ÿWPC …# VUFa %§ 07­äO 4R f u w u 0J 0TÉ 0^ 0h{ 0rã 0|U 0†Ñ 0W 1uç 0d\ U6À B)ö DC AMbU*¯ìÙrÅ B7 0UTv~©vÓ' D3ú 0@- AOmƼ 0D‚ D/Æ Bõ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0†<¾½Q 9Z ‹.Courier New RegularX&âõ$¡Ñ€²Ñ Ö€ÿÿÖ EÝ ƒ&¦)ÝÝ  Ýà@°°*ìàÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú©U!X3|x,!Ó€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€- Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial âÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÔ€"ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òOctober€11,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€"ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó hÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ&)ÝÝ  Ýà@ àÚ  ÚÚ  Ú d(-3¦$©©Ý ƒâõ!ÝÑ€²ÑÝ  ÝPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@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€ÔÝ  ÝÒ   ÒÒ „ ÒÙ€€ÙÑ  ÑÑ € ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑßL€!# ;+'h|` Å `€€LßÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€IN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌJOYCE€McCLELLAN€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:€€€€KNOX€CIRCUIT€Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:€€€€CA€No.€03A01„9604„CV„00119Ì€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellant€€€€€:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:Ìvs.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:€€€€HON.€DALE€C.€WORKMANÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:€€€€JUDGEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:ÌCITY€OF€KNOXVILLE€€€€€€€€€€€€:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€:Ì€€€€€Defendant„Appellee€€€€€€:€€€€AFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌDANIEL€F.€McGEHEE,€WITH€McGEHEE€&€NEWTON,€OF€KNOXVILLE,€TENNESSEE,ÏFOR€APPELLANT€ÌÌSHARON€E.€BOYCE,€OF€KNOXVILLE,€TENNESSEE,€FOR€APPELLEEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Sanders,€Sp.J.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€Plaintiff€has€appealed€from€an€order€dismissing€herÏcomplaint€for€personal€injuries,€based€on€Defendant's€motionÍpursuant€to€Rule€12.02(6),€TRCP,€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€uponÏwhich€relief€can€be€granted.€€We€affirm.ÌÌà àà àThe€Plaintiff„Appellant,€Joyce€McClellan,€owns€andÏoccupies€a€residence€in€the€City€of€Knoxville,€which€adjoins€aÏsmall€city€park.€€A€mulberry€tree€which€overhangs€a€portion€of€theÏPlaintiff's€property€is€located€in€the€city€park.€€In€the€Ö€$Öspring€ofÏthe€year€when€the€mulberries€ripen€they€drop€from€the€tree€ontoÏPlaintiff's€yard,€driveway€and€automobile.€€The€PlaintiffÏregistered€complaints€with€the€City€about€the€mulberries'€droppingÏfrom€the€tree€onto€her€property,€but€no€action€was€taken€by€theÏCity€to€remove€or€trim€the€tree.€€In€June,€1993,€while€trimmingÏgrass€on€her€property€in€the€vicinity€of€the€mulberry€tree,€sheÏslipped€and€fell,€injuring€her€left€ankle.€ÌÌà àà àPlaintiff€filed€suit€against€the€City€of€KnoxvilleÏalleging€she€fell€as€a€result€of€slipping€on€the€mulberries€whichÏhad€fallen€on€her€property€from€the€tree.€€She€alleged€the€City€wasÏmaintaining€a€public€nuisance€in€not€removing€the€tree€andÏpreventing€the€mulberries€from€accumulating€on€her€property;€herÏslipping€and€falling€were€the€direct€and€proximate€result€of€theÏCity's€negligence;€and€as€a€result€of€her€fall€her€ankle€wasÏbroken,€which€required€surgery,€and€caused€permanent€injuries.€€SheÏasked€for€compensatory€and€punitive€damages€and€demanded€a€jury.ÌÌà àà àThe€City,€for€answer,€denied€it€was€guilty€of€negligenceÏresulting€in€Plaintiff's€injuries.€€It€averred€the€City€was€immuneÏfrom€liability.€€It€averred€the€City's€liability,€if€any,€wasÏdetermined€by€the€provisions€of€the€Governmental€Tort€LiabilityÏAct,€TCA€ðð€29„20„101,€et€seq.€€As€an€affirmative€defense,€itÏaverred€the€Plaintiff's€own€negligence€was€responsible€for€herÏinjuries€and€her€negligence€was€the€sole€cause€of€her€injuries.€ÏThe€City€denied€Plaintiff€was€entitled€to€either€punitive€damagesÏor€a€trial€by€jury.ÌÌà àà àThe€City€also€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€pursuant€to€RuleÏ12.02(6),€TRCP.€€It€alleged€the€Plaintiff€failed€to€state€a€claimÏupon€which€relief€could€be€granted€under€the€Governmental€TortÏLiability€Act€(GTLA).€€In€its€motion,€the€City€relied€upon€TCA€ððÏ29„20„101,€et€seq.,€the€Governmental€Tort€Liability€Act,€and,Ïparticularly,€ðð€29„20„201„202„203(a)„204(a)€and€205Ì(TCA€1995€Supp.€Vol.5).ÌÌà àà àThe€City€insisted€TCA€ðð€29„20„201(a)€provides:€€"ExceptÏas€may€otherwise€be€provided€in€this€chapter,€all€governmentalÏentities€shall€be€immune€from€suit€for€any€injury€which€may€resultÏfrom€the€activities€of€such€governmental€entities€wherein€suchÏgovernmental€entities€are€engaged€in€the€exercise€and€discharge€ofÍany€of€their€functions,€governmental€or€proprietary."€€It€alsoÏinsisted€the€only€exceptions€toÌðð€29„20„201(a)€were€those€set€forth€in€TCA€ðððð€29„20„202€throughÌ20„20„205€and,€since€the€injuries€about€which€the€PlaintiffÏcomplained€in€her€complaint€did€not€fall€within€the€exceptions€to€ððÏ29„20„201(a),€the€Plaintiff€had€failed€to€state€a€claim€upon€whichÏrelief€could€be€granted.ÌÌà àà àThe€Plaintiff€filed€a€written€response€to€the€City'sÏmotion€in€which€she€argued€the€complaint€stated€a€claim€upon€whichÏrelief€could€be€granted€under€GTLA.€€As€pertinent,€the€responseÏstated:€€"The€Plaintiff€would€show€that€immunity€from€suit€of€aÏgovernmental€entity€is€removed€for€any€injury€caused€from€aÏdefective,€unsafe€or€dangerous€condition€when€the€governmentalÏentity€has€actual€notice€of€such€defective,€unsafe€or€dangerousÏcondition€as€more€fully€set€forth€in€òòTennessee€Codeóó€òòAnnotatedóó,ÏSection€29„20„203(a)€and€(b).Ìà àà à"That€the€City€of€Knoxville€is€not€immune€from€suitÏpursuant€to€the€provisions€of€òòTennessee€Code€Annotatedóó€Section€29„20„203(b)€due€to€the€fact€that€notice€had€been€given€by€theÏPlaintiff,€Joyce€McClellan,€for€many€years€prior€to€her€accident.€Ï(See€the€deposition€of€Joyce€McClellan€filed€herewith€as€òòExhibitóóÏòòAóó."ÌÌà àà àThe€Plaintiff€filed€her€discovery€deposition€as€anÏexhibit€to€her€response€to€the€City's€motion€to€dismiss.€€AsÏpertinent,€she€testified€she€had€owned€her€home,€which€was€adjacentÏto€the€city€park,€since€1973.