WPC WhgߕDfd9;?gvo_]ѽyEn"Qvu*3@qn$&6Gy|*nLd: 6bQk< FЩ̖ODOy] [*:NS%2M&wq}Y-jcp\a (g穫\3gdJ Db#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz U8   U N 0DrEjjjjjU@b 0 B 0$ D3 D- 0K(( ASs 0 0D0 AtHP LaserJet 4Si,,,,,,0m( (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular9?(dޟ C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xU< 9Z+ Courier New Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  } Rݙ$      1  XSX  _XSXXXS+ XXS Industrialpark,asdefinedbyT.C.A.1316202(2)means landandrights,easementsandfranchises  relatingthereto,andmayincludeadequateroadsandstreets,waterandsewerfacilities,utilities,anddocksand x terminals,asrequiredfortheuseofindustry,andsuchappurtenantlandfornecessaryincidentaluse.#+  +~#Ԁ#XSX +#(#$  0    Rݙ$      2  XSX  _XSXXXS_+ XXSRoane_ԀCountyResolution#079805(asamended),whichwasintroducedasanexhibitattrial,authorizes   [_c]ondemnation_Ԁ[_p]roceedings_ԀpursuanttoT.C.A.[]2917101etseq.toacquirecertainpropertyrightsforthe x completionoftheMacedoniaIndustrialParkProject.#+  +~##XSX +# ` Rݙ$      3  XSX  _ X^B XXXSXSX X X^B+ XXS Thatnomansparticularservicesshallbedemanded,orpropertytaken,orappliedtopublicuse,withoutthe  consentofhisrepresentatives,orwithout#   +#+   justcompensationbeingmadetherefor.Tenn.Const.Art.I,21.#   +## X^B X  ɼ#(9 Z(Times New Roman - -(|G2ݙ$ !.8dd8         0  XSX d(|3$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @$ATKNOXVILLE  @"May2000Session 0 XSX #XXSn#  ROANECOUNTY,TENNESSEEv.CHRISTMASLUMBERCOMPANY, 8 INC.,etal.XSX   P @d d  InterlocutoryAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforRoaneCounty  X @ No.11756RussellE.Simmons,Jr.,Judge  H    `     h FILEDJULY27,_2000_ (  @*AV) ` dE<` A߈   @No.E199900370COAR9CV   AV) ` dE<` A    Thisisacondemnationcase.Thetrialcourtenteredanorderfindingthat_Roane_ԀCounty( the  County)hastherighttocondemntherespondentspropertyforuseasanindustrialpark.We  grantedtherespondentsapplicationforaninterlocutoryappealtoreviewthetrialcourts  determinationthattheCountyhastherighttocondemnthesubjectproperty.Findingthatthe v Countyspetitionislegallydeficient,wevacatethetrialcourtsorderandremandforfurther f proceedings. V  @..Tenn.R.App.P.9AppealbyPermission;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtVacated; 6 @99$CaseRemanded  &v CharlesD.Susano#XS!#XSX.,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichHerschelP.FranksandD. V Michael_Swiney_,JJ.,joined. F GaryA.Davis,Knoxville,Tennessee,fortheappellants,ChristmasLumberCompany,Inc.,and & JohnHarveySmith.   TomMcFarland,Kingston,Tennessee,fortheappellee,RoaneCounty,Tennessee. "! PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter,andAnnLouiseVix,SeniorCounsel,forthe $# StateofTennessee. v% $ @55' OPINION #XXS1#XSXԈ F(#'   I. &*v%) '   TheCountyfiledacondemnationpetitionseekingtoacquireapproximately142.4acresof ,V'+  landownedbytherespondents,ChristmasLumberCompany,Inc.andJohnHarveySmith.As ,F(,6 authorityforthecondemnation,#XXS #XSXtheCountyspetitionreliesspecificallyandexclusivelyonT.C.A.  2917101,etseq.,whichprovides,inpertinentpart,that     8 ` [_c]ounties_Ԁareempoweredtocondemnandtaketheproperty,  buildings,privileges,rights,andeasementsofindividualsandprivate p corporationsforanycountypurpose.` ` x` x _T.C.A._Ԁ2917101(1980).ThepetitionallegesthattheCountyseekstocondemnthisproperty for @  countypurposes.Itgoesontoprovidethat [t]hepropertyrightssoughttobeacquiredarefora 0  publicpurposeandpublicconveniencedoesrequireit.Nowhereinthepetitionisthereaspecific  p  referencetotheIndustrialParkAct,T.C.A.1316201,etseq.,whichprovides,inpertinentpart, `  asfollows: P  8  8`   Subjecttotheconditionsofthispart,anymunicipalityhasthepower 0  to: ` x` x 8  8`   (1)Acquirelandandrightsandeasementsthereinbygift,purchase,  oreminentdomain,anddevelopthelandintoindustrialparkswithin  orwithoutthemunicipalityorpartiallywithinandpartiallywithout  themunicipality,andmaintainandoperatesuchindustrialparks....` x` x T.C.A.1316203(1)(1999).(Emphasisadded).Thepetitiondoesnotspecificallyprovidethat ` thepropertyinquestionisbeingtakenforthedevelopmentofanindustrialparkasdefinedin P T.C.A.1316202(2)(1999). #  1      ׀Thepetitiondoesalludeto specificauthorizationsetoutinRoane @ CountyResolution#079805(asamended);however,thesubjectresolutionisnotanexhibittothe 0 petition,isnotattachedtothepetition,andisnotincorporatedbyreferenceintothepetition._ #  2      _Ԁ  p   Respondentsfiledananswer,inwhichtheyassertthattheCounty iswithoutauthorityto P exerciseeminentdomainforpurposesofdevelopmentofanindustrialparkunderthestatutecited @ inthePetition,i.e.,_T.C.A._Ԁ2917101,etseq.Theylaterfiledamotionseekingdismissalofthe 0 petitiononthegroundthattheCountyshouldhaveproceededundertheIndustrialParkActinstead   of_T.C.A._Ԁ2917101,etseq.,inpursuingcondemnationoftherespondentsproperty.Thetrial ! courtdeniedrespondentsmotion,concluding "      `     h      p      #! 8  8`   thatthe[County]hastheauthoritytocondemnandtakepropertyfor   thepurposeofanindustrialparkunderboth_T.C.A._Ԁ1316204et  seqand_T.C.A._Ԁ2917101etseqandoneisnotexclusiveofthe  other.Bothstatutesmustbereadtogethertointerpretthestatutes.  TheCourtfurtherfindsthatevenifastatutehadnotbeenpledthat p therearesufficientavermentsinthecomplainttostateacauseof `  action.P ` x` x ThecaseproceededtotrialonFebruary11,1999.AttheconclusionoftheCountysproof, 0  respondentsmovedtodismissonthebasisthattheCountyhadfailedtoprovethatthetakingof  p  propertyforpurposesofdevelopmentofanindustrialparkisfora publicuseasrequiredby `  ArticleI,section21oftheTennesseeConstitution. #  3      ׀Thetrialcourtdeniedrespondentsmotionfrom P  thebench,findingthatthedevelopmentofanindustrialparkconstitutesapublicuse.Therecord @  indicatesthatthetrialcourtconsideredtherespondentschallengetotheconstitutionalityofthe 0  proposedtakingtobeachallengetotheconstitutionalityoftheIndustrialParkAct,anissuethathad   notbeenraisedbyrespondentsintheirpleadings.Afterthetrialcourtannounceditsdenialofthe  motiontodismiss,respondentsmovedtoamendtheiranswertoassertaconstitutionalchallengeto  theIndustrialParkActandtonotifytheStateAttorneyGeneralthatthestatutehadbeenchallenged  Єandupheldinthetrialcourt.Thecourtbelowgrantedrespondentsmotiontoamend;however,  theStateAttorneyGeneraldidnotreceivenoticeoftheconstitutionalissueuntilafterthetrialbelow.  Cf.Tenn.R.Civ.P.24.04. p   Followingthetrial,thecourtbelowfileditsorderandmemorandumopinion,inwhichitheld P thattheCountyhadtheauthoritytocondemnrespondentsproperty;thattheCountysactionswere @ notarbitrary,capricious,oranabuseofdiscretion;andthattherewerenoviolationsoftheOpen 0 MeetingsAct,T.C.A.844101,etseq.Thetrialcourtthengrantedrespondentspetitionforan  p interlocutoryappeal.Wealsograntedthepetition. `   II. @ $  Onthisappeal,respondentsarguethatthecondemnationwasinvalidforseveralreasons,   includingthatthetakingwasnotforapublicuse;thattheCountyspetitionwasdeficient;thatthe ! condemnationwasprematureandthusanabuseofdiscretion;thatthedecisiontocondemn "  respondentspropertywasmadeinviolationoftheOpenMeetingsAct;thatthecondemnationwas #! arbitraryandcapricious;andthatrespondentsareentitledtoajurytrialontheissueoftheCountys $" righttocondemn.WeagreewithrespondentsthattheCountyspetitionwaslegallydeficient. % #   Ithaslongbeenrecognizedthat becausethepowerofeminentdomainisagainstcommon `'"% right, Vinsonv.Nashville,Chattanooga&St.LouisRy., 45Tenn.App.161,321S.W.2d841,844 P(#& (1958),statutesgrantingsuchpoweraretobestrictlyconstruedagainstthe_condemnor,_Ԁ Claiborne  Countyv.Jennings, 199Tenn.161,285S.W.2d132,134(1955),andtheproceduresprescribedby  thosestatutes mustbefollowed, CityofChattanoogav.State, 151Tenn.691,272S.W.432,434  (1925).  T.C.A.2917803(a)(1980)mandatesthatapetitionforcondemnation shallcontaina  descriptionofthepropertyorpropertyrightssoughttobecondemned,thecivildistrictinwhichthe p sameislocated,adescriptionoftheprojecttobeconstructedandtheamountofdamagestowhich `  the_condemnor_Ԁhasdeterminedthattheownerwillbeentitled....(Emphasisadded).Asindicated P  previously,theCountyspetitionstatesonlythatitisseekingcondemnationofrespondentsproperty @   forcountypurposes,withspecificauthorizationsetoutinRoaneCountyResolution#079805(as 0  amended),aresolutionthatisnotattachedtothepetitionorotherwisemadeapartofthepetition.  p  Thepetitionisfurtherdeficientinthatitdoesnotcontain adescriptionoftheprojecttobe `  constructedasrequiredbyT.C.A.2917803(a). P  Ѐ @    Thepurposeofapleadingisto givenoticetothepartiesandthetrialcourtoftheissuesto 0  betried. Castelliv.Lien, 910S.W.2d420,429(Tenn.Ct.App.1995). [T]hepetitionshouldnot   leaveanyuncertaintyastothetheoryonwhichthepleaderwishestoproceed.61A_Am.Jur_.2d  Pleading81(1999).Itisevidentfromtherecord,althoughnotfromthepleadingsthemselves,that  theCountyisseekingtoacquirerespondentspropertyforthepurposessetforthintheIndustrial  ParkAct,i.e.,todevelop,maintain,andoperateanindustrialpark.SeeT.C.A.1316203(1).The  petition,however,doesnotaffordanynoticetorespondentsthattheCountyseekstoacquirethe  subjectpropertyforsuchpurposes,nordoesitsetforththattheIndustrialParkActspecifically p authorizesacountytoexercisethepowerofeminentdomainforsuchpurposes.Ataminimum,the ` drasticremedyofcondemnationrequiresthatthepetitiontocondemnbesetforthinfullcompliance P with_T.C.A._Ԁ2917803(a)(1980).Asapartofthis,allofthestatutoryauthorityunderpinningthe @ petitionshouldbesetforthinthepetition.Apartofthatauthorityinthiscaseisclearlythe 0 IndustrialParkAct,_T.C.A._Ԁ1316201,etseq.  p   WefindthattheCountyscondemnationpetitionwasdeficientforthereasonssetforth P above.Therefore,wevacatethetrialcourtsjudgmentinthiscaseandremandtoaffordtheCounty @ theopportunitytoamenditspetition,consistentwiththisopinion.Wealsofinditisnecessaryto 0 remandthiscaseforanewtrialinordertoaffordtheAttorneyGeneralanopportunitytointervene   andtodefendtheconstitutionalityoftheIndustrialParkAct,insofarasitisimplicatedinthiscase. ! Whenthevalidityofastatuteisquestioned,theAttorneyGeneralmustbenotifiedandgivenan "  opportunitytointervene.#XXS #XSXԀSee_T.C.A._Ԁ2914107(b)(1980);Tenn.R.Civ.P.24.04.Theother #! issuesraisedbyrespondentsonappealarepretermitted. $"   Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisvacated.Thiscaseisremandedforfurtherproceedings, p&!$ consistentwiththisopinion.Costsonappealaretaxedtotheappellee.#XXS8# `'"%    `     h     __________________________ +&)    `     h     CHARLESD.SUSANO,JR.,J.