ÿWPC¬ a†üé8B¿ëÑSáÆš^ª¸ÂñL³¦û¾nk[¸cÖ¿ý§-îO`˜ J< s?|ŒÖt+I¿„ý0ðtO^bÝåt÷öC¬ÜHl]\ÊãÍÚî .MMÈZbp¿_A^ýÇ'ÕµçékQ6BN­sÙæ•Ò®WÎ,¢Ešhˆ'&Ƚ„žý[whç К=“…Xà/±Í'ƒA#)Ñ ¶ÐÔ½¥ýg¨ÿm2ß_*mJMRÄ‘EãÓ› ,kƒè 7Eé2ŽÆô§uf>E–ÝÕQnÞ¦>†*»SÀñ „/ed òTÿÓ«g¿½o3ˆ8è¼\®D+ *¿>´lN—”Zp7”ú QHú±g n¾?‘$YÛøL1Ô‰üSt\ùãª8Ÿ-Tà1ј?êöYIefªôöÃŒ(õrÂþl¶°é*Òü/Ÿÿ™õaÍ.äÿ8ÏÒÇ* ¬¾¸¬KÛ+m¶TVúÂÁJ#gôat©Q#¸åó3WEÿñB³ÒÞ(pbNfæãvZCO%yÛ›ÖH/|O§‹üÚ9=÷°¿˜"«ñ™l¬˜AK‘HràcKqkõ–Ýp ¨K¸ÚŸK@ˆu|F¢\ìG»á+µ:[5|€b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'UNíN;b==EŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸŸb¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ 0ë©©©© B”” 0¤± D3U D-ˆ 0Kµµ ASÆS 0¤ 0D½ A«˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»D )L (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularö~ì(ê:i¢Ø+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular XÝ ƒR6 $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôýEò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMills€filed€a€bankruptcy€petition€pending€these€proceedings,€but€the€bankruptcy€court€granted€relief€from€theÐ ° Ðautomatic€stay€provisions€of€the€bankruptcy€code€to€allow€Mills€to€pursue€this€appeal.€€- ù-(|G26 $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôýEò»»Ô d(|3‡~$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡~$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K]»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K]»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼K]»»»ÔÑ8€ÁXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îHLK]ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼K]»îîHL #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJune€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XÁX»¼K]ÔÌò òÔ#†¼K]»XXÁî#ÔDAVID€MILLSòòóó€v.€LINDA€SOLOMONòòóóÔ‡XÁX»¼K]Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Cannon€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€95„54€€€€€€Robert€E.€Ô_ÔCorlewÔ_Ô,€III,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1998„00393„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€16,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡XÁXXXÁÔThese€proceedings€began€when€David€Mills€filed€a€complaint€seeking€to€condemn€an€easementÐ xÈ  Ðacross€Linda€Solomonððs€property.€€In€bifurcated€proceedings,€the€jury€first€determined€the€locationÐ d´ Ðof€Millsðð€easement€across€Solomonððs€property€and,€later,€found€that€Solomon€was€entitled€to€anÐ P  Ðaward€of€damages€totaling€$11,908€for€the€easement,€including€$9900€in€incidental€damages.€€OnÐ <Œ Ðappeal€from€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€entered€on€the€juryððs€verdict,€Mills€challenges€only€the€awardÐ (x Ðof€$9900€in€incidental€damages.€€We€agree€with€Millsðð€contention€that€the€record€fails€to€containÐ d Ðmaterial€evidence€to€support€the€award€of€incidental€damages,€and€we€reverse€that€portion€of€the€trialÐ P Ðcourtððs€judgment.Ð ì< ÐÓÄÓò òó óÔ#†XÁXXXÁÐ#ÔÔ#†¼K]»XXÁ\#ÔÔ‡XÁX»¼K]ÔÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€Part;Ð Ä ÐReversed€in€Part;€and€Remandedó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼K]»àXÁ½#ÔÔ‡XÁX.¼K]ÔDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,€W.S.,óóÐ ˆØ Ðand€òòHolly€K.€Lillard,€J.óó,€joined.Ð tÄ ÐÌFrank€M.€Fly,€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€David€Mills.Ð L œ ÐÌJohn€B.€Ô_ÔMeltonÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Woodbury,€Tennessee,€and€Frank€Buck€and€Lena€Ann€Buck,€Smithville,Ð $"t! ÐTennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Linda€Solomon.Ð #`" ÐÓ† ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼K]»XXÁµ #ÔÔ‡XÁX»¼K]ÔÐ è$8 $ ÐòòóóÔ#†¼K]»XXÁø #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÁX»¼K]ÔÌÔ‡XÁXXXÁÔÔ& ì Ôà  àMills€initiated€these€proceedings€in€June€1995€when€he€filed€a€complaint€to€condemn€anÔ'ìÀ&  ÔÐ À&"& Ðeasement€or€right„of„way€over€Solomonððs€property€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÐ ¬'ü"' Ð54-14-102€(1993).€€Tracking€the€language€of€the€foregoing€statute,€Millsðð€complaint€alleged€that€heÐ ˜(è#( Ðowned€a€twenty„acre€tract€of€land€adjacent€to€a€118„acre€tract€owned€by€Solomon€in€Cannon€County,Ð „)Ô$) Ðthat€Millsðð€property€was€cut€off€or€obstructed€entirely€from€a€public€road€or€highway€by€theÐ p*À%* Ðintervening€lands€of€Solomon€and€others,€and€that€Mills€had€no€adequate€and€convenient€outlet€fromÐ \+¬&+ Ðhis€land€to€a€public€road.€€According€to€Millsðð€complaint,€the€parties€were€friends€when€they€movedÐ H,˜', Ðto€Cannon€County€in€the€early€1970ððs.€€In€1980,€Mills€bought€a€twenty„acre€tract€adjacent€toÐ 4-„(-ý ÐSolomonððs€land.€€With€Solomonððs€permission,€Mills€constructed€a€dirt€road€over€SolomonððsÐ ° Ðproperty,€and€he€used€the€road€to€access€his€property€until€the€early€1990ððs,€when€Solomon€withdrewÐ œì Ðher€permission€for€Mills€to€use€the€road€and€threatened€to€have€Mills€arrested€for€trespassing.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThe€first€phase€of€the€trial€proceedings€was€conducted€in€June€1997.€€At€the€conclusion€ofÐ `° Ðthis€phase,€the€jury€returned€a€verdict€establishing€the€location€of€Millsðð€easement€on€SolomonððsÐ L œ Ðproperty.€€At€the€second€hearing,€held€in€September€1997,€the€jury€decided€the€issue€of€damages.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐThe€jury€found€that€Solomon€was€entitled€to€damages€in€the€total€sum€of€$11,908.€€This€amountÐ $ t Ðincluded€$1908€for€the€easement€itself€and€$100€for€the€rental€value€of€the€easement€pending€the€trialÐ  ` Ðproceedings.€€The€remainder€of€the€award,€$9900,€consisted€of€the€ð ðincidental€damages€to€theÐ ü L  Ðbalance€of€the€land€owned€by€Ms.€Solomon.ðð€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àAfter€the€trial€court€entered€a€final€judgment€in€accordance€with€the€juryððs€verdict,€Mills€filedÐ À  Ða€motion€for€Ô_ÔremittiturÔ_Ô€and/or€new€trial.€€The€trial€court€denied€Millsðð€post„trial€motion,€and€thisÐ ¬ü  Ðappeal€followed.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àPending€this€appeal,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€Mills€was€not€entitled€to€possession€of€theÐ pÀ Ðeasement€until€he€had€paid€the€award€of€damages€to€Solomon.€€Nevertheless,€the€trial€court€grantedÐ \¬ ÐMills€the€temporary€use€of€the€easement€conditioned€upon€his€posting€a€bond€in€the€sum€of€$1000.€Ð H˜ ÐSolomon€objected€to€the€amount€of€the€bond,€contending€that,€pursuant€to€this€stateððs€eminentÐ 4„ Ðdomain€statutes,€Mills€was€required€to€post€a€bond€for€double€the€amount€of€damages€awarded.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÐ  p ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-120€(1980).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€Mills€challenges€only€the€award€of€incidental€damages,€contending€that€theÐ ä4 Ðevidence€presented€at€trial€failed€to€support€the€award€of€$9900€for€incidental€damages€to€SolomonððsÐ Ð  Ðland.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€response,€Solomon€contends€that€the€award€of€incidental€damages€should€be€upheldÐ ¼  Ðbecause€it€is€within€the€range€of€evidence€presented€at€trial.€€As€a€preliminary€matter,€however,Ð ¨ø ÐSolomon€again€challenges€the€adequacy€of€Millsðð€bond,€insisting€that€Millsðð€appeal€should€beÐ ”ä Ðdismissed€due€to€his€failure€to€post€a€bond€for€double€the€amount€of€damages€as€required€by€thisÐ €Ð Ðstateððs€eminent€domain€statutes.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àWe€first€address€Solomonððs€contention€that€Millsðð€appeal€should€be€dismissed€due€to€hisÐ D!” Ðfailure€to€post€a€sufficient€bond.€€In€support€of€this€argument,€Solomon€relies€upon€the€followingÐ 0"€  Ðstatutory€provision:Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€taking€of€an€appeal€does€not€suspend€the€operations€of€the€petitioner€onÐ ô$D # Ðthe€land,€provided€such€petitioner€will€give€bond€with€good€security,€to€be€approvedÐ à%0!$ Ðby€the€clerk,€in€double€the€amount€of€the€assessment€of€the€jury€of€inquest,€payableÐ Ì&"% Ðto€the€defendants,€and€conditioned€to€abide€by€and€perform€the€final€judgment€in€theÐ ¸'#& Ðpremises.Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  ЇTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-120€(1980).€€Solomon€contends€that€this€statutory€bond€requirementÐ ° Ðapplies€to€all€condemnation€proceedings,€including€condemnations€of€private€easements€pursuantÐ œì Ðto€title54,€chapter14.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWe€disagree.€€The€statutory€bond€provision€cited€by€Solomon€is€found€in€this€stateððs€eminentÐ `° Ðdomain€statutes€codified€at€title29,€chapter16.€€Title29,€chapter16€grants€certain€entities€the€powerÐ L œ Ðto€condemn€anotherððs€real€property€for€the€purpose€of€constructing€internal€improvements.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐSpecifically,€chapter16€provides€thatÐ $ t ÐÌà8  àà ` à[Ô_Ôa]nyÔ_Ô€person€or€corporation€authorized€by€law€to€construct€any€railroad,Ð ü L  Ðturnpike,€canal,€toll€bridge,€road,€causeway,€or€other€work€of€internal€improvementÐ è 8  Ðto€which€the€like€privilege€is€conceded,€may€take€the€real€estate€of€individuals,€notÐ Ô$  Ðexceeding€the€amount€prescribed€by€law,€or€by€the€charter€under€which€the€person€orÐ À  Ðcorporation€acts,€in€the€manner€and€upon€the€terms€herein€Ô& Ä Ôprovided.Ьü Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-101€(1980).€€Moreover,€chapter16€states€that€its€provisionsÔ'Ĭí#ÔÐ „Ô  ÐÌà8  àshall€be€deemed,€unless€expressly€stated€to€the€contrary,€and€without€incorporationÐ \¬ Ðor€reference,€to€be€a€part€of€every€section,€or€legislative€act,€present€or€future,€whichÐ H˜ Ðgrants€the€power€of€such€condemnation.Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-102€(1980).€€Thus,€chapter16ððs€provisions€apply€to€every€legislativeÐ  \ Ðenactment€granting€such€condemnation€powers,€whether€the€enactment€consists€of€a€public€statuteÐ øH Ðor€a€private€act.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòÔ_ÔRaglandÔ_Ôv.€Davidson€County€Bd.€of€Educ.ó óóó,€312€S.W.2d€855,€859€(Tenn.€1958);Ð ä4 Ðò òòòTennessee€Mining&€Mfg.€Co.v.€Anderson€Countyó óóó,€121€S.W.2d€543,€546€(Tenn.€1938).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àContrary€to€Solomonððs€argument,€we€conclude€that€the€cited€statutory€bond€provision€doesÐ ¨ø Ðnot€apply€to€the€present€proceeding.€€The€present€proceeding€was€brought€pursuant€to€title54,Ð ”ä Ðchapter14,€which€permits€a€landlocked€property€owner€to€condemn€an€easement€or€right„of„wayÐ €Ð Ðacross€the€property€of€an€adjacent€landowner.€€Specifically,€title54,€chapter14€provides€thatÐ l¼ ÐÌà8  àà ` à[Ô_Ôa]nyÔ_Ô€person€owning€any€lands,€ingress€or€egress€to€and€from€which€is€cut€offÐ D!” Ðor€obstructed€entirely€from€a€public€road€or€highway€by€the€intervening€lands€ofÐ 0"€  Ðanother,€or€who€has€no€adequate€and€convenient€outlet€from€such€lands€to€a€publicÐ #l! Ðroad€in€the€state,€by€reason€of€the€intervening€lands€of€another,€is€given€the€right€toÐ $X" Ðhave€an€easement€or€right„of„way€condemned€and€set€aside€for€the€benefit€Ô& ° Ôof€suchÐ ô$D # Ðlands€over€and€across€such€intervening€lands€or€property.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€54-14-102€(1993).Ô'°ô$Æ+ÔÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€recognized€that€a€proceeding€brought€pursuant€to€section€54-14-102€is,€inÐ )à$( Ðeffect,€a€condemnation€action€because€the€statute€ð ðà8 @| àconfers€the€power€of€eminent€domain€upon€oneÐ |*Ì%) Ðprivate€person€to€take€anotherððs€property,ðð€provided€the€petitioner€meets€the€statutory€requirementÐ h+¸&* Ðof€necessity€and€provided€he€uses€the€easement€or€right„of„way€only€for€the€purpose€of€ingress€andÐ ° Ðegress.€€òòò òVinsonv.€Nashville,€Chattanooga&€St.€Louis€Ry.ó óóó,€321€S.W.2d€841,€843€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð œì Ð1958).€€We€also€have€recognized,€however,€that€an€action€to€condemn€a€private€easement€or€right„of„Ð ˆØ Ðway€under€this€statute€differs€significantly€from€an€action€to€condemn€an€easement€or€right„of„wayÐ tÄ Ðfor€a€public€road€under€this€stateððs€other€condemnation€statutes.€€The€easement€or€right„of„wayÐ `° Ðcondemned€under€section€54-14-102€ð ðis€a€private€and€not€a€public€way.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€€It€belongs€to€the€ownerÐ L œ Ðof€the€land€benefitted€thereby,€and€it€continues€as€long€as€it€is€used€and€maintained€by€the€owner€forÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€limited€purpose€of€ingress€and€egress.€€In€contrast,€a€public€road€is€held€in€trust€for€the€public€andÐ $ t Ðis€maintained€for€use€by€the€public€at€large.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.€€at€843„44.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€present€proceeding€may€be€characterized€as€a€condemnation€action,€we€do€notÐ è 8  Ðbelieve€that€it€is€the€type€of€condemnation€action€to€which€the€provisions€of€title29,€chapter16Ð Ô$  Ðapply.€€Title29,€chapter16€applies€to€condemnation€actions€brought€by€persons€or€corporations€forÐ À  Ðthe€purpose€of€constructing€internal€improvements,€such€as€railroads,€turnpikes,€canals,€toll€bridges,Ð ¬ü  Ðroads,€causeways,€or€other€improvements.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-101€(1980).€€By€itsÐ ˜è  Ðprovisions,€this€chapter€also€applies€to€any€legislative€act€ð ðwhich€grants€the€power€of€suchÐ „Ô  Ðcondemnation.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-16-102€(1980).€€By€referring€to€ð ðthe€power€of€ò òòòsuchó óóóÐ pÀ Ðcondemnation,ðð€rather€than€simply€ð ðthe€power€of€condemnation,ðð€the€statute€limits€its€applicationÐ \¬ Ðto€the€type€of€condemnation€action€set€forth€in€the€preceding€section€29-16-101,€ò òòòi.e.ó óóó€theÐ H˜ Ðcondemnation€of€land€for€the€purpose€of€constructing€internal€improvements.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€present€proceeding€does€not€involve€the€condemnation€of€land€for€the€construction€ofÐ  \ Ðan€internal€improvement.€€Rather,€as€we€previously€explained,€this€action€involves€the€condemnationÐ øH Ðof€land€for€the€limited€purpose€of€ingress€from€or€egress€to€a€public€road.€€Accordingly,€theÐ ä4 Ðremaining€provisions€of€title29,€chapter16,€including€the€cited€statutory€bond€provision,€do€notÐ Ð  Ðapply€to€the€present€proceeding.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àOur€conclusion€that€Mills€was€not€required€to€comply€with€the€foregoing€statutory€bondÐ ”ä Ðprovision€is€strengthened€by€the€legislatureððs€recent€amendment€of€title54,€chapter14,€to€include€aÐ €Ð Ðsimilar€bond€requirement.€€Rather€than€requiring€a€petitioner€taking€an€appeal€to€post€a€bond€forÐ l¼ Ðdouble€the€amount€of€damages,€the€amendment€requires€the€petitioner€to€post€a€bond€for€double€theÐ X ¨ Ðappraised€value€of€the€parcel€of€land€or€property€rights€sought€to€be€taken:Ð D!” ÐÌà8  àà ` àUpon€the€filing€of€a€petition€by€the€person€desiring€to€secure€such€easementÐ #l! Ðor€right„of„way,€the€court€shall€appoint€an€appraiser€to€conduct€an€appraisal€of€theÐ $X" Ðparcel€of€land€or€rights€therein€or€incident€thereto€a€portion€of€which€is€wanted.€€TheÐ ô$D # Ðcost€of€the€appraisal€shall€be€borne€by€the€person€seeking€to€appropriate€such€land.€Ð à%0!$ ÐUpon€completion,€the€appraisal€shall€be€filed€with€the€court€and€within€thirty(30)Ð Ì&"% Ðdays€of€the€filing,€the€person€seeking€to€appropriate€such€land€shall€post€a€bond€forÐ ¸'#& Ðtwo(2)€times€the€amount€of€the€appraisal.€€The€appraisal€shall€be€conducted€for€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsole€purpose€of€determining€the€amount€of€the€bond€and€shall€not€be€admissible€asÐ )à$( Ðevidence.Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€54-14-103(b)€(Supp.€1999).€€This€provision,€which€went€into€effect€June14,Ð ° Ð1999,€ò òòòseeó óóó€1999€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts€362,€provides€some€of€the€same€protection€as€the€appeal€bondÐ œì Ðrequired€by€section€29-16-120,€but€it€provides€this€protection€earlier€in€the€proceeding€by€requiringÐ ˆØ Ðthe€petitioner€to€post€a€bond€shortly€after€the€filing€of€the€petition€rather€than€upon€taking€an€appeal.€Ð tÄ ÐAlthough€not€conclusive€of€the€legislatureððs€intent,€we€think€that€this€recent€amendment€supports€theÐ `° Ðnotion€that,€prior€to€June14,€1999,€the€statutes€authorizing€the€condemnation€of€private€easementsÐ L œ Ðdid€not€include€such€a€statutory€bond€requirement.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€damages€issue€raised€by€Mills,€we€agree€that€the€juryððs€award€of€incidentalÐ  ` Ðdamages€in€this€case€is€not€supported€by€material€evidence.€€Our€review€of€the€judgment€entered€onÐ ü L  Ðthe€juryððs€verdict€is€governed€by€rule€13(d)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure,€whichÐ è 8  Ðprovides€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôf]indingsÔ_Ô€of€fact€by€a€jury€in€civil€actions€shall€be€set€aside€only€if€there€is€no€materialÐ Ô$  Ðevidence€to€support€the€verdict.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€Under€this€standard€of€review,€we€ð ðareÐ À  Ðnot€at€liberty€to€weigh€the€evidence€or€to€decide€where€the€preponderance€lies,€but€are€limited€toÐ ¬ü  Ðdetermining€whether€there€is€material€evidence€to€support€the€verdict.ðð€€ò òòòÔ_ÔCrabtreeÔ_Ô€Masonry€Co.v.Ð ˜è  ÐC&R€Constr.,€Inc.ó óóó,€575€S.W.2d€4,€5€(Tenn.€1978).€€In€making€this€determination,€we€are€ð ðrequiredÐ „Ô  Ðto€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€all€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€verdict,€to€assume€the€truthÐ pÀ Ðof€all€that€tends€to€support€it,€allowing€all€reasonable€inferences€to€sustain€the€verdict,€and€to€discardÐ \¬ Ðall€to€the€contrary.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€€If€the€record€contains€any€material€evidence€to€support€the€verdict,€we€mustÐ H˜ Ðaffirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.;€ò òòòaccordó óóó€òòò òForresterv.€Ô_ÔStockstillÔ_Ôó óóó,€869€S.W.2d€328,€329Ð 4„ Ð(Tenn.€1994).Ð  p ÐÌà  àAs€located€by€the€jury,€Millsðð€easement€traversed€Solomonððs€property€in€such€a€way€thatÐ øH Ðeleven€acres€of€Solomonððs€property€lay€on€one€side€of€the€easement€and€the€remainder€of€herÐ ä4 Ðproperty€lay€on€the€other€side.€€At€the€damages€phase€of€the€proceedings,€Solomonððs€proof€ofÐ Ð  Ðdamages€focused€on€the€eleven€acres€of€land€that€lay€on€the€left€side€of€Millsðð€easement.€€SolomonÐ ¼  Ðtestified€that€the€fair€market€value€of€her€property€was€$1000€per€acre.€€In€Solomonððs€opinion,€theÐ ¨ø Ðfair€market€value€of€her€property€had€declined€by€$10,000€or€$11,000,€the€fair€market€value€of€theÐ ”ä Ðeleven€acres€to€the€left€of€Millsðð€easement.€€Solomon€defended€her€opinion€by€explaining€that€theÐ €Ð Ðeasement€ð ðcut€upðð€her€property,€that€ð ðit€[was]€like€losing€that€much€of€[her]€property,ðð€and€that,€ifÐ l¼ Ðher€children€inherited€the€land,€they€would€be€ð ðgetting€less€property.ðð€€Thus,€in€estimating€herÐ X ¨ Ðdamages,€Solomon€discounted€the€value€of€her€property€by€the€entire€fair€market€value€of€the€elevenÐ D!” Ðacres.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àSolomonððs€expert€similarly€estimated€the€damages€to€Solomonððs€property€by€deducting€theÐ $X" Ðentire€value€of€the€eleven€acres.€€Gary€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô,€a€licensed€real€estate€broker,€testified€that€SolomonððsÐ ô$D # Ðproperty€was€worth€$833€per€acre.€€In€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ôðð€opinion,€the€value€of€Solomonððs€property€wasÐ à%0!$ Ðreduced€by€$9163,€the€full€value€of€the€eleven€acres€on€one€side€of€the€easement.€€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_ÔÐ Ì&"% Ðacknowledged€that€his€damages€estimate€ð ðwas€the€same€as€if€Mrs.€Solomon€were€deeding€[the€elevenÐ ¸'#& Ðacres]€over€to€Mr.€Mills.ðð€€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô€defended€his€estimate€by€explaining€that€Solomon€would€beÐ ¤(ô#' Ðunable€to€sell€the€eleven€acres€as€a€separate€tract€because€of€its€severe€topography€and€insufficientÐ )à$( Ðfrontage€on€a€public€road.€€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô€believed€that€Millsðð€condemnation€of€the€easement€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðcomparable€to€ð ðcutting€a€portion€of€[the]€land€off€and€cutting€it€away.ðð€€At€another€point€in€hisÐ h+¸&* Ðtestimony,€however,€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô€contradicted€his€statement€that€the€eleven€acres€had€no€value€when€heÐ ° Ðtestified€that€ð ð[Ô_Ôy]ouÔ_Ô€could€sell€it€[the€eleven€acres],€it€would€just€be€at€a€lessor€[sic]€value€than€whatÐ œì Ðit,€you€know,€would€be€otherwise.ðð€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€this€testimony€misapprehends€both€the€legal€effect€of€Millsðð€easement€acrossÐ `° ÐSolomonððs€property€and€the€law€of€damages€in€cases€involving€the€condemnation€of€such€easements.€Ð L œ ÐContrary€to€Solomonððs€and€Nicholððs€suggestions,€Millsðð€easement€did€not€have€the€effect€of€severingÐ 8 ˆ ÐSolomonððs€property€into€two€tracts€of€land.€€By€condemning€an€easement€pursuant€to€sectionÐ $ t Ð54-14-102,€Mills€did€not€acquire€title€to€the€strip€of€property€over€which€the€easement€lay.€€ThatÐ  ` Ðproperty€is€still€owned€by€Solomon.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòLillardv.€Southern€Ry.€Co.ó óóó,€330€S.W.2d€335,€337€(Tenn.Ð ü L  Ð1959);€òòò òColonial€Pipeline€Co.v.€Ô_ÔEatherlyÔ_Ôó óóó,€621€S.W.2d€770,€773€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981).€€All€thatÐ è 8  ÐMills€acquired€was€the€right€to€use€the€property€for€the€limited€purpose€of€ingress€to€and€egress€fromÐ Ô$  Ðhis€landlocked€property.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòVinsonv.€Nashville,€Chattanooga&€St.€Louis€Ry.ó óóó,€321€S.W.2d€841,Ð À  Ð843€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1958).€€While€Millsðð€condemnation€of€the€easement€might€have€diminished€theÐ ¬ü  Ðvalue€of€Solomonððs€118„acre€tract€of€land,€it€did€not€result€in€the€creation€of€two€separate€tracts€ofÐ ˜è  Ðproperty.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAs€a€general€rule,€when€an€easement€is€condemned€across€a€defendantððs€property,€theÐ \¬ Ðmeasure€of€damages€is€the€difference€in€the€fair€market€value€of€the€defendantððs€property€prior€to€theÐ H˜ Ðtaking€and€its€value€after€the€taking.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòState€ex€rel.€Shawv.€Gormanó óóó,€596€S.W.2d€796,€797€(Tenn.Ð 4„ Ð1980);€ò òòòBettyv.€Metropolitan€Ô_ÔGovððtÔ_Ôó óóó,€835€S.W.2d€1,€7€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€This€is€consistent€withÐ  p Ðthe€rule€that€the€ð ðproper€measure€of€damages€to€land€remaining€after€a€partial€taking€is€the€declineÐ  \ Ðin€the€fair€market€value€of€the€property€by€virtue€of€the€taking.ðð€€ò òòòShelby€Countyv.€Ô_ÔKingswayÔ_Ô€GreensÐ øH Ðof€Am.,€Inc.óóó ó,€706€S.W.2d€634,€638€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1985);€ò òòòaccordó óóó€ò òòòCity€of€Rogersvillev.€Ô_ÔNelmsÔ_Ôó óóó,Ð ä4 Ð1985€WL€4126,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.6,€1985)€(ò òòòno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó).€€It€is€also€consistent€withÐ Ð  Ðthe€rule€that,€in€an€action€for€breach€of€covenant€against€encumbrances,€where€the€encumbrance€isÐ ¼  Ðan€easement,€the€proper€measure€of€damages€is€the€propertyððs€diminution€in€value€as€a€result€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðeasementððs€existence,€ò òòòi.e.ó óóó€the€difference€between€the€landððs€value€without€the€easement€and€its€valueÐ ”ä Ðwith€the€easement.€€ò òòòEllisonv.€F.€Murray€Parker€Builders,€Inc.óóó ó,€573€S.W.2d€161,€162„63€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð €Ð ÐApp.€1978).Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àIn€cases€involving€the€condemnation€of€an€easement€or€any€other€partial€taking,€theÐ D!” Ðdefendantððs€damages€should€be€measured€in€relation€to€the€defendantððs€entire€tract€of€property.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÐ 0"€  Ðò òòòÔ_ÔBlevinsÔ_Ôv.€Johnson€Countyó óóó,€746€S.W.2d€678,€685€(Tenn.€1988);€ò òòòState€ex€rel.€Packv.€Walkeró óóó,€423Ð #l! ÐS.W.2d€473,€473€(Tenn.€1968).