€€A€mulberry€tree€located€on€city€parkÏproperty€overhung€her€property.€€When€the€mulberries€on€the€treeÏripened,€they€would€fall€off€the€tree€onto€her€property.€€She€hadÏcomplained€to€the€City€on€numerous€occasions€and€asked€the€City€toÏcut€the€tree.€€She€wanted€the€tree€cut€down€"because€it's€messy,Ïstinks,€it's€a€hazard".€€On€the€day€of€her€accident,€she€wasÏcutting€grass€on€her€property€with€a€"sling€sickle".€€RipeÏmulberries€on€the€ground€caused€her€to€slip€and€fall,€resulting€inÏher€broken€ankle.ÌÌà àà àThere€was€no€proof€offered€by€the€Plaintiff€by€way€ofÏaffidavit€or€otherwise€to€show€the€Plaintiff's€injuries€resultedÏfrom€any€of€the€exceptions€to€TCA€ðð€29„20„201(a),€which€are€asÏfollows:Ìà àà àTCA€ðð€29„20„203(a)€for€injuries€"caused€by€a€defective,Ïunsafe,€or€dangerous€condition€of€any€street,€alley,€sidewalk€orÏhighway,€owned€and€controlled€by€such€governmental€entity...;"Ìà àà àTCA€ðð€29„20„204(a)€for€injuries€"caused€by€the€dangerousÏor€defective€condition€of€any€public€building,€structure,€dam,Ïreservoir€or€other€public€improvement€owned€and€controlled€by€suchÏgovernmental€entity;"Ìà àà àTCA€ðð€29„20„202€9(a)€for€injuries€"...resulting€from€theÏnegligent€operation€by€any€employee€of€a€motor€vehicle€or€otherÏequipment€while€in€the€scope€of€his€employment;"€and€Ìà àà àTCA€ðð€29„20„205€"...for€injury€proximately€caused€by€aÏnegligent€act€or€omission€of€any€employee€within€the€scope€of€hisÏemployment...."€with€certain€exceptions.ÌÌà àà àUpon€the€hearing€of€the€motion,€the€court€sustained€theÏCity's€motion€and€dismissed€the€complaint.ÌÌà àà àThe€Plaintiff€has€appealed,€presenting€the€followingÏissues€for€review:€1.€"The€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€theÏcomplaint€on€the€basis€of€assumption€of€the€risk€by€Plaintiff"€andÏ2."If€this€Honorable€Court€were€to€construe€the€trial€court's€orderÏthat€the€City€of€Knoxville€was€immune€from€suit,€then€the€trialÏcourt€erred€because€it€had€insufficient€facts€on€which€to€base€anÏopinion€on€the€issue€of€immunity."€€We€cannot€agree€the€trial€courtÏerred,€and€affirm.ÌÌà àà àIn€considering€the€Appellant's€first€issue,€we€cannotÏfind€that€the€court€dismissed€the€complaint€"on€the€basis€ofÏassumption€of€the€risk€by€the€Plaintiff."€€The€order€dismissing€theÏcomplaint€fails€to€state€the€basis€of€the€court's€ruling.€€TheÏcourt's€order,€as€pertinent,€states€the€cause€came€on€to€be€heardÍ"upon€defendant's€Motion€to€Dismiss,€plaintiff's€response,€and€oralÏargument,€and€it€appearing€to€the€Court€that€the€Motion€should€beÏsustained,€it€isÌà àà à"ORDERED€that€Complaint€against€the€City€of€Knoxville€isÏhereby€dismissed."€€But,€even€if€her€assumption€of€the€risk€hadÏbeen€the€basis€for€dismissing€the€complaint,€it€would€not€beÌ€reversible€error€since€the€court€reached€a€correct€result.€€WhereÏa€trial€judge€has€reached€a€correct€result,€it€will€not€be€reversedÏbecause€he€may€have€predicated€it€on€an€erroneous€reason.€Ïò òCherokee€Ins.€Co.€v.€U.S.€Fire€Ins.€Co.ó ó,€559€S.W.2d€337Ï(Tenn.App.1977);€ò òBaker€v.€Sealó ó,€694€S.W.2d€948,€953Ï(Tenn.App.1984).ÌÌà àà àAs€for€Appellant's€second€issue€that€"the€trial€courtÏerred€because€it€had€insufficient€facts€on€which€to€base€an€opinionÏon€the€issue€of€immunity",€it€was€not€necessary€for€the€court€toÏhave€extraneous€facts€to€determine€that€Plaintiff's€complaintÏfailed€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€could€be€granted€underÏGTLA.ÌÌà àà àThe€Appellant€fails€to€set€out€in€her€brief€how€theÏallegations€in€her€complaint€would€fall€within€the€purview€ofÏeither€of€the€exceptions€to€the€immunity€granted€to€allÏgovernmental€entities€under€TCA€ðð€29„20„201(a).ÌÌà àà àFrom€reading€Appellant's€brief,€we€find€it€difficult€toÏfollow€the€reasoning€of€the€Appellant€as€to€why€she€insists€theÏcourt€was€in€error€in€sustaining€the€City's€motion€to€dismiss.€€AtÏone€point€in€her€brief,€Appellant€states:€"The€contention€of€theÏAppellant€McClellan€is€that€the€injury€which€she€sustained€wasÏcaused€by€a€public€nuisance€on€governmental€property€which€is€a€25„foot€right€of€way€along€the€edge€of€Lark€Avenue€Park.€€The€City€ofÏKnoxville€was€well€aware€of€the€nuisance€which€existed€and€hadÏexisted€for€an€extended€period€of€time€since€1976...."€€At€anotherÏplace€in€her€brief,€Appellant€states:€€"The€Plaintiff€has€beenÏproceeding€under€the€theory€that€her€cause€of€action€isÌÌnot€an€exception€to€òòTennessee€Code€Annotatedóó€SectionsÌ29„20„203(a)€and€29„20„205(1)€which€is€[sic]€set€forth€below:ÌÓÓ"T.C.A.€29„20„203.€€Removal€of€immunity€for€injury€from€unsafeÏstreets€and€highways€„€Notice€required.€„€(a)€Immunity€from€suit€ofÏa€governmental€entity€is€removed€from€any€injury€caused€by€aÏdefective,€unsafe,€or€dangerous€condition€of€any€street,€alley,Ïsidewalk€or€highway,€owned€and€controlled€by€such€governmentalÏentity.€'Street'€or€'highway'€includes€traffic€control€deviceÏthereon.ÌÌ"T.C.A.€29„20„205.€€Removal€of€immunity€for€injury€caused€byÏnegligent€act€or€omission€of€employees€„€Exceptions.€„€ImmunityÏfrom€suit€of€all€governmental€entitled€is€removed€for€injuryÏproximately€caused€by€a€negligent€act€or€omission€of€any€employeeÏwithin€the€scope€of€his€employment€except€if€the€injury:Ìà à(1)€Arises€out€of€the€exercise€or€performance€or€the€failureÏto€exercise€or€perform€a€discretionary€function,€whether€or€not€theÏdiscretion€is€abused.ÌÌÓÓ"The€Trial€Court€had€no€basis€or€evidence€before€it€on€which€toÏmake€a€determination€as€to€whether€the€Plaintiff's€cause€of€actionÏwas€an€exception.€€The€Court€did€not,€and€could€not,€dismiss€theÏPlaintiff's€cause€of€action€on€the€basis€of€immunity€because€thereÏis€no€evidence€on€which€to€render€a€decision€based€on€immunity.€ÏThere€is€[sic]€been€no€determination€under€òòTennessee€Code€AnnotatedóóÏSection€29„20„203(a)€as€to€whether€a€'dangerous€condition€of€anyÏstreet,€alley,€sidewalk€or€highway€owned€and€controlled€by€suchÏgovernmental€entity'€nor€under€òòTennessee€Code€Annotatedóó€Section€29„20„205(1)€as€to€whether€the€failure€of€the€City€to€correct€theÏnuisance€was€discretionary."ÌÌà àà àWe€conclude€from€Appellant's€brief€that€she€is€saying:Ï(1)€The€City€was€maintaining€a€nuisance€which€was€not€governed€byÏGTLA€and€she€is€entitled€to€recover€damages€on€that€theory;€Ì(2)€She€was€injured€on€a€defective,€unsafe€or€dangerous€conditionÏof€a€street,€alley,€sidewalk€,€or€highway€owned€by€the€City€and€wasÏentitled€to€recover€pursuant€to€TCA€ðð€29„20„203(a);€and€(3)€HerÏ"injuries€were€proximately€caused€by€a€negligent€act€or€omission€ofÏan€employee€within€the€scope€of€his€employment"Ìpursuant€to€ðð€29„20„205€by€failing€to€remove€the€hazard€of€theÏmulberry€tree.ÌÌÒ ‘ ÒÒ „ Òà àà àWe€first€address€the€issue€of€liability€of€the€City€underÏthe€theory€of€maintaining€a€nuisance.€€Under€the€common€law,Ïmunicipalities€were€considered€to€be€acting€in€a€proprietaryÏcapacity€rather€than€a€governmental€capacity€in€maintaining€aÏnuisance,€and€were€liable€in€damages.€€The€Tennessee€GovernmentalÏTort€Liability€Act€was€passed€in€1973,€which€extends€immunity€toÏproprietary€activities€by€TCA€ðð€29„20„201.€€ò òCrowe€v.€John€W.ó óÏò òHorton€Mem.€Hospitaló ó,€579€S.W.2d€888€(Tenn.App.1979).€€In€theÏcase€of€ò òCollier€v.€Memphis€Light,€Gas€&€Water€Div.ó ó,€677ÏS.W.2d€771,€776€(Tenn.App.1983)€this€court,€in€addressing€theÏquestion€of€immunity€by€municipal€utilities€for€damages€due€toÏinjuries€caused€by€nuisance,€said:ÌÒ 4 ÒÒ  ÒÓÓà àWe€have€been€squarely€presented€with€the€issueÏof€whether€plaintiffs€have€an€action€independent€ofÏthe€Act€for€damages€due€to€injuries€caused€byÏnuisance.ÌÌà àAs€previously€noted€the€Act€is€premised€on€theÏestablishment€of€absolute€immunity€for€governmentalÏentities,€not€only€for€acts€in€their€governmentalÏcapacity,€but€also€for€acts€in€their€proprietaryÏcapacity.€€Comprehensive€plans€are€then€established€toÏcontrol€all€actions€for€damages€against€governmentalÏentities.ÌÌà àIn€ò òHaun€v.€Freemanó ó,€Court€of€Appeals,€WesternÏSection,€unreported€(filed€November€22,€1982),€JudgeÏNearn,€in€considering€actions€for€damages€outside€theÏAct,€observed:Ìà0 à...Therefore,€it€seems€clear€to€us€that€it€isÏthe€legislative€intent€that,€unless€excepted€inÏthe€chapter,€all€claims€for€injuries€against€aÏgovernmental€entity€must€be€brought€under€theÏchapter.€€We€are€buttressed€in€this€conclusionÏby€the€fact€that€T.C.A.€ðð€29„20„201€does€not€useÏthe€term€"negligence"€but€uses€the€term€"suitÍfor€any€injury"€which€would€include€even€theÏpreviously€time„honored€claim€for€nuisanceÏinjury,€which€courts€have€previously€recognizedÏas€being€an€exception€to€the€governmentalÏimmunity€doctrine€on€the€òòipse€dixitóó€statementÏthat€such€claims€are€not€based€on€negligence.ÌÌId.€at€pages€2€and€3."ÌÌÒ ‘ ÒÒ „ ÒÓÓà àà àAs€for€the€Plaintiff's€contention€she€was€injured€on€aÏdefective,€unsafe€or€dangerous€condition€of€a€street,€alley,Ïsidewalk€or€highway,€there€is€no€allegation€in€the€complaint€theÏPlaintiff€was€any€place€except€on€her€own€property€when€she€wasÏinjured.€€In€her€complaint€Plaintiff€alleges:€"Plaintiff€wasÏtrimming€her€grass€on€June€1,€1993,€and€slipped€and€fell€on€theÏproperty€adjoining€the€Defendant's€right€of€way,€causing€her€toÏbreak€her€left€ankle."€€In€her€deposition,€she€testified€she€was€onÏher€property€when€she€fell.€€Upon€the€hearing€of€the€motion€toÏdismiss,€Plaintiff's€counsel€made€the€following€statement€to€theÏcourt:€€"Your€Honor,€very€briefly,€my€client€was€on€her€propertyÏrather€than€on€the€City's€property€at€the€time€of€the€fall.€€TheÏmulberry€tree€was€in€Marsh€Park,€which€adjoins€the€property€of€myÏclient."€€There€is€nothing€in€the€complaint€which€would€support€aÏrecovery€by€the€Plaintiff€under€TCA€ðð€29„20„203(a).ÌÌà àà àNeither€is€there€any€allegation€in€the€complaint€whichÏstates€a€claim€upon€which€the€Plaintiff€could€recover€under€TCAÌðð€29„20„205.€€As€pertinent,€the€statute€states€immunity€from€suitÏis€removed€"for€injuries€proximately€caused€by€a€negligent€act€orÍomission€of€òòany€employee€within€the€scope€of€his€employmentóó..."Ïwith€certain€exceptions.€€(Emphasis€ours.)ÌÌà àà àIn€her€complaint,€Plaintiff,€as€pertinent,€alleges:€"ThatÏthe€Plaintiff€has€complained€of€the€nuisance€of€the€mulberry€uponÏnumerous€occasion€[sic]€over€the€past€ten€(10)€years,€and€that€theÏDefendant€has€never€taken€any€affirmative€action€to€alleviate€theÏhazard€public€nuisance€created€by€the€presence€of€the€mulberryÏtree"€and€"As€the€direct€and€proximate€result€of€the€Defendant'sÏnegligence,€[Plaintiff]€has€suffered€severe,€painful€and€permanentÏinjuries€of€a€continuing€nature€to€her€left€leg€and€body€and€[sic]Ïa€whole."€€The€complaint,€however,€fails€to€allege€her€injuriesÏwere€"proximately€caused€by€a€negligent€act€or€omission€of€anyÏemployee€within€the€scope€of€his€employment."€€The€court,€in€theÏcase€of€ò òGentry€v.€Cookeville€General€Hosp.ó ó,€734€S.W.2d€337,Ï339€(Tenn.App.1987),€in€addressing€the€omission€of€this€averment€inÏa€complaint,€said:ÌÒ 4 ÒÒ  ÒÓÓà àSaid€Act,€T.C.A.€ðð€29„20„201,€provides€inÏpertinent€part€as€follows:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€*€€€€€€€€€€*€€€€€€€€€*€Ìà à(c)€When€immunity€is€removed€by€this€chapter€anyÏclaim€for€damages€must€be€brought€in€strict€complianceÏwith€the€terms€of€this€chapter.ÌÌà àT.C.A.€ðð€29„20„205€provides€in€pertinent€part:Ìà0 à...€€Immunity€from€suit€of€all€governmentalÏentities€is€removed€for€injury€proximatelyÏcaused€by€a€negligent€act€or€omission€of€òòanyóóÏòòemployee€within€the€scope€of€his€employmentóó....Ï(Emphasis€in€ò òGentryó ó)ÌÌà àA€complaint€against€a€governmental€entity€forÏtort€must€overtly€allege€that€the€tort€was€committedÏby€an€employee€or€employees€of€the€governmental€entityÏwithin€the€scope€of€his€or€their€employment.€€AÏcomplaint€which€does€not€so€state€does€not€state€aÏclaim€for€which€relief€can€be€granted€because€theÏaction€is€not€alleged€to€be€within€the€class€of€casesÏexcepted€by€the€statute€from€governmental€immunity.ÌÌÒ ‘ ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓà àà àòòAlso€seeóó€Lò òee€v.€City€of€Clevelandó ó,€859€S.,W.2d€347Ï(Tenn.App.1993).ÌÌà àà àWe€find€no€error€in€the€trial€court's€sustaining€theÏCity's€motion€and€dismissing€the€complaint.€€The€trial€court€isÏaffirmed€and€the€cost€of€this€appeal€is€taxed€to€the€Appellant.€ÏThe€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€any€furtherÏnecessary€proceedings.ÌÓÓÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€__________________________Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Clifford€E.€Sanders,€Sp.J.ÌCONCUR:€ÌÌ______________________ÌHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.ÌÌ______________________ÌCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.