WPC] 52SN0eѥɲ(EL()zފ]m+!+?.})Fv#cU# Ӕ(0 b6K5_؞l]i_Y. ms8wY4#zis_~0 iedN1f֚RJ.6X;:p/LeFvʷIw=+aEE=5J7W R^kj Χ ͘щqwBq-}D63 6@1%U&Dw^mv`!VU/K'96zҖ^ꔄ[em)e.$D`|LX/cɨ,'5W2# UN % 0cU <~w@4U< 0 Y):) jc #  AQ 0D 0DX;'U: B0M 0D 0D__ D/ B D3"'L9$HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(;B$X^XXX-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman $E%P&E'(U)U*U+,Ӏ8n~<$3|x8)L  Z $Arrus BT Roman(W(3PN$ B!X4;XXX   `   0     PN$Xt`XXX `   1    ݀Subsequently,Nortonbecamethesuccessorinownershipoftheproperty   ` whichisthesubjectofthedisputedlease.   0  PN$Xt`XXX `   4    ݀Shortlythereafter,NortonenteredintoanewleasewithLOAforthe   ` constructionofhighwaysignsonthepropertyatornearthesamelocation. `  PN$Xt`XXX `   5    ݀McCaskillhascontinuedtotenderthemonthlyrentinaccordancewith  the ` lease.However,Nortonhascontinuinglyrejectedthemonthlyrentfrom    ` McCaskill.   PN$Xt`XXX `   3    ݀Atthetimetheleasewasenteredinto,CitySignwasownedbythe (#    ` defendantsfather,JamesH.McCaskill.   2#$  Xd|XXX `   6    ݀NortonandLOAalsosoughtinjunctivereliefagainstCitySigntoprevent   ` CitySignfromtakinganyactionwithregardtotheissuanceofanewsign ` permitandtheerectionofanewsignonpropertyadjacenttothepropertythat ` isthesubjectofthislawsuit. "%C<< C(3$ !  ($$   1   1  2#$  Xd|XXX `   7    ݀Besidesthetypewrittenoptionprovisionintheleaseonwhichtheparties  havefocusedtheirattention,theleasecontainsaprintedprovisionwhichcouldhaveaffectedtheoutcomeofthislawsuit.Theleasestates:8 `  ` !` ! 8 ` 8 ` !` !Aftertheoriginaltermhereof,thisleaseshallcontinueinforcefromyeartoyearforaperiodofseven(7)consecutiveyearsunlessterminatedattheendoftheoriginalterm,oranyadditionalyearthereafter,uponwrittennoticeofterminationtoLessorbyLessee,servednotlessthanthirty(30)daysbeforetheendofsuchtermoradditionalyear.    Neitherpartybroughttheprovisiontotheattentionofthetrialcourt,norhavetheyreliedupontheprovisioninthisCourt.Theprovisionsbeneficiary,CitySign,hasobviouslywaivedtheprovisionandcannotnowclaimerrorforitsexclusion.T.R.A.P.36(a)( Nothinginthisruleshallbeconstruedasrequiringreliefbegrantedtoapartyresponsibleforanerrororwhofailedtotakewhateveractionwasreasonablyavailabletopreventornullifytheharmfuleffectofanerror.).  "  XXXX_XX   Ad FILEDXX_   October7,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr.XXAppellateCourtClerk   PN$Xt`XXX `   2    ݀Thedocumentisaprintedformwithtypewrittenadditionsdraftedby  City ` Sign.,cAZ"Arial Regular dLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (#$  0  ''' dxdP Pd'dxd  $    7    Xd|XXX#XXXXd|C# Ҁ BXd|XXX#XXXXd|# /  $    7    ݀Xd|XXXԀBesidesthetypewrittenoptionprovisionintheleaseonwhichtheparties  havefocusedtheirattention,theleasecontainsaprintedprovisionwhichcouldhaveaffectedtheoutcomeofthislawsuit.Theleasestates:8      8  8`   Aftertheoriginaltermhereof,thisleaseshallcontinueinforcefromyeartoyearforaperiodofseven(7)consecutiveyearsunlessterminatedattheendoftheoriginalterm,oranyadditionalyearthereafter,uponwrittennoticeofterminationtoLessorbyLessee,servednotlessthanthirty(30)daysbeforetheendofsuchtermoradditionalyear. ` x` x Neitherpartybroughttheprovisiontotheattentionofthetrialcourt,norhavetheyreliedupontheprovisioninthisCourt.Theprovisionsbeneficiary,CitySign,hasobviouslywaivedtheprovisionandcannotnowclaimerrorforitsexclusion.T.R.A.P.36(a)( Nothinginthisruleshallbeconstruedasrequiringreliefbegrantedtoapartyresponsibleforanerrororwhofailedtotakewhateveractionwasreasonablyavailabletopreventornullifytheharmfuleffectofanerror.).#XXXXd|E# B!XeXXX  TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7LXXdXXd7    8,r(<,(j 8` `@E` ttx$, r,8@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  8t(>.*jxf(` `@EL` ttx$( t8@)ATJACKSON `  ______________________________________________ MAXNORTONand  LONGOUTDOORADVERTISING,     ` PlaintiffsAppellees,Vs. `     h      p MadisonChancery50956     `     h      p C.A.No.02A019712CH00325 JOHNA.McCASKILLd/b/a   CITYSIGNCOMPANY,     ` DefendantAppellant.____________________________________________________________________________@ FROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFMADISONCOUNTY@ THEHONORABLEJOEC.MORRIS,CHANCELLOR@ JamesT.Ryal,Jr.;Adams,Ryal&FlippinofHumboldt@>>(ForAppellant@ LarryA.Butler,JustinS.Gilbert;Spragin,Barnett,@ Cobb&Butler,PLCofJackson@II(ForAppellees((@$ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED  '## @&Opinionfiled:)))))) `     h      p   W.FRANKCRAWFORD, 2..  `     h      p $#1#$%  %&%  %&'PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S.CONCUR:DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGEDAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE' * :66  ;77 *+7 t` XXdXXd7ћ ` Thisappealinvolvesadisputeoverthedurationofalease.DefendantJohn  A.McCaskill(McCaskill),doingbusinessasCitySignCompany(CitySign),appealstheChancellorsordergrantingpartialsummaryjudgmenttoplaintiffsMaxNorton(Norton)andLongOutdoorAdvertising(LOA). ` OnoraboutJune12,1985,RichardD.Norton,Jr.,Nortonsbrother,  ##  1      כentered   intoalease ##  2      כwithCitySign.X ##  3      כUnderthelease,RichardD.Norton,Jr.,agreedtolease   abillboardlocationoncommercialpropertylocatedontheHighway45ByPassinJackson,TennesseetoCitySign.Accordingtothelease,CitySignagreedtopaymonthlyinstallmentsofrentinexchangefortherighttomaintainbillboardadvertisingontheproperty.TheleasewasforaperiodoftenyearsbeginningJuly1,1985andendingJune30,1995.Aspartofthelease,CitySigninsertedatypewrittenprovisionwithintheformleasewhichstated: CitySignCompanyreservesanoptiontorenewthisleaseattheendof10yearsforalikeperiod. ` OnJuly5,1995,NortonnotifiedCitySignbyletterthattheoriginaltermoftheleasehadexpiredonJune30,1995.NortonaddedthatsinceCitySigndidnotexercisetheoptiontorenew,theleaseexpiredandwasnolongerinforce.  ##  4      כDespite " receiptofNortonsletter,McCaskill,ownerofCitySign,wrotealetterdatedJuly10,1995notifyingNortonthatCitySignwasexercisingitsoptiontorenewtheleaseforthetenyearsspecifiedinthelease.McCaskillenclosedacheckforthemonthsrentonthelease.  ##  5      כ *&&  ` OnSeptember11,1995,NortonandLOAfiledacomplaintagainstMcCaskill,individuallyandd/b/aCitySignCompany,allegingthatCitySignwrongfullyrefused,andhascontinuedtorefuse,toremoveitsbillboardfromtheleasedpremisesandhasrefusedtoreleaseitssignpermitwiththeTennesseeDepartmentofTransportation.NortonandLOAclaimthatsuchwrongfulrefusalhaspreventedNortonfromfulfillinghiscontractualobligationswithregardtoLOA.Furthermore,NortonandLOAclaimthatCitySignswrongfulrefusalprevented,andhascontinuedtoprevent,LOAfromobtainingsignpermitsandusingthepropertyforitsownpurposesandeconomicbenefit.NortonandLOAassertthatCitySignisliableforalldamagesresultingfromCitySignsallegedbreachofcontract,trespass,andtortiousinterferencewithcontractualrelations. ##  6      כ   ` OnFebruary13,1996,NortonandLOAfiledamotionforpartialsummaryjudgmentassertingthattheleaseterminatedJune30,1995,andthe onlyreviewingissuetobetriedisdamages.Subsequently,CitySignfiledaresponseanditsownmotionforsummaryjudgmentwhereinitassertedthatthelease wasrenewedwithinareasonableperiodoftimefollowingJune30,1995. ` OnAugust1,1996,theChancellorgrantedNortonandLOAsmotionforpartialsummaryjudgmentwhiledenyingCitySignsmotionforsummaryjudgment.FollowingtheChancellorsorder,thepartiesenteredintoaconsentjudgmentwherebythepartiesagreedupondamagesshouldtheappellatecourtaffirmtheChancellorsdecision. ` CitySignappealsandpresentsthefollowingissueforreview:WhethertheChancellorerredingrantingplaintiffsmotionforpartialsummaryjudgmentandinfailingtograntdefendantsmotionforsummaryjudgment. 2..  ` Amotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbegrantedwhenthemovantdemonstratesthattherearenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthatthemovingpartyisentitledtoajudgmentasamatteroflaw.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.04.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmentbearstheburdenofdemonstratingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactexists. Bainv.Wells ,936S.W.2d618,622(Tenn.1997).On   amotionforsummaryjudgment,thecourtmusttakethestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidenceinfavorofthenonmovingparty,allowallreasonableinferencesinfavorofthatparty,anddiscardallcountervailingevidence. Id. In Byrdv.Hall ,847  S.W.2d208(Tenn.1993),ourSupremeCourtstated:8 ` Onceitisshownbythemovingpartythatthereisnogenuineissueofmaterialfact,thenonmovingpartymustthendemonstrate,byaffidavitsordiscoverymaterials,thatthereisagenuine,materialfactdisputetowarrantatrial.Inthisregard,Rule56.05providesthatthenonmovingpartycannotsimplyrelyuponhispleadingsbutmustsetforthspecificfactsshowingthatthereisagenuineissueofmaterialfact  fortrial.8` !` !  Id. at211(citationsomitted)(emphasisinoriginal).   ` Summaryjudgmentisonlyappropriatewhenthefactsandthelegalconclusionsdrawnfromthefactsreasonablypermitonlyoneconclusion. Carvellv. "  Bottoms ,900S.W.2d23,26(Tenn.1995).Ascertainmentoftheintentionofthe $  partiestoawrittencontractisaquestionoflaw,ratherthanaquestionoffact. HamblenCountyv.CityofMorristown ,656S.W.2d331,33536(Tenn.1983). ($$ Sinceonlyquestionsoflawareinvolved,thereisnopresumptionofcorrectnessregardingatrialcourt'sgrantofsummaryjudgment. Bain ,936S.W.2dat622. ,(( Therefore,ourreviewofthetrialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgmentis denovo on .** therecordbeforethisCourt. Warrenv.EstateofKirk ,954S.W.2d722,723(Tenn. 0 ,, 1997). ` CitySignassertsthattheoptiontorenewtheleasecomesattheendofthetenyearsandnotsometimepriortotheexpirationofthelease.Furthermore,CitySigncontendsthatsincetheleaseprovidedanoptiontorenewattheendoftenyears,the 8$44 optionmaybeexercisedwithinareasonabletimeaftertheexpirationoftheleaseterm.CitySignassertsthattheoptionwasexercisedwithintendaysoftheexpirationoftheleaseandthuswithinareasonabletime.Forthesereasons,CitySignclaimsitproperlyexercisedtheoptiontorenewtherebyextendingtheleaseforanadditionaltenyears. ` Ontheotherhand,NortoncontendsthattheChancellorwascorrectingrantingthemotionforsummaryjudgment.NortonbasicallyassertsthattheleaseexpiredonJune30,1995,andthatCitySigndidnotattempttorenewtheleaseonorbeforethattime.AccordingtoNorton,thetermsoftheleaseclearlystatethattheoptionwastobeexercisedattheendofthelease,notaftertheendofthelease.Whentheleaseexp/ ##  7      ired,theoptiontorenewalsoexpired.Thus,theoptiondidnotexistforCitySigntoexercise.. ##  7      01 ##  7       ##  7      כ  'XXXX' ` Itiswellestablishedthatleasesarecontractsand,thus,therulesofconstructionpertainingtocontractsapplytoleasesinascertainingthescopeandmeaningofleases.49Am.Jur.2d LandlordandTenant 43(1995). Thecardinal   ruleofconstructionofwritteninstrumentsisthattheintentionofthepartiesasascertainedfromthelanguageoftheinstrumentcontrols. St.PaulSurplusLines $  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  Ins.Co.v.BishopsGateIns.Co. ,725S.W.2d948,951(Tenn.App.1986)(citing  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT   FirstAm.NatlBankv.ChickenSys.ofAm.,Inc. ,510S.W.2d906,908(Tenn.  1974)).However,wheretheleaseisunambiguous,thelanguageinthecontractitselfestablishestheintentoftheparties.Thus,iftheleaseisplainandunambiguous,themeaningoftheleaseisaquestionoflaw,andthefunctionofthecourtistointerpretthecontractaswritten,accordingtoitsplainterms. Pettyv.Sloan ,197Tenn.630,   63739,277S.W.2d355,35859(1955). Furthermore,thisCourtcannotmakeanewcontractfortheparties,butcanmerelyconstruetheleaseaswritten. St.Paul   SurplusLinesIns.Co. ,725S.W.2dat951(citing Stonev.Martin ,185Tenn.369,  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  †TR[РA' Legal[РA' Legal A' legal A' legalT  374,206S.W.2d388,390(1947)).†\RA' Legal\  †\RA' Legal\  †\RA' Legal\  †\RA' Legal\   ` Optionstorenewareessentiallyunilateralcontractswhichgivethelesseeanirrevocablerighttoextendaleaseduringtheoptionperiod. AmericanOilCo.v.  Rasar ,203Tenn.37,45,308S.W.2d486,490(1957). Lesseesmustgivetimely  noticeaccordingtothetermsoftheoption,andlesseeswhofailtogivetherequirednoticelosetheirrighttorenewthelease. AbouSakherv.HumphreysCounty ,955   S.W.2d65,68(Tenn.App.1997)(citing Rasar ,203Tenn.at45,308S.W.2dat "  490). ` WhilewehavefoundnoTennesseecaseswhichaddressanoptiontorenewattheendofthelease,thereappearstobeasplitofauthorityinotherjurisdictionsconcerningwhensuchanoptionistobeexercised.Somecourtsfindthattheoptionmaybeexercisedwithinareasonabletimeaftertheleaseexpires. SeeCaitov.Ferri , ,$(( 44R.I.261,116A.897,897(1922)( [A]fairconstructionoftheagreementisthatitwastheintentofthepartiesthatthetenantwastohaveareasonabletimeaftertheterminationoftheleaseinwhichtomakehiselection,....).Ontheotherhand,othercourtsrequirethattheoptionbeexercisedonorbeforethedateofexpirationofthelease. SeeMusicTree,Inc.v.TallmanPianoStore,Inc. ,608P.2d1228,1230 6(22 (Or.App.1980)( Intheabsenceofaspecifictimefixedbythetermsofthelease 8,44 withinwhichthetenantmustexercisetherighttorenew,thelawimpliesareasonabletimetoexercisetheoptionwithinthetermofthelease.); I.X.L.  Furniture&CarpetInstallmentHousev.Berets ,32Utah454,91P.279,28283  (1907)(Wherethelesseehadtheoptiontorenew attheexpirationofthetermofthislease,thecourtheldthatthelesseewasrequiredtomakeitsrequestonorbeforethelastdayofthelease,notafterithadexpired.). Seealso 49Am.Jur.2d    LandlordandTenant 168(1995)( Theexerciseofanoptiontorenewalease   must,absentunusualcircumstances,occurpriortotheexpirationofthelease.). ` WhilethereisnoprecedentinTennesseewhichspecificallyaddressesthecircumstancespresentedinthiscase,itisclearthatanoptiontorenewmustbeexercisedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthelease. SeeCorim,Inc.v.SamBlair  Co. ,721S.W.2d256,26061(Tenn.App.1986); SouthernRegionIndus.Realty,  Inc.v.ChattanoogaWarehouse&ColdStorageCo. ,612S.W.2d162,16465(Tenn.  App.1980). [I]ntheabsenceofspecialcircumstanceswarrantingacourtofequityingrantingrelieftherightofarenewalislostifthenoticeisnotgiveninaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthelease. Rasar ,203Tenn.at45,308S.W.2dat490. "  ` CitySignreliesuponcasesfromotherjurisdictionsforitspropositionthatithadareasonabletimeaftertheexpirationoftheleasetoexercisetheoptiontorenew.Uponreview,wefindthecasesCitySignreliesupontobedistinguishableinthattheydealtwithsituationsinvolvingholdovertenantswherethelandlords,bytheiractions,waivedthenotificationrequirement. ` Inthecasesubjudice,CitySignhadanoptiontorenewattheendoftenyears.Ratherthanrenewtheleaseonorbeforethedateofexpiration,CitySignwaitedtendaysaftertheleaseexpiredbeforeexercisingtheoptiontorenew.Inaddition,CitySigndidnotattempttorenewtheleaseuntilafterNortonwrotealetternotifyingCitySignthattheyhadfailedtoexercisetheiroptiontorenewandthattheleasehadthereforeexpired. 8 44  ` CitySignfailedtoexercisetheoptiontorenewinaccordancewiththeprovisionsoftheleasetherebylosingitsrighttorenew.Thus,underthecircumstances,theleaseexpiredanddoesnotcontinuetobeinforce. ` Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed,andthecaseisremandedforsuchfurtherproceedingsasnecessary.Costsofappealareassessedagainsttheappellants. `     h      p _________________________________ `     h      p W.FRANKCRAWFORD,    `     h      p PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S.    CONCUR:   ____________________________________   DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE   ____________________________________ DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE     +