ÿWPCÝ …UNV %¤ 0(ªw@Ò4&5 0l= 0D© 0[í 0DH 0JŒ 0TÖ 0^* 0hˆ 0rð 0|b 0†Þ 0d 1uô 0di U >Í B) DC4 AMwU*Ä îåûÀà B  D3½·ðv~§ 0@%vÓe AO8Ƈ 0DM D/‘ BÀ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ ~DD€D‚ƒ„I…†Ó€DÒ ‹6Ti3|x((3úÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(3§à$¥¥Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.($Ó$‘‘òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€%ÔÔ€%ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€%XÔÌÌJuly€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ÛÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€The€relevant€policy€provisions€provide:Ìà8 àA.€€COVERAGEÌà8 àWe€will€pay€all€sums€an€ð ðinsuredðð€legally€must€pay€as€damages€because€of€ð ðbodilyÏinjuryðð€or€ð ðproperty€damageðð€to€which€this€insurance€applies,€caused€by€anÏð ðaccidentðð€and€resulting€from€the€ownership,€maintenance€or€use€of€a€coveredÏð ðauto.ððÌà8 à1.€€WHO€IS€AN€INSUREDÌà8 àThe€following€are€ð ðinsureds:ððÌà8 àa.€€You€for€any€covered€ð ðauto.ððÌà8 àb.€€Anyone€else€while€using€with€your€permission€a€covered€ð ðautoðð€you€own,€hireÏor€borrow€.€.€.€.Ìà8 àB.€€EXCLUSIONSÌà8 àThis€insurance€does€not€apply€to€any€of€the€following:Ìà8 à1.€€EXPECTED€OR€INTENDED€INJURYÌà8 àð ðBodily€injuryðð€or€ð ðproperty€damageðð€expected€or€intended€from€the€standpoint€ofÏthe€ð ðinsured.ððÌ ¶Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€The€contract€of€insurance€was€formed€in€Florida€and€was€sold€by€a€Florida€agent€to€aÏFlorida€insured,€WSN.€€The€parties€agreed€and€the€trial€court€found€that€Florida€law€controls€theÏdisposition€of€any€substantive€issues€and€Tennessee€law€controls€the€disposition€of€any€proceduralÏissues.€Ì d))))'ÿÿdxd ­Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€€(alteration€in€original).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€!¼ÔÑ7€¥3XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  Ñ›Þ ÞÌReliance€Insurance€Company,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9612„CV„00552Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)̜ـ€ÙßR€$&#A1-j|`n` ç `€€@ÿRß›v.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àTrial€Court€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à93C„3494ÌWSN€Leasing€,€Inc.,à àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant,à àà à)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌSteven€Craig€Griffin,à àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant.à àà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌAPPEAL€FOR€THE€SIXTH€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€W.€BROTHERS,€JUDGEÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌGEORGE€T.€LEWIS,€IIIÌBaker,€Donelson,€Bearman€&€CaldwellÌ2000€First€Tennessee€BuildingÌ165€Madison€AvenueÌMemphis,€Tennessee€38103Ìà àATTORNEY€FOR€DEFENDANT/APPELLANTÌÌMICHAEL€F.€RAFFERTYÌHarris,€Shelton,€Dunlap€&€Cobb,€L.L.P.C.Ì2700€One€Commerce€SquareÌMemphis,€Tennessee€38103„2555Ìà àATTORNEY€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLEEÌÌ€ÌÌÌà@ àVACATED€IN€PART,€AFFIRMED€IN€PART,€ÌÓ  ÓAND€REMANDEDÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÇÓ€Óà@ àòòÔ€!„ÔOÔ€!¼ÔPINIONóóÌÌà àThis€is€an€appeal€by€defendant/appellant,€WSN€Leasing,€Inc.,€from€aÏdecision€of€the€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Davidson€County€finding€the€insuranceÏpolicy€issued€by€plaintiff/appellee,€Reliance€Insurance€Company,€to€WSN€did€notÏcover€certain€intentional€acts€of€WSNððs€employee,€defendant€Steven€CraigÏGriffin,€and€granting€summary€judgment€in€Relianceððs€favor.€€The€facts€out€ofÏwhich€this€matter€arose€are€as€follows.ÌÌà àMary€Kay€Tellez€met€Steven€Craig€Griffin€for€the€first€time€at€a€NashvilleÏrestaurant€on€28€October€1990.