WPC\! # VUNa % 0U<M w@ 4   0 0D 0J 0T^ 0^ 0h 0rx 0| 0f 0 1u|U, 0d BU,U>U6B)>DCg AMU* D3!T2 0@&v~fv AO 0D D/! B?!HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(p+$TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman HEDӀyJ , 3|x((3l$ +!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   `   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)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d&&&&7Border 1dd-'C << G<  9p`(Arial""""'dxd  !  #d#$    \RA'\  ))   YYY FILED)X July11,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.)AppellateCourtClerk  ( !  #d#$    \RA'\   $       Rule10(CourtofAppeals).MemorandumOpinion.(b)TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm,reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhenaformalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedbymemorandumopinionitshallbedesignated"MEMORANDUMOPINION,"shallnotbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequentunrelatedcase.$("$    PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &##Xd&###Xd#$    \RA'\  %%7%XXdd7  ћ@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ WESTERNSECTIONATJACKSON  ________________________________________________ ELVIESMITH,ANNIEMAE  FROMTHECHESTERCOUNTY BENNETT,Individuallyandas CHANCERYCOURT,No.P300 ExecutrixoftheEstateofPearlie MaePorter,Deceased;WANNA THEHONORABLEJOEC. MAYREDMONandPAULE.  MORRIS,Chancellor WEAVER,       AFFIRMED  PlaintiffsAppellees,      C.A.No.02A019504CH00088Vs.      F.LloydTatum,Tatum&Tatumof LURENEFAULKNER,BETTY Henderson,ForAppellees JEANWEAVER,ANDJAMESARLINPORTER,    LutherWayneRobertsonofٜL(+';+'h|` . `Lߛ      Collierville,ForAppellants, DefendantsAppellants,Vs. WALTERBENNETT, ThirdPartyDefendant.___________________________________________________________________________7%XXdXXd7  @ MEMORANDUMOPINION ,   ___________________________________________________________________________ CRAWFORD,J.    DefendantsAppellants,LureneFaulkner,BettyJeanWeaver,andJamesArlinPorter(Appellants),appealfromthejudgmentofthetrialcourtdenyingtheirclaimforattorneysfeestobepaidbytheestateofPearlieMaePorter. ThisisthesecondtimethiscasehasbeenbeforethisCourt.ThepartiesinbothsuitsarethesixchildrenofArdieandPearlieMaePorter.OnAugust1,1990,theappellees;ElvieSmith,AnnieMaeBennett,andWannaMaeRedmon,filedacomplaintseekingtosellahouseand1.15acresofrealpropertycontainedintheestate.Ms.SmithandMs.BennettaretheexecutricesofMrs.Portersestate.OnOctober9,1990,appellantsfiledananswerandcountercomplaintforrescissionofawarrantydeedexecutedbyArdieandPearlieMaePorterconveyingotherrealpropertytotheappellees.AlsoonOctober9,1990,appellantsfiledapetitiontocontestthelastwillandtestamentofPearlieMaePorter,allegingthatthewillwasinvalidbecauseMrs.Porterlackedtestamentarycapacityatthetimethewillwasexecutedandthatshewasundulyinfluencedbytheappellees.Thecasesweretriedtogether,andonSeptember29,1992,thetrialcourtenteredjudgmentonajuryverdictwhichfoundthatthepurportedlastwillandtestamentofPearlieMaePorterwasMrs.Porterstruewill,butthatthedeedfromthePorterstransferringthebulkoftheirrealpropertytoappelleeswasinvalid.OnappealtothisCourt,thetrialcourtsdecreewasaffirmedinallrespects. Afterremand,appellantsnowseekanawardofattorneysfeesagainstϜtheestateintheamountof$18,330.00.Thisfigureisbasedononethirdof$55,000.00,theamountbywhichappellantsallegeMrs.Portersestateincreasedasaresultoftheappellantssuccessfuleffortstosetasidetheaforementioneddeed.AppellantsfirstfiledamotiononMarch11,1992,seekingattorneyfeesfromtheestateintheamountof$14,380.00fortimeappellantsattorneyspentbetweenAugust3,1990,andFebruary15,1992.Themotionwasnotheardpriortotheappealandafterremandappellantssoughtattorneyfeesfor303.6hoursofwork,attherateof$100.00perhour.OnDecember21,1994,afteranevidentiaryhearing,thetrialcourtenteredanorderdenyingallowanceoffeesoutoftheestatetoeitherparty.Thepresentappealfollowed. Appellantspresentasingleissueonappealwhich,asstatedinappellantsbrief,is:8 8 WhetherthetrialcourterredinnotallowingtheAppellantsanyattorneyfeesinthiscausewhentheservicesoftheirattorneywereofvaluetotheestateinthiscauseinthatthedeedwhichwassetaside,thepropertyrepresentedbysuchdeedwasalmostthreefourthsofthevalueoftheestateofPerlieMaePorter,deceased,andtonotallowtheAppellantstheirreasonableattorneysfeesamountstounjustenrichmentoftheAppelleesinthiscause. Sincethiscasewastriedbythecourtsittingwithoutajury,wereviewthecase denovo withapresumptionofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffactbythetrialcourt.Unlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthefindings,wemustaffirm,absenterroroflaw.T.R.A.P.13(d). Generally, [i]ntheabsenceofastatuteorcontractualprovisionsforindemnificationorsomerecognizedgroundofequity,thereisnorighttohaveattorneysfeespaidbyanopposingpartyincivillitigation. Kimbroughv.UnionPlantersNationalBank ,764S.W.2d203,205(Tenn.1989). Counselforanunsuccessfulcontestantofawillcannotbepaidoutoftheassetsbequeathedbythewill. Bridgefordv.Williams, 58Tenn.App.693,697,436S.W.2d453,455(1967).In Merchants&PlantersBankv.Myers ,644S.W.2d683(Tenn.App.1982),thisCourtsaid:8 8 Asageneralrule,forattorneysfeestobeallowedoutofanestate,theattorneymusthavebeenemployedbythepersonalrepresentativeoftheestate;however,thereisanexceptionwhereanattorneysserviceshaveinuredtothebenefitoftheestateand,inthosecases,thecourthasdiscretiontoallowfees.(Citationsomitted.) Id .at688. Evenwherefeesmaybeproperlychargedagainsttheestate,theymustbereasonable,necessaryandproper. InreEstateofWallace ,829S.W.2d696,701(Tenn.App.1992).The Wallace courtstated: Trialcourtshavethediscretion,inthefirstinstance,todeterminewhethertherequestedfeesandexpensesarereasonable....Wewillnotalterthetrialcourtsdecisionunlesswefindthattheawardexceedsreasonablelimits. Id .(Citationsomitted.); seealsoMerchants&PlantersBank ,644S.W.2dat688. Intheinstantcase,itisclearthatappellantssuittosetasidethedeedinuredtothebenefitoftheestatebyincreasingthevalueoftheestatebyapproximately$55,000.00.However,itisalsouncontrovertedthatappellantsunsuccessfulsuittocontestthewilldidnotinuretothebenefitoftheestateandthus,attorneysfeesshouldnotbeallowedforthatportionofthesuit. Bridgeford, 58Tenn.App.at697,436S.W.2dϜat455(1967). Withregardtothesuittosetasidethedeed,appellantsdidnotpresentthecourtwithseparatecalculationsofattorneysfeesforthewillcontestandthesuittosetasidethedeedand,bytheadmissionofappellantsattorney, itwasimpossibletodivideoneissuefromtheother.Thecourtcannotarbitrarilyawardattorneysfeeswithoutabasisfortheircalculation,norcanacourtrandomlyimpose,asappellantscounselsuggests,whatiseffectivelyaunilateralcontingencyfeeagreementontheestate.Apparentlyappellantsattorneycouldnotconceiveofameansbywhichtoseparatethefeesforthewillcontestandforthesuitregardingthedeed.Underthesecircumstances,weholdthatitwaswellwithinthediscretionofthetrialcourtnottoallowanawardoffees. Wallace ,829S.W.2dat701; Merchants&PlantersBankv.Myers ,644S.W.2dat688. Accordingly,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.Costsofappealaretaxedtotheappellants.Inviewofourdecision,appelleesissuesarepretermitted.       _________________________________       W.FRANKCRAWFORD,       PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S. CONCUR: _________________________________ ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE _________________________________DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE