WPC_ # VU:a % 0(w 0l 0DE b  4  0J 0T 0^^ 0h 0r$ 0| 0 0 1u( U, 0d U,-U *YB)DC AM B< Yfv~vt D3G 0@z AO  0D D/ BBHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 ,rAZ"Arial RegularX($Ӏ ((3$ !      0  (#$  0  - -x#D 3|x 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)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd-#C << G d  !  #d#!  !   YYY FILED!XJuly17,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d#!     !       Wethinkthenoticeofintenttoproceedonthetechnicalrecordaloneisinitselfanindicationthattheappellantshadnoevidentiarybasisonwhichtochallengethetrialcourtsaction.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &  Xd&#  Xd#!      \RA'\ 7wXXdd7    INRE:ESTATEOFGUYOAKLEY, )      ) Deceased    )      )ESTATEOFDUDLEYOAKLEY,  ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019408CV00398 Petitioner/Appellant,  )      ) VS.      ) DicksonCircuitL$&#;+'h|+:`  `L      ) No.7988REBECCASTEWARTASEXECUTRIX )ANDTRUSTEEOFGUYOAKLEY )ESTATE,ANDINDIVIDUALLY,  )ETAL.,     )      ) Respondent/Appellee.  )@ COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLE@ APPEALEDFROMTHECIRCUITCOURTOFDICKSONCOUNTY@ ATCHARLOTTE,TENNESSEE@ THEHONORABLEALLENWALLACE,JUDGE@ !SUPPLEMENTALOPINION !XM.LINDAHUGHES222SecondAvenue,NorthSuite360,MezzanineNashville,Tennessee37201 AttorneyforPetitioner/AppellantJIMMYP.LOCKERT105SycamoreStreetAshlandCity,Tennessee37015 AttorneyforRespondent/Appellee@ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:TODD,P.J.,M.S.LEWIS,J.@ @ !SUPPLEMENTALOPINION!X   TheSupremeCourtremandedthiscasetothiscourttoconsiderwhetherthetrialjudgewascorrectindirectingaverdictfortheproponentsofthewillofGuyOakley.TheSupremeCourtsorderassumedthatthedepositionofDr.LawrenceGrossmanwasreadintoevidenceatthetrial.  Wesubsequentlyorderedthepartiestobriefthatpointand,further,tobriefthequestionofwhetherDr.GrossmansdepositioncreatedanissueoffactonMr.OakleyscompetencetomakeawillonOctober4,1989.  Theappellantshavenowmovedtobeallowedtofilethetranscriptoftheevidence.Wethinkthismotioncomesmuchtoolate.Afterfailingtofilethetranscriptinatimelymanner,andfailingtopersuadethiscourtthatthefailurewasjustified,theappellantsfiledanoticeoftheirintenttoproceedonthetechnicalrecordalone. '   ׀Therefore,sinceitwasonthatbasisalonethattheappealwasallowedtoproceed,themotiontofileatranscriptoftheevidenceisherebyoverruled.  Wearestilltroubledbytheprecedentwearesettinginthiscaseofallowinganappellanttochallengeadirectedverdictonthebasisofadepositionthatappearsintherecordwithoutacompletetranscriptoftheevidence.Wecannotknowwhethertheevidenceinthedepositionwasproperlybeforethejury.ButtheSupremeCourtsremanddirectsthiscourttoreconsidertheproprietyofthedirectedverdictinlightoftheevidenceinthedeposition.  Therefore,wecomefinallytothemeritsoftheappeal.Mr.Oakley,aninetyfouryearoldman,executedhiswillonOctober4,1989.Dr.Grossman,aninternist/cardiologist,hadtreatedMr.Oakleysince1966.In1988thedoctornoticedthatMr.Oakleywasconfusedanddisoriented,especiallywhenhewasinthehospitalandonmedication.InJuneof1989Mr.Oakleywasbackinthehospitalsufferingfromanemiaandanenlargedspleenandliver.Dr.GrossmansuspectedthatMr.Oakleysconditionwasrelatedtothestomachandcoloncancerforwhichhehadbeentreatedpreviously.Onthatoccasionheleftthehospitalagainstmedicaladvicebecausethehospitalhadanintegratednursingstaff.InJulyhewasbackinthehospitalforastomachresection.OnbothoccasionsDr.Grossmanfoundhimtobeconfusedandverydifficulttoreasonwith.InDr.GrossmansopinionMr.Oakleywasnotmentallycompetent.  Dr.GrossmantreatedMr.Oakleyseveraltimesin1990andheappearedtobeconfusedanddisoriented,especiallywhenhewasonanysortofmedication.  Theburdeninawillcontestisalwaysontheonewhoallegesanunsoundmindtoproveit.Harperv.Watkins,670S.W.2d611(Tenn.App.1983).Thatburdenrequiresacontestanttoproduceevidencefromwhichthejurycouldinferthatthetestator,attheverytimeofexecutingthewill,didnotknowandunderstandtheforceandconsequencesofhisact.AmericanTrust&BankingCo.v.Williams,32Tenn.App.592,225S.W.2d79(1948).Atestator isnotrenderedincapableofmakingawillby...oldage,bluntperception,orfailingmindormemory,ifhismindissufficientlysoundtoenablehimtoknowandunderstandwhatheisdoing.Id.225S.W.2dat83.Evidenceofapriormentalconditionduetotemporary,superficial,accidental,occasionalorintermittentcausesorconditionshaslittleornoprobativevaluenotenoughtoshifttheburdenofprovingthetestatorsconditionattheverytimethewillwasexecuted.Id.225S.W.2dat84.  WedonotthinktheevidenceinDr.Grossmansdepositionsatisfiesthecontestantsburden.ThereisnoproofofMr.Oakleyscompetencyonthedateheexecutedthewill.Dr.Grossmansaysthatin1988and1989Mr.Oakleywasconfusedandincoherentwhenhewasinthehospitalandonmedication.ThelasttimeDr.GrossmansawhimbeforetheexecutionofthewillwasinJulyof1989.Dr.GrossmandoesnotattributeMr.Oakleysconfusiontoanyspecificmaladyotherthanoldage;notablyhedoesnotsaythatMr.Oakleysufferedfromageneral,continuous,chronic,orprogressivediseaseofthemind.SeeAmericanTrust&BankingCo.v.Williams,32Tenn.App.592,225S.W.2d79(1948).  ThejudgmentofthecourtbelowisaffirmedandthecauseisremandedtotheCircuitCourtofDicksonCountyforfurtherproceedings.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellant.      _______________________________      BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:_______________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGEMIDDLESECTION_______________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE    @ %