€€Griffin€invited€Ms.€Tellez€outside€to€see€hisÏtractor„trailer€rig€which€was€owned€by€Griffinððs€employer,€WSN.€€As€Ms.€TellezÏapproached€the€truck,€Griffin€grabbed€her€and€shoved€her€into€the€sleeperÏcompartment.€€Griffin€drove€around€Nashville€and€outlying€areas€for€four€to€fiveÏhours€with€Ms.€Tellez€bound€and€gagged€in€the€sleeper€compartment.€€GriffinÏstopped€intermittently€to€beat€and€sexually€assault€Ms.€Tellez.€€Finally,€GriffinÏabandoned€Ms.€Tellez€along€Interstate€40€in€œCheatham›€County.ÌÌà àMs.€Tellez€filed€suit€against€Griffin€and€WSN€in€Davidson€County€on€25ÏOctober€1991.€€Ms.€Tellez€alleged,€in€part,€that€WSN€was€liable€for€negligentÏentrustment€and€vicariously€liable€for€Griffinððs€acts.€€Reliance€stepped€in€asÏWSNððs€insurance€agency€and€defended€the€case.€€Ms.€Tellez€settled€on€11€MayÏ1995,€and€Reliance€paid€the€settlement€amount.ÌÌà àOn€17€November€1993,€Reliance€filed€a€declaratory€judgment€action.€ÏReliance€sought€a€declaration€that€it€was€ð ðnot€obligated€under€its€policy€ofÏinsurance€to€defend€the€claims€against€the€defendants€or€to€pay€any€sums,Íincluding€any€judgmentðð€in€the€Tellez€action.× ƒ' ××  ×€€Reliance€did€not€include€a€claimÏfor€monetary€damages€in€the€complaint.€€In€response,€WSN€answered€and€filed€aÏcounterclaim.€€WSN€alleged€Reliance€acted€with€bad€faith€because€it€waited€twoÏyears€to€file€the€declaratory€judgment€action.€€After€Reliance€settled€the€case,ÏWSN€amended€its€counterclaim€and€alleged€Reliance€admitted€coverage€when€itÏpaid€the€settlement€and€WSN€was€entitled€to€attorneyððs€fees€pursuant€to€FloridaÏStatue€section€627.428(1).× ƒ( ××  ×ÌÌà àReliance€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€on€17€May€1994,€and€WSNÏfiled€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€on€18€March€1996.€€The€trial€court€enteredÏits€memorandum€and€opinion€disposing€of€the€motions€on€29€July€1996.€€TheÏcourt€determined€Reliance€was€not€obligated€to€defend€the€action€because€ð ðtheÏintentional,€criminal€actions€on€the€part€of€the€individual€defendant,€Steven€CraigÏGriffin,€which€are€the€basis€of€the€underlying€lawsuit€did€not€ððresult€from€theÏownership,€maintenance€or€use€of€a€covered€ððautoðððð€as€required€under€theÍinsurance€contract.ðð€€The€court€also€determined€WSN€was€not€entitled€toÏattorneyððs€fees€because€section€627.428(1)€ð ðwould€not€apply€to€a€judgmentÏrendered€in€this€Court€since€the€statuteððs€application€is€limited€to€ðða€judgment€orÏdecree€by€any€of€the€courts€of€this€state€[Florida]ðð.ðð× ƒ+ ××  ×€€Accordingly,€the€courtÏgranted€Relianceððs€motion€and€denied€WSNððs€motion.ÌÌà àWSN€filed€its€notice€of€appeal€on€13€August€1996.€€WSNððs€first€issue€isÏð ðwhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€WSNððs€policy€of€insurance€did€notÏprovide€coverage€to€its€insured,€WSN,ðð€and€its€second€issue€is€ð ðwhether€the€trialÏcourt€erred€in€refusing€to€award€attorneysðð€fees€to€WSN€as€required€by€FloridaÏlaw.ððÌÌà àWhen€reviewing€summary€judgment€cases,€this€court€must€determine,€asÏdid€the€trial€court,€whether€the€moving€parties€have€met€the€requirements€of€RuleÏ56€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€òòò òGonzales€v.€Alman€Constr.ÏCo.óóó ó,€857€S.W.2d€42,€44„45€(Tenn.€App.€1993).€€Thus,€this€court€must€determineÏwhether€there€are€any€genuine€issues€of€material€fact,€and€if€not,€which€of€theÏparties€is€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€mater€of€law.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.03€(WestÏ1996).€€The€parties€do€not€dispute€the€facts€of€this€case.€€Their€only€dispute€isÏwith€the€trial€courtððs€application€of€the€controlling€legal€principles.ÌÌà àWe€address€the€issue€concerning€the€insurance€policy€first.€€WSN€makesÏtwo€arguments€in€support€of€its€claim€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€itÏdetermined€the€policy€did€not€obligate€Reliance€to€defend€the€Tellez€action.€€WSNÏfirst€argues€Reliance€admitted€coverage€by€settling€the€Tellez€action.€€The€secondÏargument€is€the€terms€of€the€policy€provided€coverage.€€In€response,€RelianceÍargues€initially€that€the€issue€is€moot€because€ð ðthe€underlying€tort€case€was€settledÏby€the€insurer€and€the€insurer€is€not€seeking€reimbursement€from€the€insured€forÏany€amount€paid€in€defending€or€settling€the€claim.ðð€€Reliance€next€contends€thatÏthe€€policy€did€not€cover€the€incident€because€the€sexual€assault€of€Ms.€Tellez€didÏnot€result€from€the€ð ðownership,€maintenance€or€use€of€a€covered€ððautoðððð€asÏdefined€by€Florida€law.€€Moreover,€Reliance€points€to€the€policy€exclusions€andÏargues€Griffinððs€acts€were€expected€and€intended€from€his€standpoint.€€Finally,ÏReliance€denies€it€admitted€coverage€when€it€settled€the€Tellez€action.ÌÌà àIt€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€Relianceððs€initial€argument€is€correct.€Ïð ðThe€central€question€in€a€mootness€inquiry€is€whether€changes€in€theÏcircumstances€existing€at€the€beginning€of€the€litigation€have€forestalled€the€needÏfor€meaningful€relief.€€A€case€will€generally€be€considered€moot€if€it€no€longerÏserves€as€a€means€to€provide€relief€to€the€prevailing€party.ðð€€òòò òMcIntyre€v.ÏTraughberóóó ó,€884€S.W.2d€134,€137€(Tenn.€App.€1994)€(citations€omitted).€€TheÏissue€in€this€case€is€whether€the€insurance€policy€obligated€Reliance€to€provide€aÏdefense€to€and€to€pay€the€settlement€in€the€Tellez€action.€€Prior€to€the€settlement,Ïthis€issue€was€a€ð ðpresent,€live€controversy.ðð€€òòò òId.ó óóó€€Had€the€court€entered€a€decisionÏprior€to€the€settlement,€the€prevailing€party€would€have€had€some€form€of€relief.€ÏReliance€could€have€refused€to€represent€WSN€any€further€had€it€prevailed,€andÏWSN€could€have€forced€Reliance€to€continue€providing€it€a€defense€had€itÏprevailed.€€After€the€parties€settled€the€Tellez€action,€however,€€there€was€no€needÏfor€a€defense.€€Moreover,€Reliance€did€not€request€any€reimbursement€in€itsÏdeclaratory€judgment€complaint.€€Thus,€there€is€no€relief€to€grant€either€RelianceÏor€WSN.€€That€is,€Reliance€ends€up€paying€for€the€defense€and€the€settlement€noÏmatter€who€prevails.€€Given€the€above,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€theÏTellez€settlement€rendered€this€issue€moot€because€a€decision€of€the€court€couldÍnot€provide€any€relief€to€the€prevailing€party.ÌÌà àWe€now€turn€to€WSNððs€second€issue€of€ð ðwhether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏrefusing€to€award€attorneyððs€fees€to€WSN€as€required€by€Florida€law.ðð€€A€partyÏmay€not€recover€attorneyððs€fees€absent€a€statutory€or€contractual€provisionÏproviding€for€such€recovery.€€òòò òPhoenix€Indem.€Co.€v.€Union€Fin.€Co.ó óóó,€54ÏSo.2d€188,€190€(Fla.€1951);€òòò òHoward€G.€Lewis€Constr.€Co.€v.€Leeóóó ó,€830ÏS.W.2d€60,€64„65€(Tenn.€App.€1991).€€œWSNððs›€only€basis€for€its€claim€toÏattorneyððs€fees€is€Florida€Statutes€section€627.428(1)€which€provides€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 à€€(1)€€Upon€the€rendition€of€a€judgment€or€decree€by€any€of€theÏcourts€of€this€state€against€an€insurer€and€in€favor€of€any€named€orÏomnibus€insured€or€the€named€beneficiary€under€a€policy€or€contractÏexecuted€by€the€insurer,€the€trial€court€or,€in€the€event€of€an€appealÏin€which€the€insured€or€beneficiary€prevails,€the€appellate€court€shallÏadjudge€or€decree€against€the€insurer€and€in€favor€of€the€insured€orÏbeneficiary€a€reasonable€sum€as€fees€or€compensation€for€theÏinsuredððs€or€beneficiaryððs€attorney€prosecuting€the€suit€in€which€theÏrecovery€is€had.ÌÓ€ÓÌÓ€ÓFla.€Stat.€Ann.€ðð627.428(1)€(West€1996).ÌÌà àReliance€contends€the€statute€is€inapplicable€because€it€only€applies€toÏjudgements€and€decrees€rendered€by€Florida€courts.€€Despite€WSNððs€argumentÏthat€adoption€of€Relianceððs€position€will€result€in€ð ðthe€rankest€of€forumÏshopping,ðð€we€are€of€the€opinion€that€Relianceððs€position€is€correct.€€In€order€toÏadopt€WSNððs€position,€this€court€would€have€to€derive€a€meaning€beyond€theÏplain€and€unambiguous€language€of€the€statute.€€Such€a€determination€isÏprohibited€under€the€general€rules€of€statutory€construction€as€applied€in€Florida.€Ïòòò òState€v.€Eganóóó ó,€287€So.2d€1,€4€(Fla.€1973).€€The€Florida€Supreme€Court€has€Ïstated€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àSurely,€the€purpose€of€all€rules€relating€to€the€construction€of€statutesÍis€to€discover€the€true€intention€of€the€law.€€But€such€rules€are€usefulÏonly€in€case€of€doubt€and€should€never€be€used€to€create€doubt,€onlyÏto€remove€it.€€Where€the€legislative€intent€as€evidenced€by€the€statuteÏis€plain€and€unambiguous,€then€there€is€no€necessity€for€anyÏconstruction€or€interpretation€of€the€statute,€and€the€courts€need€onlyÏgive€effect€to€the€plain€meaning€of€its€terms.ÌÓ€ÓÌÓ€Óòòò òId.ó óóó€€The€court€continued:ÌÓÓà8 àð ðEven€where€a€court€is€convinced€that€the€Legislature€really€meantÏand€intended€something€not€expressed€in€the€phraseology€of€the€act,Ïit€will€not€deem€itself€authorized€to€depart€from€the€plain€meaning€ofÏthe€language€which€is€free€from€ambiguity.€.€.€.€If€[the€statute]€hasÏbeen€passed€improvidently€the€responsibility€is€with€the€LegislatureÏand€not€the€courts.€€Whether€the€law€be€expressed€in€general€orÏlimited€terms,€the€Legislature€should€be€held€to€mean€what€they€haveÏplainly€expressed,€and€consequently€no€room€is€left€for€construction.Ï.€.€.ððÌÓ€ÓÌÓ€Óòòò òId.óóó ó€(quoting€òòò òVan€Pelt€v.€Hillardóóó ó,€75€Fla.€792,€78€So.€693,€694„95€(1918)).ÌÌà àWSN€failed€to€cite€any€cases€wherein€a€Florida€court€has€held€that€theÏparticular€language€at€issue€in€this€case€is€ambiguous.€€Moreover,€we€are€of€theÏopinion€there€is€absolutely€no€ambiguity.€€The€Florida€statute€clearly€requires€aÏjudgment€or€decree€by€a€Florida€court€as€a€condition€to€receiving€attorneyððs€fees.€ÏWe€will€not€hold€otherwise.ÌÌà àIn€conclusion,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€that€the€issue€of€RelianceððsÏobligation€to€defend€WSN€in€the€Tellez€action€and€to€pay€the€settlement€is€moot€asÏthis€court€is€unable€to€provide€either€party€any€relief.€€Thus,€this€portion€of€theÏtrial€courtððs€opinion€shall€be€vacated.€€òòò òSee€McIntyreó óóó,€884€S.W.2d€at€138.€€InÏaddition,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€court€WSN€is€not€entitled€to€attorneyððs€feesÏbecause€the€express€language€of€the€Florida€statute€cited€by€WSN€applies€only€toÏjudgments€and€decrees€of€Floridaððs€courts.ÌÌà àTherefore,€it€follows€that€the€judgement€of€the€trial€court€is€vacated€in€partÏand€affirmed€in€part.€€The€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€any€furtherÏproceedings.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€divided€equally€between€plaintiff/appellee,ÏReliance€Insurance€Company,€and€defendant/appellant,€WSN€Leasing,€Inc.ÌÌÌœ›ÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœÔ€!XÔ____________________________________›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌœCONCUR:›ÌÌœ_________________________________________›ÌœBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGE̛̜_________________________________________›ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€œJUDGE›