ÿWPC JºæàrÙõ8%NÞ½oîÝ4>[ü= I"Ž;.«Xò;>Ir½pÉúÌç‘ITô!Zj GC!>8o&^‰ˆþ6…aOŸ1T' *,V*ÕÉD?:Á‡ÀfA…AZ‚Áa ÑHÀFÐ+QäåxÙ¨POõà\!Û;°UÛsHÜg#6ÅI^ü˜Y\RûTÌ4†œ­4 äh ¶¼1hÔÿÏýL<‚ñÄ`A)þJüsÊ"Ã…ïçZ £IÇeýòxÝ}V4>ûн(À5â6 a4Çä_·ÍËÈ` OÖƒ#ê‚^FÝ z=µ„HèBü[ñläÌÈŒß/Mò¼Bµ3,wÎBùÑ•Ø[xà éA‰ÄNjîŸF w2Yzc-—®9_ôŸ ŽÊãY¬ŒLÕ‹´IgÉg¨Xù]W,¢’ÿHg)b¨r!Ã÷ž &Ed@L•«Ê²9º1b‘.6‚ËN:”ÍÈ–eI…ƒ[~ávIâÙ×Xº‡ysðÛ{Øh¸Üv‚­íÒ/^s¢8ôä1Ïó%—_ ˜!›ê0²gC:&ÇRi¾´á¹·Mÿä±{[Ñߦv(/fàf°~Pq˜þ“ ÷ýÁTÍÃú‹Eî+Óa# NUNY %§ 0S­b 0ú ^  w@ 4N b q ms 5Š 0D¿  N U N [ U:\\\\\\\\\\\\\ AQ–Æç 0D­­ 0Dññ D/55 Bd D3 B´´´´ 0oÑÑÆ@@ A D+£ 0KΘHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(+|ø$¡¡Ô€¼¬+»XXÔÓ  Ó- ù-(ª(2F<$¤¤Ý ƒ|ø!ÝÔ€¼ ¼XXÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑ  ÑÑÑÔ€XdgX¼¼ ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó&—Ã&c ØÙEÚÛDÜDÝDÞDßEàÓ€ês~Á&ê:i ‚3|xêÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ +Ý ƒ#L$ÝÔ€¼=»XXÔÓ  ÓÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑ @ ÑÑ@ÑÔ€XD*X»¼=ÔÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Realty€Shop€points€out€in€its€petition€for€rehearing€that€93€of€the€162€exhibits€notÐ ° Ðsubmitted€to€this€court€dealt€with€matters€pertaining€to€the€change€orders.€€We€have€no€doubt€thatÏThe€Realty€Shop€is€correct€because€we€have€read€the€transcript€which€sheds€light€on€the€substanceÏof€the€omitted€exhibits.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó (í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular ÷Ý ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X$G XXXÔÔ€;  XX$GÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X$G X ;ÔÐ  ÐÌJune€4,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular!"Z$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdVVVV'ÿÿdxd d(G3ÚÄ$££Ý ƒ|ø!ÝÔ€¼ ¼XXÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5\Z`_ I&mage <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK'ÈÈÈÈdxd( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó óÝ ƒ|ø!ÝÔ€¼ ¼XXÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑ„°ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ€ÑÑ7€dg¼XdìdÈ7ÑÑ  Ñò òÔ‡¼´¼¼¼ ÔÔ‡„„¼¼´ÔÓ€ÓÓ€ÓÑ  Ññêññàñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@E ±` 8ttxPX°ð  rßñàññêññêññêñà@  DàÔ#†¼´¼„„H#ÔÔ‡ $ò ¼¼´ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñêñßt€ )>.*jxõÿw` `€€@Eg` 8ttxPMðð w tßñêñà@ZZ)DàAT€NASHVILLEó óˆÐ ð@ ÐÔ#†¼´¼  $ò]#ÔÌÌTHE€REALTY€SHOP,€INC.,à À àà  àà p à)Ð \ ¬ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ìà ` àPlaintiff/Appellee,à À àà  àà0 p à)Ј Øp€%p€% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)ÌVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ð ´   Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)ÌRR€WESTMINSTER€HOLDING,€INC.,à p à)à È àDavidson€ChanceryÐ à0  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)à È àNo.€94„293„IÐ öF  Ðà ` àDefendant/Appellant,à À àà  àà p à)Ð  \  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ìandà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ð 8ˆ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)à È àAppeal€No.Ð Nž ÐJOHN€S.€CLARK€CO.,€INC.;à À àà  àà p à)à È à01A01„9609„CH„00418Ð d´ ÐSENASH,€INC.;€andà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ð zÊ ÐCLARENDON€NATIONAL€INS.€CO.,à p à)Ð à Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ìà ` àDefendants.à  àà h àà À àà  àà p à)Ð ¼  ÐÌÔ#†¼ ¼¼¼´)#ÔÓ€yÓÌà@. . Dàòòò òÔ‡ ¦ÿ ¼¼ ÔOPINION€DENYING€PETITION€FOR€REHEARINGÔ#†¼ ¼  ¦ÿ1 #Ôóóó óˆÐ €Ð ÐÌà ` àThe€Realty€Shop,€Inc.€has€filed€a€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€39€petition€requesting€thisÏcourt€to€reconsider€its€May€11,€1999€opinion.€€We€requested€RR€Westminster€Holding,ÏInc.€to€respond€to€the€petition€and€have€now€received€its€response.€€Based€on€ourÏconsideration€of€the€petition,€the€response,€and€the€record€filed€in€this€court,€we€findÏthat€the€petition€is€without€merit€and€should€be€denied.ÌÌà@úú.Dàò òI.ó óˆÐ +Ï&( ÐÌà ` àWe€turn€first€to€The€Realty€Shopððs€assertion€that€we€invaded€the€province€of€theÏtrier„of„fact€by€addressing€and€deciding€the€damage€question.€€The€Realty€Shop€insistsÏthat€we€should€not€have€undertaken€to€calculate€the€damages€in€light€of€the€ten€changeÏorders€because€the€trial€court€did€not€address€this€question€and€because€the€partiesÏelected€not€to€include€in€the€appellate€record€many€of€the€exhibits€filed€in€the€trialÏcourt.ÌÌÌÌà@ÓÓ.Dàò òA.ó óˆÐ =T8> Їà ` àThe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€require€the€parties,€not€theÏappellate€court,€to€assure€that€the€record€on€appeal€contains€a€ð ðfair,€accurate,€andÏcomplete€account€of€what€transpired€with€respect€to€those€issues€that€are€the€bases€ofÏappeal.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(a)€places€the€responsibility€for€the€contents€of€the€record,Ïas€an€initial€matter,€with€the€appellant.€€However,€the€appellee€must€also€designateÏadditional€parts€of€the€trial€court€record€to€be€included€in€the€record€on€appeal€if€itÏdetermines€that€other€parts€of€the€record€are€necessary.€€In€light€of€the€plainÏrequirements€of€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€24(a),€appellate€courts€presume€that€the€parties€haveÏprovided€them€with€an€appellate€record€that€enables€them€to€address€and€decide€theÏissues€being€raised€on€appeal.ÌÌà ` àThe€partiesðð€decisions€concerning€the€completeness€of€the€record€are,€of€course,Ïdriven€by€the€issues€to€be€raised€on€appeal.€€RR€Westminsterððs€May€20,€1996€statementÏof€issues€on€appeal€did€not€indicate€that€it€intended€to€take€issue€with€the€trial€courtððsÏcalculation€of€damages.€€However,€in€its€brief€filed€in€this€court€on€November€19,Ï1996,€RR€Westministerððs€third€issue€was€ð ðWhether€the€Trial€Court€Erred€in€itsÏCalculation€of€Damages.ðð€€In€the€portion€of€its€brief€relating€to€this€issue,€RRÏWestminister€asserted€that€the€maximum€amount€of€damages€that€The€Realty€ShopÏcould€recover€was€$70,693€ð!ð€SENASHððs€net€profit€on€the€sale€of€the€ThompsonÏStation€project€to€Tennessee€Equity€Fund.€€This€argument€necessarily€rested€on€RRÏWestminsterððs€assertion€that€all€ten€of€the€SENASH„Clark€change€orders€were€proper.ÌÌà ` àOn€December€31,€1996,€The€Realty€Shop€moved€to€supplement€the€appellateÏrecord€with€twenty€items€because€RR€Westminister€had€ð ðadvanced€arguments€onÏappeal€which€were€not€referred€to€in€their€statement€of€issues€.€.€..ðð€€Specifically,€TheÏRealty€Shop€pointed€out€that€RR€Westminister€had€argued€in€its€brief€that€ð ðthe€trialÏcourt€erred€in€its€computation€of€damages€because€had€their€[sic]€been€specificÏperformance€of€the€Option€Agreement€The€Realty€Shopððs€damages€would€have€beenÏsubstantially€reduced.ðð€€The€trial€court€authorized€the€filing€of€the€supplemental€record,Ïand€this€court€considered€the€contents€of€not€only€the€original€record€on€appeal€but€alsoÏthe€contents€of€the€supplemental€record€in€preparing€its€May€11,€1999€opinion.ÌÌà ` àWe€have€concluded€that€The€Realty€Shop€was€fully€apprised€that€RRÏWestminister€was€asserting€on€appeal€not€only€that€the€theoretical€and€factual€basis€forÏthe€trial€courtððs€damage€award€was€erroneous€but€also€that€the€ten€SENASH„ClarkÐ à:06D Ðchange€orders€were€valid€and€that€The€Realty€Shopððs€maximum€recovery€should€beÏ$70,693.€€In€light€of€the€lengthy€portions€of€RR€Westminsterððs€brief€devoted€to€the€tenÏchange€orders€and€the€trial€courtððs€calculation€of€the€damages,€we€find€that€TheÏRealty€Shop€was€not€unfairly€prevented€from€briefing€or€arguing€the€factual€and€legalÏsignificance€of€the€ten€change€orders€on€appeal.ÌÌà@ÙÙ.Dàò òB.ó óˆÐ #s ÐÌà ` àThe€Realty€Shop€also€asserts€that€this€Court€should€have€remanded€the€case€toÏthe€trial€court€after€we€determined€that€the€trial€court€had€erred€by€concluding€that€TheÏRealty€Shop€was€estopped€to€rely€on€the€written€change€order€requirement€in€theÏoption€agreement.€€It€insists€that€the€trial€court,€rather€than€this€court,€should€haveÏdetermined€the€ð ðaccuracy€and€validity€of€the€change€orders€and€the€applicability€ofÏthose€change€orders€to€the€Option€Agreementðð€because€the€trial€court€ð ðneverÏconsidered€or€decided€the€issue€of€the€accuracy€and€validity€of€the€change€ordersÏpursuant€to€the€Option€Agreement€.€.€..ðð€€ÌÌà ` àTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13€and€36€control€the€proper€scope€of€appellate€review.€ÏWhile€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(b)€ordinarily€limits€the€scope€of€review€to€the€issues€raisedÏby€the€parties€themselves,€it€also€permits€appellate€courts€to€consider€issues€not€raisedÏby€the€parties€to€prevent€needless€litigation,€to€prevent€injury€to€the€interests€of€theÏpublic,€or€to€prevent€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.€€In€addition,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï36(a)€empowers€appellate€courts€to€ð ðgrant€the€relief€on€the€law€and€facts€to€which€theÏparty€is€entitled€or€the€proceeding€otherwise€requires€.€.€..ðð€€Taken€together,€theseÏrules€permit€the€appellate€courts€to€grant€complete€relief€to€the€parties€as€long€as€theyÏhave€been€given€fair€notice€and€an€opportunity€to€be€heard€on€the€dispositive€issues.ÌÌà ` àTennesseeððs€appellate€courts€have€long€had€the€responsibility€to€render€theÏjudgment€that€the€trial€court,€sitting€as€the€trier„of„fact,€should€have€rendered.€€òòSeeÐ x6È1> ÐPerry€v.€Carteróó,€188€Tenn.€409,€411„12,€219€S.W.2d€905,€906€(1949);€òòToomey€v.Ð 8c3@ ÐAtyoeóó,€95€Tenn.€373,€381„82,€32€S.W.€254,€256€(1895).€€This€responsibility€includesÐ ®9þ4B Ðentering€judgments€based€on€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€and€the€applicableÐ I;™6D Ðlaw.€€òòSee€Roberts€v.€Robertson€County€Bd.€of€Educ.óó,€692€S.W.2d€863,€874€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ° ÐApp.€1985).€€Thus,€as€Judge€Tomlin€has€noted,€we€may€elect€to€wrestle€with€theÏoctopus€rather€than€remand€the€case€for€further€time„consuming€and€costly€wrestlingÏin€the€trial€court.€€òòSee€American€Bldgs.€Co.€v.€DBH€Attachments,€Inc.óó,€676€S.W.2dÐ  Ñ Ð558,€562€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€We€should,€however,€stay€our€hand€when€renderingÏa€judgment€pursuant€to€Tenn.€App.€P.€36(a)€would€be€unfair€to€the€parties.€€òòSeeÐ ·   ÐCooper€v.€Polosóó,€898€S.W.2d€237,€242€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995)€(declining€to€grant€finalÐ R¢  Ðrelief€based€on€evidence€that€the€trial€court€had€excluded).ÌÌà ` àWe€find€no€basis€for€declining€to€render€a€final€judgment€between€the€partiesÏbased€on€the€facts€in€this€record.€€The€damage€question€was€raised€on€appeal,€and€thisÏis€not€a€case€in€which€the€parties€were€prevented€from€a€full€and€fair€development€ofÏthe€facts.€€The€propriety€and€effect€of€the€ten€SENASH„Clark€change€orders€had€beenÏa€disputed€issue€between€the€parties€from€the€earliest€stages€of€the€litigation,€and€bothÏparties€were€given€essentially€free€reign€to€present€evidence€concerning€all€mattersÏpertinent€to€the€change€orders€during€the€trial.€€The€Realty€Shop€contested€the€validityÏand€efficacy€of€the€change€orders€at€trial,€and€RR€Westminsterððs€appellate€brief€putÏThe€Realty€Shop€on€notice€that€the€change€orders€were€an€essential€part€of€itsÏchallenge€to€the€trial€courtððs€damage€award.€€Accordingly,€we€perceive€no€prejudiceÏto€The€Realty€Shop€resulting€from€our€decision€to€grant€the€parties€the€relief€to€whichÏthey€are€entitled€under€the€law€and€the€facts€of€this€case€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€36(a).ÌÌà ` àThe€fact€that€our€May€11,€1999€decision€is€made€on€a€partial€record€stemsÏdirectly€from€the€tactical€decisions€of€both€The€Realty€Shop€and€RR€Westminster€toÏpursue€this€appeal€with€less€than€a€complete€record.€€The€parties€cannot€wait€toÏreverse€their€field€on€the€question€of€the€adequacy€of€the€record€until€after€theyÏreceive€an€opinion€that€is€not€to€their€liking.€€Accordingly,€we€decline€to€find€that€theÏincompleteness€of€the€record€requires€us€to€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€forÏfurther€proceedings.€€Granting€that€sort€of€relief€would€enable€The€Realty€Shop€toÏprofit€from€its€own€strategic€decision€in€contravention€of€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(a).ÌÌÌÌÐ F;–6D Ðà@ËË.Dàò òII.ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà ` àThe€Realty€Shop€also€asserts€that€we€have€overlooked€or€misconstrued€materialÏfacts€and€that€we€have€mistakenly€applied€the€relevant€legal€principles.€€We€haveÏcarefully€reviewed€our€May€11,€1999€opinion€as€well€as€the€record€on€appeal.€€ThisÏrecord€consists€of€the€complete€transcript€of€the€trial€and€168€of€the€330€exhibits€filedÏduring€the€proceeding.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€have€concluded€that€we€have€neither€overlooked€norÐ U¥  Ðmisconstrued€the€facts€in€the€record€on€appeal.€€We€have€also€concluded€that€weÏwould€not€have€altered€any€of€the€factual€findings€and€legal€conclusions€in€our€MayÏ11,€1999€opinion€had€the€parties€included€the€remaining€162€exhibits€in€the€record€onÏappeal.€€We€adhere€to€our€original€decision€that€the€evidence€preponderates€in€favorÏof€the€conclusion€that€the€work€covered€by€the€ten€change€orders€was€necessary,€thatÏthe€work€was€actually€performed,€that€the€work€benefitted€the€project,€and€that€ClarkÏactually€paid€its€subcontractors€and€suppliers€for€the€work.ÌÌà ` àAccordingly,€we€respectfully€deny€the€petition€for€rehearing.€€We€also€tax€theÏcosts€incident€to€this€rehearing€to€The€Realty€Shop,€Inc.€for€which€execution,€ifÏnecessary,€may€issue.ÌÔ‡¼Q»»¼=ÔÌÓ€ÓÌÔ#†¼=»»¼Qs1#ÔÔ‡¼Q»»¼=Ôà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_________________________________Ð U$¥' Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEñÖñÌñÖññÖñÌñÖññÖñÌñÖññÖñCONCURñÖññ×ññÖñ:ñÖññ×ññÙññØñS:ñØññÙññÚñ:ÌÌñÚñÔ#†¼=»»¼QÉ1#ÔÔ‡¼Q»»¼=ÔÌñÛñà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àñÛñ_________________________________ÌñÜñà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àñÜñSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGE€ÌÌÌñÝñà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àñÝñ_________________________________ÌñÞñà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àà ` àñÞñBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÔ#†¼=»»¼QU3#ÔÔ‡¼Q»»¼=ÔñßñÐ u1Å,3 ÐñßñÔ#†¼=»»¼QT5#ÔÔ‡¼Q»»¼=ÔñßñÌñßñÔ#†¼=»»¼Qµ5#Ô