ÿWPC! -<Ó ÷¿IIÜ…·Èø*^q)zxÏ„rÇ+ÂÔ›LSC J©Lƒˆ…t£²@,xÌs¡þÊä-ðäÝþ ï~\SDeË‘`NŸ¹ý3;N ÕOñŒÕ.&2¯—Ðo`üwõ”:íÒYaq5ñ¨«à&â¿RŸ$¦â÷}¯“ V¸Ûu‚ÑGj@¯BIÇäÝfX3d $°š¶º¦!íŠà ƒX3³N\¾¼D`ù=[^ûu1ó»Ï û#ÝÍÍey]«h€,f¾Â#&,”~ÚÂ2Dâ:ð-Ñny;“z=æÑw@Ý•jÔGçk²†3=V –oé£z°¶ Ö¨)ËŒkP}iU ™tÁoš1ÔºMì!¥VwA³} F; ÉsnL…Y4²a–`átNŒ2ѶÅÿ—VŸ›¦˜js=üÓé*:2£¹yœh-E·®ÁüFøŽëˆ—j¼(6ÆYâ×ߤ2bµ8~·‰ Ëî ñýfoD ÈÐK»:<»¬Á_φîÅSàþ¬Â~0¡CxU $Ó+¶eÝDY0=8jhM yi›ƒ}é¶bƒ7h *Ô9Ñÿzÿ&¥mÁq¶ôT»?òØ} /ìHNóU. ¡›†'¿&¬fÿÈ`4@T 0(c‹w“£UN¥ 0ló 0D_ m£#!ºNÛ ^ Ý UNé é é 57 U:l l l l l l l UB¦ %è è è è è è è è è è è è Bî î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î î AQ Æ\ 0D" 0Df 0Dª ª D3î tpO'ÔøÔô3|x($¡¡E(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular((3úÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0¹¢S'L (ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular +Ý ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X˜­XXXÔÔ€è³EçXX˜­ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€k¾çè³EÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€19,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAxÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX dZ[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó&&&&'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔѰÑÒܰÒÑ ý ÑÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€ù’XXdêdÈ8ÑÔ€X°hXXXÔÔ€Š„è‹XX°hÔßx€Y_B2.jzòÿØ `€€@ÿEŠàŽtt¨¦Â xßÔ_Ôññññ\ññññ€€€€à@M M ‚àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  ÐÌà@44%‚àAT€KNOXVILLEˆà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àÐ   Ðó óÌà@‚‚+‚àˆÌÌÌKAITLIN€MCCOOL,€by€next€friendà0 ì à)€C/A€NO.€03A01„9901„CV„00012Ð ì(#ì(# Ðand€mother,€ANGELA€MCCOOL,€à0 ì à)Ð ì(#ì(# ÐBETTY€MCCOOL€and€WILLIAMà0 ì à)€HAMILTON€CIRCUITÐ  ì(#ì(# ÐMCCOOL,à0 Œ àà0ä Œ (#Œ (#àà0<ä (#ä (#àà0”<(#<(#àà0ì”(#”(#à)Ð  ì(#ì(# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€HON.€JACKIE€SCHULTEN,Ìà 4 àPlaintiffs„Appellants,à0 ” àà0ì”(#”(#à)€JUDGEÐ  ì(#ì(# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)Ìvs.à0 4 àà0Œ 4(#4(#àà0ä Œ (#Œ (#àà0<ä (#ä (#àà0”<(#<(#àà0ì”(#”(#à)Ð ì(#ì(# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)ÌPROFFITTS,€INC.,à0 ä àà0<ä (#ä (#àà0”<(#<(#àà0ì”(#”(#à)€AFFIRMEDÐ ì(#ì(# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€ANDÌà 4 àDefendant„Appellee.à0 ” àà0ì”(#”(#à)€REMANDEDÐ ì(#ì(# ÐÌÌÌÌSCOTT€N.€BROWN,€JR.,€and€DANIEL€M.€STEFANIUK,€SPEARS,€MOORE,ÏREBMAN€&€WILLIAMS,€Chattanooga,€for€Plaintiffs„Appellants.ÌÌC.€DOUGLAS€DOOLEY,€CHARLES€W.€POSS,€and€JASON€G.€HOWELL,ÏLEITNER,€WILLIAMS,€DOOLEY€&€NAPOLITAN,€PLLC.,€Chattanooga,€forÏDefendant„Appellee.ÌÌÌÌÌà@%‚àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óˆÐ  (!! ÐÌÌà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àFranks,€J.ÌÌÌÓÓà 4 àà Œ àIn€this€action€to€recover€damages€for€personal€injuries€resulting€from€aÏfall€on€defendantððs€escalator.€€A€jury€returned€verdicts€for€the€defendant€and€plaintiffsÏhave€appealed,€insisting€that€the€Trial€Judge€erred€in€refusing€to€charge€a€proper€juryÏinstruction,€viz.€ð ðthat€violating€a€statute€was€negligence,€per€se,€when€there€wasÏevidence€that€made€a€statute,€namely€T.C.A.€ðð68„121„109€appliccableðð.ÌÔ‡Š„è‹‹Š„èÔÔ‡X°hX‹Š„èÔà 4 àÔ#†Š„è‹XX°hÞ #Ôà Œ àThe€plaintiffs€while€shopping€at€Proffittððs€Department€Store€inÐ  811 ÐHamilton€Place€Mall€in€Chattanooga€boarded€an€ascending€escalator,€and€during€theÐ  :33ý Ðassent€fell€down€the€escalator€and€sustained€injuries.€€Plaintiffs€testified€that€theÏescalator€ð ðlurchedðð,€which€they€described€as€ð ðit€momentarily€slowed€before€resumingÏa€normal€speedðð€and€that€this€ð ðlurchðð€caused€them€to€lose€their€balance€and€fall.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àThere€were€no€other€witnesses€to€the€incident,€and€plaintiffs€presentedÏno€evidence€at€trial€regarding€what€they€contend€happened€with€the€escalator,€exceptÏfor€their€testimony€that€it€lurched.€Ìà 4 àà Œ àDefendant,€on€the€other€hand,€presented€evidence€of€Jerry€Moncier,€anÏemployee€of€Montgomery€Kone,€who€inspected€and€repaired€escalators€and€elevators.€ÏMoncier€stated€that€he€had€inspected€the€same€escalator€that€very€morning€as€a€resultÏof€a€routine€maintenance€contract,€and€again€two€days€later,€at€defendantððs€request.€ÏHe€found€the€escalator€to€be€in€good€working€order€on€both€occasions.€€He€furtherÏtestified€that€the€escalator€was€regularly€inspected,€and€had€routine€preventativeÏmaintenance€performed€on€it,€as€well€as€any€necessary€repairs€should€there€be€aÏmalfunction.€€Moncier€further€testified€that€it€was€not€mechanically€possible€for€theÏescalator€to€behave€as€plaintiffs€claimed,€because€any€power€surge,€loss€of€power,Ïbrownout,€etc.€would€cause€the€escalator€to€immediately€shut€down,€and€it€could€onlyÏbe€restarted€by€the€insertion€of€a€special€key.€€€Plaintiffs€presented€no€evidence€toÏcontradict€this€testimony.ÌÒ‘ÜÒà é àà A àPlaintiffs€requested€the€Trial€Court€to€instruct€the€jury€regardingÏnegligence€per€se,€based€upon€T.C.A.€ðð68„121„109,€which€requires€that:€ð ðEveryÏelevator,€dumbwaiter€and€escalator€shall€be€maintained€by€the€owner€or€lessee€in€a€safeÏoperating€condition€and€so€that€it€conforms€to€the€rules€and€requirements€of€the€boardsÏas€adopted€under€ðð68„121„103.ðð€€The€Trial€Court€refused€the€instruction€as€well€asÏT.P.I.€(Civil)€3.09€(negligence€per€se),€stating€that€they€were€inapplicable.€€The€TrialÏJudge€did,€however,€instruct€the€jury€regarding€negligence€and€òòres€ipsa€loquitoróó.€€TheÐ 700 ÐTrial€Court€also€instructed€the€jury€regarding€the€duties€of€owners€and€lessors€ofÐ 922 Ðpremises,€and€defective€or€unreasonably€dangerous€conditions€on€premises€pursuant€toÏT.P.I.€(Civil)€9.01€and€9.02.€€Ìà é àà A àòòóóA€trial€court€is€required€to€give€a€requested€instruction€if€it€is€supportedÐ   Ðby€evidence,€ò òó óembodies€a€partyððs€theory€of€the€case,€is€a€correct€statement€of€the€law,Ð   Ðand€is€not€included€in€other€portions€of€the€charge.€€òòSpellmeyer€v.€Tennessee€FarmersÐ  ÐMut.€Ins.€òòóóCo.óó,€879€S.W.2d€843€(Tenn.€App.€1993).€€Ð   Ðà é àà A àIn€this€case,€plaintiff€presented€no€proof€that€the€defendant€had€violatedÏT.C.A.ðð68„121„109.€€This€Statute€requires€that€the€escalator€be€maintained€in€a€safeÏoperating€condition,€and€that€it€be€maintained€in€conformity€with€the€rules€andÏrequirements€of€the€Board€as€adopted€under€the€provisions€of€T.C.A.€ðð68„121„103.€ÏThe€Code€requires€that€escalators€be€inspected€every€six€months€by€a€Stateððs€licensedÏinspector,€who€is€then€required€to€file€a€report€regarding€the€outcome€of€the€inspection.€ÏT.C.A.€ðð68„121„106(3).€€The€report€must€include€information€regarding€whether€theÏescalator€is€in€a€safe€operating€condition,€and€whether€the€owner€of€the€escalator€hasÏconformed€to€the€Boardððs€requirements.€€T.C.A.€ðð68„121„106(5).Ìà é àà A àThe€evidence€in€this€case€established€that€the€escalator€had€beenÏinspected€every€six€months€by€a€state€licensed€inspector€as€required€by€the€Code,€andÏthat€defendant€had€never€been€notified€of€any€problems€or€violations.€€The€evidenceÏfurther€showed€that€the€escalator€was€inspected€and€maintained€on€a€monthly€basis€byÏa€private€contractor,€at€significant€expense€to€defendant.€€The€private€inspector€Ïtestified€that€this€escalator€was€kept€in€good€working€order,€and€plaintiffs€presented€noÏevidence€to€contradict€defendantððs€proof€that€the€conditions€required€by€T.C.A.€ðð68„¼121„109€had€been€met.€€Ìà é àà A àThe€plaintiffs€rely€onòòóóòòóó€òòTeal€v.€E.I.€DuPont€De€Nemours€and€Co.óó,€728Ð 5.. ÐF.2d€799€(6òòthóó€Cir.€1984),€wherein€the€Sixth€Circuit€held€that€it€was€reversible€error€forÐ 700 Ðthe€district€court€not€to€have€instructed€the€jury€on€negligence€per€se.€€In€the€òòTealóó€case,Ð 922 Ðhowever,€there€was€proof€in€the€record€that€the€OSHA€regulation€at€issue€had€actuallyÏbeen€violated.€€òòId.€óóat€803.€€In€this€case,€there€is€no€proof€of€a€statutory€violation.Ð   Ðà é àà A àIn€òòSampley€v.€Aulabaughóó,€589€S.W.2d€666€(Tenn.€App.€1979)òòóó,€plaintiffÐ   Ðwas€injured€when€the€crane€he€was€standing€on€was€struck€by€a€van,€and€the€TrialÏCourt€charged€the€jury€regarding€the€violation€of€a€statute€defining€reckless€driving,Ïand€told€the€jury€that€if€they€found€that€the€defendant€driver€was€operating€his€vehicleÏin€violation€of€the€statute,€that€would€be€negligence€per€se,€and€defendant€would€beÏliable.€òòóóòòId.€óóat€669.€€This€Court€held€that€there€was€no€proof€in€the€record€to€warrant€suchÐ  Ða€charge,€because€the€proof€had€shown€the€defendant€ð ðwas€operating€his€vehicle€in€aÏcareful,€prudent€manner€at€a€speed€of€five€to€eighteen€miles€per€hour€at€the€time€of€theÏaccident.ðð€€òòId.óó€€The€Court€said€the€jury€charge€was€error.òò€€Id.óó€at€670.à  àÐ  Ðà é àà A àòòóóIn€òòCarney€v.€Coca„Cola€Bottling€Works€of€Tullahomaóó,€856€S.W.2d€147Ð  Ð(Tenn.€App.€1993),€plaintiffs€had€sued€for€injuries€sustained€when€they€tried€to€passÏthe€defendantððs€parked€truck€and€had€an€accident.€€Plaintiffs€had€alleged€that€theÏdefendant€driver€had€parked€the€truck€in€violation€of€a€statute€codified€at€T.C.A.€ðð55„¼8„158,€which€deals€with€parking€vehicles€on€a€highway€outside€of€a€business€orÏresidential€district.€In€reversing€the€Trial€Judgeððs€negligence€per€se€charge,€this€CourtÏsaid€there€was€no€proof€in€the€record€that€the€vehicle€was€on€a€highway€outside€aÏbusiness€district,€but€rather,€the€proof€showed€the€truck€was€parked€in€front€of€aÏfactory€in€an€industrial€district.Ìà é àà A àThe€foregoing€cases€are€instructive€to€demonstrate€the€impropriety€ofÏcharging€negligence€per€se,€when€there€is€no€evidence€to€support€that€theory€of€theÏcase.€€Ìà é àà A àFinally,€plaintiffs€rely€on€òòVann€v.€Howellóó,€No.€02A01„9808„CV„00246Ð 5.. Ð(Tenn.€App.€June€30,€1999),€where€we€reversed€a€grant€of€summary€judgment€to€theÏowner€of€a€building€where€the€plaintiff€was€injured€as€a€result€of€the€condition€of€theÐ 922 Ðbuildingððs€elevator.€€òòóóThis€Court€held€the€owners€and€operators€of€elevators€to€a€higherÐ  Ðstandard€of€care,€akin€to€that€of€common€carriers,€and€said€ð ðthey€must€use€and€exerciseÏthe€highest€degree€of€care€and€precaution.ðð€€òòId.óó,€citing€òòSouthern€Bldg.€&€Loan€Assððn.€v.Ð   ÐLawsonóó,€37€S.W.2d€86,€87,€97€Tenn.€367€(1896).€€€òòVannóó€dealt€with€elevators€and€notÐ   Ðescalators,€but€assuming€òòarguendoóó€that€the€same€degree€of€care€obtaines,€we€reach€theÐ  Ðsame€result€because€plaintiffs€offered€no€proof€at€trial€that€defendant€had€violated€theÏstatute.€€Moreover€a€common€carrier€is€not€an€insurer€of€a€passengerððs€safety.€ÏòòSoutheastern€Aviation,€Inc.€v.€Hurdóó,€355€S.W.2d€436€(Tenn.€1962).€€Ð  Ðà é àà A àThe€evidence€in€this€case€does€not€establish€a€basis€requiring€the€TrialÏJudge€to€instruct€the€jury€as€requested€by€plaintiffs.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÏTrial€Court€and€remand€with€cost€of€the€appeal€assessed€to€the€appellants.€€ÌÓÓÔ#†Š„è‹‹Š„è¿ #ÔÌÌà@\\+\àòòˆà ù àÌóóà é àà A àà ™ àà ñ àà I àà ¡ à__________________________Ð   Ðà é àà A àà ™ àà ñ àà I àà ¡ àHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌÌ___________________________ÌHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.ÌÌÌÌÌÌ___________________________ÌÔ‡Š„è‹‹Š„èÔD.€Michael€Swiney,€J.Ô#†Š„è‹‹Š„èŸ-#ÔÐ 2++ ÐÌ