WPC /#U:( %b 0(h4b  B 0J 0T& 0^z 0h 0r@w 0| 0DD 0 0 1udU, AO 0DT 0d U, U *( 0@R B) D3 DC D/1 AM` B e  v~ vIBM Laser Printer 4019IBM4019,,,,0 P /b7PJ 2P,rAZ"Arial RegularX($1# 3|x- - d2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23    2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  (3$ !  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(Modern$(C<< C($$   1  P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial("$    % Line 7 d'dxd%%%%7Border 1dd**' dxd$'C << GP Pd  !  #d##  "  #   eee FILED#X #"US ,  + !  #X CecilCrowson,Jr.   # eee AppellateCourtClerk   #XPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA: T Monaco  BA: T Monaco ! . &""Xd&#""Xd##      \RA'\7XXdd7    STATE,EXREL,LORRETTAHEAD )OVERSTREET,    )      ) Plaintiff/Appellee,   )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019507CH00309VS.      )      ) SmithChanceryL),';+'h|D `L      ) No.5357PAULDANIELKING,   )      ) Defendant/Appellant.  )@ COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLEAPPEALEDFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFSMITHCOUNTYATCARTHAGE,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEC.K.SMITH,JUDGECHARLESW.BURSONAttorneyGeneral&ReporterWILLIAMASHBYSMITH,JR.AssistantAttorneyGeneral404JamesRobertsonParkwayNashville,Tennessee372430499 AttorneyforPlaintiff/AppelleeTHOMASH.BILBREY1024ScottsvilleHighwayP.O.Box97Lafayette,Tennessee37083 AttorneyforDefendant/Appellant@ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:LEWIS,J.KOCH,J.  @ #OPINION #X  Theonlyissueraisedinthispaternityactioniswhetherthereisanymaterialevidencetosupportthejury'sverdictthattheappellantwasthefatherofthechild.Weaffirm.  Theappelleetestifiedthatbeginningintheearlypartof1983sheengagedinsexualintercoursewiththeappellantapproximatelyonceaweek.Theseliaisonslastedmostoftheyear,evenaftertheappelleebecamepregnantinOctoberof1983.Shetestifiedthatshewasnothavingsexwithanyoneelseduringtherelevantperiod.  TheappelleealsoproducedthetestimonyofthedirectorofaNashvillelaboratorythatrancertainbloodtestsonthemother,thechild,andtheappellant.Thefirsttest,performedin1985andtestingbloodcellcharacteristics,showedan83.3%probabilitythattheappellantwasthechild'sfather.ADNAtestadministeredin1993establishedarelativechanceofpaternityat99.83%.Combiningthetestresultsestablisheda99.96%chanceofpaternity.  Theappellantarguesthattheappellee'stestimonyshouldhavebeenexcludedbythedoctrineofjudicialestoppel.Hecitesherswornallegationsinapaternityactionandanactionforoutrageousconductfiledin1984.Inthosepleadingssheswore(1)thatwhenshelearnedshewaspregnanttheappellantgavehertwentydollarstobuymedicinetoinduceanabortion,and(2)thattheappellanthadacknowledgedbywordsandactsthathewasthechild'sfather.Atthetrialbelowtheappelleetestified(1)thatshedidnottalktotheappellantaftershelearnedthatshewaspregnant,untilafterthechildwasbornand,(2)thattheappellanthadneveracknowledgedthatthechildwashis.  Asageneralrule,thedoctrineofjudicialestoppelpreventsawitnessfromcontradictingsworntestimonygiveninapriorjudicialproceeding.InRe:AdoptionofJohnson,678S.W.2d65(Tenn.App.1984).Buttheapplicationofthedoctrineinthiscasewouldnothelptheappellant.Iftheappellanthadobjectedatthetrialandthetwocontradictorystatementshadbeenexcluded,itwouldnotchangetheessentialpartsoftheappellee'stestimony.Norwouldithaveaffectedthescientificevidenceshowingtheprobabilitythattheappellantwasthechild'sfather.  Theappellantalsocitesthelargeamountofevidenceintherecordthatcontradictstheappellee'sversionofthefactsandpointstowardherstepfather,theappellant'sbrother,astherealfatherofthechild.These,however,werefactsforthejurytoconsider.Wecannotreweightheevidenceandmustaffirmifthereismaterialevidencetosupporttheverdict.Rule13(d),Tenn.R.App.Proc.  Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.ThecauseisremandedtotheChanceryCourtofSmithCountyforanyfurtherproceedingsnecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtoappellant.      _____________________________      BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:_______________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE_______________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE