WPC 4# UN %A 0cGU<w@4&: 0I 0J: 0TB 0^ 0h 0r\ 0| 0J 0 1u` 0d 0@9 D3y B 0D U> B)K DCt AM U* AQ.  0DE 0D D/ B ^w 8v~EvHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(;1$XcXXX-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman UDD2eӀzz!3|x(W(3Q$ 1!XXXX   `   0  2 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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$    """"'dxd d(#$  0  <  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd* &C << G<  9p`(Arial*+ ,-C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ($$   1  ..' dxdP Pd T !  #d#$      +"  ((   YYY FILED(X June20,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.(AppellateCourtClerk   !  #d#$       $       Rule10(CourtofAppeals).MemorandumOpinion.(b)TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated"MEMORANDUMOPINION,"shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase.$  !#d#$       $       Adamswasinitiallyadefendantbutwaslatervoluntarilydismissed.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . $      ݛ\RA'\\RA'\7XXdd7    Ӝ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ WESTERNSECTIONATJACKSON  ______________________________________________ ALBERTMILAM,JR.,AMinor,  FROMTHESHELBYCOUNTY byMotherandNextFriendTINA  CIRCUITCOURT,THE L.MILAM,andTINAL.MILAM,  HONORABLEKAYS.ROBILIO, Individually,      JUDGE PlaintiffAppellant,    AFFIRMED        ShelbyCircuitNo.50240T.D.Vs.       C.A.No.02A019607CV00167 FRANKLIND.WILSON,    TinaL.MilamofMemphis       ForAppellant DefendantAppellee.̜*R'/&A1-j|Y` . `@Rߛ       EdM.HurleyofMemphis       ForAppellee____________________________________________________________________________7XXdXXd7  @ MEMORANDUMOPINION 0   __________________________________________________________________________ CRAWFORD,J.  Thisappealinvolvesanactiontorecoverdamagesforpersonalinjuriesallegedlysustainedinanautomobileaccident.Theplaintiffs,AlbertMilamJr.,aminor,byhismotherandnextfriendTinaL.Milam,andTinaL.Milam,individually(theMilams),appealfromthejudgmentofthetrialcourtonajuryverdictforthedefendant,FranklinD.Wilson(Wilson). TheamendedcomplaintaversthatonMarch26,1992,sixyearoldAlbertMilamwasridingasapassengerinanautomobiledrivenbyhismother,TinaMilam,whentheMilamsautomobilewasstruckfrombehindbyanautomobiledrivenbyArthurL.Adams(Adams). 1   ׀AdamssautomobilehadinturnbeenstruckbyanautomobiledrivenbyWilson.Thecomplaintallegesthatthedefendantswereguiltyofvariousactsofnegligenceunderthecommonlawandwereguiltyofnegligencepersebyviolatingvariouscityordinancesandstatestatutes.Thecomplaintaversthatthedefendantsnegligencedirectlyandproximatelycausedthecollisionandtheresultinglosses,injuries,anddamagestotheplaintiffs.Wilsonsansweradmitstheaccident,butdeniesthematerialallegationsofthecomplaintandjoinsissuethereon.WilsonsansweralsoaversthattheaccidentwasdirectlyandproximatelycausedbythenegligenceofAdams. AfteratrialinwhichtheMilamswererepresentedbycounsel,thejuryreturnedaverdictinWilsonsfavor.ThetrialcourtenteredajudgmentonthejuryverdictonFebruary12,1996.OnFebruary20,1996,counselfortheMilamsfiledamotionforanewtrial,assertingthefollowinggrounds:(1)theweightoftheevidenceiscontrarytoafindingofthedefendantasnotguilty;(2)theverdictiscontrarytotheweightoftheevidenceastoliabilityanddamages;and(3)thegreatweightandpreponderanceoftheevidenceareinfavoroftheplaintiffsastotheliabilityofthedefendantanddamages.ThetrialcourtdeniedtheMilamsmotionforanewtrial,andtheMilams,nowactingprose,haveperfectedthisappeal. Theissuesforreview,asstatedintheMilamsbrief,are:8 8 1.WasDefendant,FrankD.Wilson,hereinaftercalledWilsonorDefendant,guiltyofviolatingtrafficregulations,recklessoperation,negligenceandviolatingPlaintiffsrightsingeneralwhenhecollidedhisvehicle,knownasvehicle#1,intoanothervehicle,knownasvehicle#2,operatedbyArthurL.Adams,hereinaftercalledAdams,causingAdamsvehicle#2tocollideintoAppellantsvehicle,knownasvehicle#3,causingAppellantsseverephysicalandbodyinjuries?WereAppellantsduecompensationforinjuries,hospitalbillsandothermonetarylossesduetothenegligenceofDefendant?Wasverdictfairalthoughjurorsfellasleepduringtrial? Weperceivetheissuestobe:8 8 1.Whetherthereismaterialevidencetosupportthejurysverdict.8 8 2.WhethertheMilamsreceivedafairtrialwhensomeofthejurorsfellasleepduringthetrial. Wewillconsiderthesecondissuefirst. TheMilamscontendthattheydidnotreceiveafairtrialbecausesomeofthemembersofthejuryfellasleepduringthetrial.T.R.A.P.3(e)providesinpertinentpart:8 8 [I]nallcasestriedbyajury,noissuepresentedforreviewshallbepredicateduponerrorintheadmissionorexclusionofevidence,juryinstructionsgrantedorrefused,misconductofjurors,partiesorcounsel,orotheractioncommittedoroccurringduringthetrialofthecase,orothergrounduponwhichanewtrialissought,unlessthesamewasspecificallystatedinamotionforanewtrial;otherwisesuchissueswillbetreatedaswaived.T.R.A.P.3(e).TheMilamsdidnotraisethisissueintheirmotionforanewtrial,andtheirfailuretodosoconstitutesawaiveroftheissueonappeal. Hartsellv.FortSandersReglMed.Ctr. ,905S.W.2d944,950(Tenn.App.1995).Thisissueiswithoutmerit. AstotheMilamsfirstissue,wewillconstruetheirmotionforanewtrialthatassertstheverdictwascontrarytotheweightoftheevidencetoincludetheassertionthatthereisnomaterialevidencetosupporttheverdict. Inreviewingajudgmentbaseduponajuryverdicttheappellatecourtsarenotatlibertytoweightheevidenceortodecidewherethepreponderancelies,butarelimitedtodeterminingwhetherthereismaterialevidencetosupporttheverdict. Overtonv.Davis ,739S.W.2d2,23(Tenn.App.1987) . Indeterminingwhetherthereismaterialevidencetosupporttheverdict,theappellatecourtisrequiredtotakethestrongestlegitimateviewofalltheevidenceinfavoroftheverdict,toassumethetruthofallthattendstosupportit,allowingallreasonableinferencestosustaintheverdict,andtodiscardalltothecontrary.Havingthusexaminedtherecord,ifthereisanymaterialevidencetosupporttheverdict,itmustbeaffirmed. Id. (citing CrabtreeMasonryCo.v.C&RConstr.,Inc. ,575S.W.2d4,5(Tenn.1978)).  Therecorddoesnotcontainatranscriptorstatementoftheevidence.Intheabsenceofatranscriptorastatementoftheevidence,wemustconclusivelypresumethateveryfactadmissibleunderthepleadingswasfoundorshouldhavebeenfoundfavorablytotheappellee. Leekv.Powell ,884S.W.2d118,121(Tenn.App.1994)(citing Lyonv.Lyon ,765S.W.2d759,763(Tenn.App.1988)).Thisissueisalsowithoutmerit. Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsareassessedagainsttheappellants.       _________________________________       W.FRANKCRAWFORD,       PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S. CONCUR: ____________________________________ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE ____________________________________ DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE