Appellants€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àHON.€R.€VANN€OWENSÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àCHANCELLORÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€CHATEM,€€€€€)à àAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌINCORPORATED,€PHILIP€E.€COX€€€€€)Ìand€EMILY€B.€COX,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€Defendants„Appelees€€€)ÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòORDERóóó óÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€appeal€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€from€theÏChancery€Court€of€Hamilton€County,€briefs€and€argument€of€counsel.€ÏUpon€consideration€thereof,€this€Court€is€of€opinion€that€thereÏwas€no€reversible€error€in€the€trial€court.Ìà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€Costs€are€taxedÏto€the€appellant€and€this€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€forÏthe€collection€thereof.ÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€PER€CURIAM