€€That€is,€the€measure€of€damages€should€be€the€difference€in€valueÐ $X" Ðof€the€entire€property€or€tract€before€the€creation€of€the€easement€and€its€value€after€the€easementððsÐ ô$D # Ðcreation.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€ò òòòFaulknerv.€City€of€Nashvilleó óóó,€285€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€39,€43€(Tenn.€1926);€ò òòòsee€alsoó óóó€29A€Ô_ÔC.J.S.Ô_ÔÐ à%0!$ Ðò òòòEminent€Domainó óóó€ðððð126,€131,€at€325,€340€(1992).Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€Solomonððs€proof€of€damages€improperly€focused€on€the€value€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðeleven€acres€of€land€on€the€left€side€of€Millsðð€easement€as€if€the€eleven€acres€were€severable€fromÐ )à$( Ðthe€entire€tract€of€Solomonððs€property.€€Solomonððs€testimony€that€the€eleven€acres€had€no€value€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðbased€upon€her€feeling€that€this€portion€of€the€property€was€ð ðcut€offðð€from€the€remainder€of€the€tract.€Ð h+¸&* ÐÔ_ÔNicholsÔ_Ôðð€testimony€that€the€eleven€acres€had€no€value€was€based€on€his€opinion€that,€if€offered€forÐ ° Ðsale€as€a€separate€tract,€the€eleven„acre€tract€would€not€be€marketable,€but€he€later€acknowledged€thatÐ œì Ðthe€eleven€acres€had€some€value.€€None€of€this€testimony€addressed€the€determinative€issue€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðeasementððs€effect€on€the€value€of€the€entire€118„acre€tract€of€property€owned€by€Solomon.€€Instead,Ð tÄ Ðthe€testimony€focused€only€on€the€easementððs€effect€on€the€eleven€acres€to€the€left€of€the€easement.Ð `° ÐÌà  àWe€recognize€that€Millsðð€easement€may€have€affected€the€value€of€Solomonððs€property€and,Ð 8 ˆ Ðparticularly,€the€value€of€the€property€in€the€immediate€vicinity€of€the€easement.€€The€only€proof€ofÐ $ t Ðdiminished€value,€however,€was€based,€not€upon€the€value€of€the€entire€tract,€but€upon€the€value€ofÐ  ` Ðeleven€acres€of€the€tract.€€Moreover,€this€proof€was€based€entirely€upon€the€hypothetical€sale€of€theÐ ü L  Ðeleven€acres€as€if€it€constituted€a€separate€tract€of€property.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòStatev.€Ô_ÔChumbleyÔ_Ôó óóó,€181€S.W.2d€382,Ð è 8  Ð383€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1944)€(holding€that€value€of€land€condemned€must€be€fixed€as€of€time€of€takingÐ Ô$  Ðand€may€not€be€based€upon€speculative€future€developments);€ò òòòaccordó óóó€ò òòòState€ex€rel.€Ô_ÔCommððrÔ_Ôv.€Coxó óóó,Ð À  Ð1987€WL€17021,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.15,€1987)€(ò òòòno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó).€€Under€theseÐ ¬ü  Ðcircumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€record€fails€to€contain€material€proof€to€support€the€juryððs€awardÐ ˜è  Ðof€$9900€in€incidental€damages.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àInasmuch€as€the€record€contains€no€material€evidence€as€to€the€easementððs€effect€on€the€valueÐ \¬ Ðof€Solomonððs€entire€tract€of€property,€we€reverse€the€award€of€$9900€in€incidental€damages,€and€weÐ H˜ Ðremand€this€cause€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€In€all€other€respects,€the€trialÐ 4„ Ðcourtððs€judgment€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellee,€Linda€Solomon,€and€herÐ  p Ðsurety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ô#†XÁXXXÁ #ÔÐ  \ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ¼  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGE