WPC\  # VUNa % 0(w@4 1 UP@ 0l 0D 0J@ 0T 0^ < 0hD 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d%U>U 6 D3 B0B)M 0@vDC AMU*F p|4n'?v~fv AO 0D D/ B? HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ [D\D]^D_`DabDcӀoڃ"03|xo&@FZ 8CaslonOpnface BT Regular((3$ !      0  (#$  0  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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Courier New++++'dxd d% Line 7 d("$    ,,,,7Border 1dd-.C << G<  9p`(Arial  !#d#(  00   YYY FILED0X July22,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.0AppellateCourtClerk   !#d#(   $       ))Foreaseofreference,theplaintiffswillbereferredtoastheEstateorinthesingular;actually,HaroldD.Robbinsandwife,JeanA.Robbins,asnaturalparentsandnextofkinofBrianK.Robbins,arethenamedplaintiffsandappellees.  !#d#(   $       ))Thearbitratorsawardwas$548,431.80,being70%oftheplaintiffsdamages.Thejudgmentwasenteredfor$100,000,themaximumawardauthorizedbythepartiesprearbitration highlowagreement. d !#d#(   $       ))Ms.Moneyshusband,thedefendantHermanL.Money,alsoappealed.Foreaseofreference,theappellantwillbereferredtoasMoney,Ms.Money,orinthesingular.  !#d#(   $       ))Thisconclusionisbaseduponthewrittenopinionofthearbitratorandstatementsinthebriefs.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . (  P )7lXXdd7\RA'\ћ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE̜R/1.A1-j|i`  `@RߛHAROLDD.ROBBINSandwife, )C/ANO.03A019703CV00072JEANA.ROBBINS,NaturalParents)andNextofKinofBRIANK. )ROBBINS,Deceased,   )      )  PlaintiffsAppellees,)      )      )APPEALASOFRIGHTFROMTHE      )CAMPBELLCOUNTYCIRCUITCOURTv.      )      )      )      )      )WILMAJ.MONEYand   )HERMANL.MONEY,   )      )HON.CONRADE.TROUTMAN,JR.  DefendantsAppellants.)JUDGEForAppellants      ForAppelleesROBERTW.KNOLTON     EDWARDM.GRAVES,JR.̜Kramer,Rayson,Leake,    CARLWINKLES̀Rodgers&Morgan     Knoxville,TennesseeOakRidge,Tennessee@   OPINION))XAFFIRMED          Susano,J.REMANDEDWITHINSTRUCTIONS  Weareaskedtoreviewanarbitrationaward.PursuanttotheauthorityfoundatT.C.A.295312and295315,thetrialcourt,actingontheapplicationoftheplaintiffs,theparentsofthelateBrianK.Robbins(Estate), 2   כconfirmedthearbitratorsaward 3   ׀ofdamagestotheEstateagainstthedefendantWilmaJ.Money(Money),andenteredajudgment inconformitytherewith.SeeT.C.A.295315.Money 4   ׀appealed,assertingtwogroundsforreversal: 8 1.Wastheawardofthearbitrator,hisfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,clearlyerroneous? 8 2.Didthetrialjudgeerrinaffirmingtheawardofthearbitratorandenteringjudgmentthereonagainsttheappellants?Weaffirm.@ I  ThislitigationaroseoutofanautomobileaccidentthatoccurredinCampbellCountyonNovember18,1993.Atthetimeoftheaccident,Ms.MoneywasattemptingtomakealefthandturnoffU.S.Highway25WwhenhervehiclewasstruckbyavehicledrivenbyBrianK.Robbins(Robbins),whowasproceedingintheoppositedirectionon25W.Robbinsandhisbrother,StevenM.Robbins,werekilled.KimberlyMichelleHensley,whowasalsoapassengerintheRobbinsvehicle,andMs.Moneywerealsoinjuredintheaccident.  TheEstatefiledsuitagainstMs.MoneyandherhusbandintheCampbellCountyCircuitCourt.TheMoneysfiledacounterclaimagainsttheEstate.Atalaterdate,thisactionwasconsolidatedwithasuitfiledbytheparentsofStevenM.RobbinsagainsttheMoneysandasuitfiledbyMs.HensleyagainsttheEstateandtheMoneys.TheMoneyscounterclaimwassettledanddismissedbyorderenteredFebruary26,1996.TherecorddoesnotdisclosethedispositionofMs.HensleyssuitagainsttheEstate.Thepartiestotheremainingactionsenteredintoawrittenagreementtoarbitratetheirrespectiveclaims subjecttotheprovisionsofT.C.A.295301,etseq.,andtothecompatibleprovisionsofT.C.A.295101,etseq.  ThepartiesagreedthatBruceA.Anderson,aKnoxvilleattorney,wouldserveasarbitrator.OnOctober2,1996,thepartiesappearedbeforeMr.Andersonforahearing.OnOctober10,1996,thearbitratorsubmittedhiswrittenopinion,inwhichheapportionedthefaultfortheaccident,70%toMoneyand30%toϜRobbins.Theopiniondescribestheevidenceheardbythearbitrator: 8 ...thepartiesstipulatedmostoftheproofintroducedincludingcertaindepositions,affidavitsandotherexhibits.Fourwitnessestestifiedatthehearing:JoyceHeatherlyWalker,WilmaMoney,KimberlyHensleyandHaroldRobbins.Thearbitratornotesinhisopinionthat 8 [t]heissueofliabilitywascontestedbythepartiestheplaintiffscontendingthatthecauseoftheaccidentwasWilmaMoneymakingalefthandturninfrontoftheRobbinsvehicle,andMs.MoneycontendingthatthecauseoftheaccidentwastheexcessivespeedoftheRobbinsvehicle.Thearbitrator,infindingthatthemajorshareoftheblamefortheaccidentrestedwithMoney,statedthattherewas considerableconflictingtestimonybetweentheeyewitnessesaswellas conflictingtestimonybetweentheaccidentreconstructionexpertsofferedbybothsides.  MoneydidnotappealthatpartofthetrialcourtsjudgmentpertainingtothearbitrationawardstotheestateofRobbinsbrotherandMs.Hensley.Therefore,theonlypartofthetrialcourtsjudgmentbeforeusisthatwhichconfirmsthearbitratorsawardtotheEstateagainstMoney.@ II  TheappellantMoneyarguesthatarbitrationawards,ingeneral,aresubjecttojudicialreview;thatthisshouldbeparticularlytruewhenthematterarbitratedinvolvesanactionfornegligencegrowingoutofanautomobileaccident;thatthearbitratorsfindingsoffactare clearlyerroneous;andthatthearbitratorsawardisbaseduponanerroneousconclusionoflaw.Theappellee,relyingupontherecentSupremeCourtdecisionof Arnoldv.MorganKeeganandCo.,Inc. ,914S.W.2d445(Tenn.1996),strenuouslyarguesthatanappellatecourtiswithoutauthorityto vacat[e][anarbitrationaward]forameremistakeoffactorlaw.  Inthiscase,theappellantasksustoreversethetrialcourtsjudgment,vacatethearbitratorsaward andenteraJudgmentinthisCourtinMoneysfavor.Itisclearfromtheappellantsbriefthatthefundamentalbasisforthisrequestistheappellantsassertionthatthearbitratorsfindingsoffactare clearlyerroneousandthathisconclusionsoflawinvolveamisinterpretationoflaw,particularlythecaseof TennesseeϜTrailways,Inc.v.Ervin ,438S.W.2d733(Tenn.1969)anditsprogeny.  Assuming,solelyforthepurposeofargument,thattheappellantiscorrectwhenshearguesthatourstandardofreviewpermitsustoengageintheinquirysuggestedbyherissuesapositionthatissubjecttoseriousquestionundertheholdinginthe Arnold casewedonothavethenecessaryrecordbeforeustomakethisinquiry.Theappellantdidnotfurnishuswithatranscriptorstatementoftheevidenceconsideredbythearbitrator.Whiletherecordcertifiedbytheclerkofthetrialcourtcontainsanumberofunauthenticated,photostaticcopiesofnumberedexhibits,whichtheappellantclaimsaretheexhibitsϜintroducedbeforethearbitrator,itdoesnotcontainthe livetestimonyheardbythearbitrator.Aspreviouslyindicated,thearbitratorheardtheoraltestimonyoffourwitnesses,allofwhomapparentlytestified,atleastinpart,onmatterspertainingtotheissueofliability. 5   ׀Thus,whiletheappellantinvitesustoengageinareviewoftheevidence,shedoesnotpresentuswithatranscriptorstatementoftheevidencetoenableustomakesuchaninquiry.Astotheunauthenticatedexhibitsintherecord,theirlackofauthenticationfromthearbitratororthetrialjudge,seeRule24(f),T.R.A.P.,precludesusfromconsideringthem.See Bishopv.Bishop ,939S.W.2d109,110(Tenn.App.1996);butevenifwecouldconsiderthem,itisclearthatwedonothavealloftherelevantevidenceontheissueofliabilitythatwasconsideredbythearbitrator.  Theappellantfiledwiththetrialcourtadocumententitled DesignationofAppellateRecordandNoticeofNoTranscript.Inthatdocument,shestatesthat therewillbenotranscriptpreparedandfiledasapartoftherecordonappealinthiscause.UnderRule24,T.R.A.P.,anappellantwhointendstochallengefactualfindingsisrequiredtofileatranscriptorstatementoftheevidencethat convey[s]afair,accurateandcompleteaccountofwhattranspiredwithrespecttothoseissuesthatarethebasesofappeal.SeeRule24(b)and(c),T.R.A.P. TheappellanthastheprimaryburdentoseethataproperrecordispreparedonappealandfiledinthisCourt. McDonaldv.ϜOnoh ,772S.W.2d913,914(Tenn.App.1989).  Thisisnotacasewherethefilingofapartialtranscriptmaytriggeranobligationonthepartoftheappelleetosupplementtheappellantsfiling.SeeRule24(b).Inthiscase,notranscriptwasfiled.Thefailuretofileatranscriptorstatementoftheevidenceinthisappeal,involvingasitdoeschallengestothecorrectnessoffindingsoffact,bringsintoplayawellestablishedprincipleoflaw: 8 Wheretheissuesraisedgototheevidence,theremustbeatranscript.Intheabsenceofatranscriptoftheevidence,thereisaconclusivepresumptionthattherewassufficientevidencebeforethetrialcourttosupportitsjudgment,andthisCourtmustthereforeaffirmthejudgment.Ӝ Coakleyv.Daniels ,840S.W.2d367,370(Tenn.App.1992).(Emphasisadded).Seealso McDonald ,772S.W.2dat914; Bishop ,939S.W.2dat110; Wordv.Word ,937S.W.2d931,932(Tenn.App.1996); Sherrodv.Wix ,849S.W.2d780,783(Tenn.App.1992); Irvinv.CityofClarksville, 767S.W.2d649,653(Tenn.App.1988).  Thus,whilewehaveseriousreservationsastowhetherwecouldreachtheappellantsissuesevenifwehadatranscriptorstatementoftheevidence,itisclearthatwecannotdecidefactuallybasedissueswithouttherelevantfactsthatwerepresentedtothearbitrator.Weareanappellatecourt.WeϜevaluate,underprescribedstandardsofreview,whatothertribunalsorfactfindershavedonetodetermineiftherearereversibleerrorsintheirrulings.Wearepreventedfromdoingsounlessthetotalityoftheevidencethatledtothosefactuallydrivendeterminationsislaidbeforeus.  TheEstatecontendsthatthisisafrivolousappeal.ItseeksdamagesunderT.C.A.271122.Weagree.Theappelleeshouldnothavetoincurthecostofdefendinganappealthatwasdoomedfromthestartbythelackofatranscriptorstatementoftheevidence.See McDonald ,772S.W.2dat914.  Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxedtotheappellantandhersurety.Onremand,thetrialcourtwilldetermineappelleesexpensesincidenttothisappeal,includingreasonableattorneysfees.      __________________________      CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.CONCUR:________________________HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.________________________̜HerschelP.Franks,J.