WPC 4Vj 0(yw@ 0J 0T3 0^ 0h 0rM 0| 0; 0 1uQ U, 0d UBV % U, U6 B) DC) AMl U* , Bv~,v D3} 0@ AO? 0D D/I Bxv 3|x($ DDDDDӀ2 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    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd-!C << G<  9p`(Arial " !  #d#  ##   YYY FILED#X June13,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.#AppellateCourtClerk  dPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &Xd&#Xd#        \RA'\7XXdd7L"$!;+'h|`  `Lߛ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTION KNOXTENNRENTALCOMPANY, )C/ANO.03A019512CH00459andROBERTC.LOWE,   )      )KNOXCHANCERY PlaintiffsAppellants, )      )HON.FREDERICKD.McDONALD,v.      )CHANCELLOR      )THEHOMEINSURANCECOMPANY )andRONALDL.JENKINS,  )AFFIRMED      )AND DefendantsAppellees. )REMANDEDPHILIPP.DURANDandRONALDL.GRIMM,AMBROSE,WILSON,GRIMM&DURAND,andARCHIER.CARPENTER,CARPENTER&OCONNOR,Knoxville,forPlaintiffsAppellants.THOMASC.CORTS,ORTALE,KELLEY,HERBERT&CRAWFORD,Nashville,forDefendantAppellee,TheHomeInsuranceCompany.@ OPINION @         Franks.J.  PlaintiffsactiontorequiredefendantinsurancecompanytosatisfyanallegedbalanceowingontheplaintiffsϜstatecourtjudgmentwasdismissedbytheChancellor,whodeterminedthejudgmentbetweenplaintiffsanddefendantinU.S.DistrictCourtwasresjudicataontheclaiminthisaction.  TheChancellorfiledamemorandumopinionandsuccinctlynarratesthehistoryofthislitigation:0 0  PlaintiffKnoxTennRentalCompanyrecoveredjudgmentinthiscourtinapriorlawsuitfor$1,058,351.86againstRobertC.Lowe,RonaldL.JenkinsandJenkinsInsurance,Inc.PlaintiffsthensuedDefendantHomeInsuranceCompanyinfederaldistrictcourtonHomesinsurancepolicyissuedtoJenkinsInsurance,Inc.Assertingcoverageforthejudgmentthathadbeenrecovered.Plaintiffsprevailed,recoveringjudgmentinthefederaldistrictcourtagainstHomefortheamountofthejudgmentinthiscourtplusinterestthereonunderTennesseelawattherateof10%perannumforatotaljudgmentinthefederalcourtof$1,372,377.88.Thefederalcourtjudgment,whichwasenteredMay12,1992,wasthereafteraffirmedbytheUnitedStatesCircuitCourtofAppealsfortheSixthCircuit.0 0  Homepaidthefederaljudgmentplusinterestthereonatthe4.4%ratepayableonjudgmentsunderfederallaw,makingatotalpaymentof$1,460,216.79.However,PlaintiffsclaimthatHomestillowesinterestadditionaltothe4.4%interestpaidbyHometofullysatisfythejudgmentinthiscourt,whichPlaintiffspointoutdrawsinterestattherateof10%underTennesseelaw,5.6%morethanthefederalrate.TheamountofadditionalinterestclaimedbyPlaintiffsinthissuit(filedNovember1,1994)is$62,940.08plus$17.24adayofaccumulatinginterestatthe10%perannumrate.0 0  Plaintiffasserteditsclaimfortheadditionalinterestinthefederalcourtcase,andthatassertionwasdeniedthereonthebasisthatwhileonstateclaimsassertedinfederalcourtstatelawgovernsprejudgmentinterest,federallawgovernspostjudgmentinterest.PlaintiffsthenfiledanothersuitinfederalcourtagainstHomeseekingtocollecttheassertedunpaidportionofinterest.Thatsuitwasdismissed.Thefederaldistrictcourtruledthatthematterwasresjudicata,holdingthattheinterestissuehadbeenpreviouslylitigatedinthefirstfederalcourtactionanddecidedadverselytoPlaintiffs.Plaintiffsnowseeks[sic]theadditionalinterestinthiscourt,againclaimingthatthejudgmentinthiscourthasnotbeensatisfiedastotheunpaidportionofthe10%interest.  PlaintiffsinitialactioninfederalcourtessentiallywasseekingadeclarationthatHomeInsuranceprovidedcoverageforthestatecourtjudgmentandalsosoughttheentryofajudgmentinfederalcourtbasedonthestatecourtjudgmentagainstHome.U.S.MagistrateJudgeMurrianruledinplaintiffsfavor,findingthatthestatecourtjudgmentshouldbepaidbydefendantwithinterestatthestateratetothedateoftheentryofthejudgmentinfederalcourt.AnappealtotheSixthCircuitensued,andafterthejudgmentwasaffirmedthedefendant,pursuanttofederalrulesofcivilprocedure,movedtheCourttoenteranorderthatthejudgmentwassatisfiedinfulluponthepaymentofthejudgmentinfederalcourt,plusinterestatthefederalratefromentryofthejudgmentinfederalcourtuntilthejudgmentwassatisfied.JudgeMurrianruledinfavorofthedefendantandenteredanordertotheeffectthatthejudgmentwas satisfiedinfull. 𛀀  PlaintiffsthenfiledanotheractioninU.S.DistrictCourtseekingtocollectadditionalinterestonthejudgmentatthestaterate.Inresponsetothataction,U.S.DistrictJudgeJarvissaid:0 0 HomeInsurancecontendsthattheissueiswhetheritisrequiredtosatisfythestatecourtjudgmentagainstLoweorifitsobligationwastosatisfythefederalcourtjudgmentinfavorofKTRandLoweagainstitself.Iconcludethatitsobligationwastosatisfythefederalcourtjudgment.Iconcludethatnotonlycouldthatissuehavebeenraised,0 0 ...butitwasinfactraised.PlaintiffarguedthatthechancerycourtstatejudgmenthadnotbeensatisfiedandthatLowewasstillliabletopayKTRthebalanceofthatjudgment,includingpostjudgmentinterestatthe10%rate.However,themagistratejudgedisagreed,therebydisposingofthequestionofwhetherHomeInsuranceCompanywasobligatedthesatisfythestatecourtjudgmentorthefederalcourtjudgmententeredagainstit.TheissuewhichplaintiffsraiseinthisCourthasthereforebeenpreviouslylitigatedbetweenthesameparties,andthependingclaimisbarredbythedoctrineofresjudicata.  Asnotedabove,afterthisadverseruling,plaintiffsbroughtthisactioninstatecourt.  Plaintiffssuitinfederalcourtaskedthatajudgmentbeenteredagainsttheinsurancecompanybasedonthestatecourtjudgmentobtainedagainsttheinsurancecompanysinsured.Theyweregrantedthereliefsought,andinthetwoϜactionsinfederalcourtraisedtheissueoftheproperrateofinteresttobepaidonthejudgmentbytheinsurancecompany,whichispreciselytheissueraisedbeforeChancellorMcDonald.Beginningwiththefederallitigation,wehavethesameinterestedpartiesandthesameissueraisedanddecidedineachofthethreeactions.Clearly,plaintiffsareboundbythedoctrineofresjudicata.SeeWhitseyv.WilliamsonCountyBank,700S.W.2d562(Tenn.App.1985);Rachelsv.Steele,633S.W.2d473(Tenn.App.1981).  DefendantbymotionseeksanawardofjustdamagespursuanttoT.C.A.271122,contendingplaintiffsappealisfrivolous.Weagree.Plaintiffshavelitigatedthisissueinthreeseparatecourtactionswiththesameresult.  WeremandthiscausetotheTrialCourtforadeterminationofcostsandfeestobeawardedtodefendant,pursuanttoT.C.A.271122.Thecostsoftheappealareassessedtoappellants.      ________________________      HerschelP.Franks,J.CONCUR:___________________________HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.___________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.