WPC" # VUNa % 0(w@4 1 UP@ 0l 0D 0J@ 0T  0^ 0hD 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d%U> D3 BU 6 0@MB)DC AMU*Fp4v~v AO 0! 0D! D/:" Bi"HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ DDDEӀ^!3|x&@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++++'dxd d<  9p`(Courier New("$    % Line 7 d....7Border 1dd-/C << G<  9p`(Arial  !#d#)  11   YYY FILED1X December23,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.1AppellateCourtClerk  * !#d#)   $       ,,Theplaintiffscounselonthisappealwasfirstretainedafterthetrialcourtentereditsfinaljudgment.  !#d#)   $       ,,T.C.A.664102providesasfollows: 8 Thepersonalrepresentativecannotberequiredtoexecuteaconveyanceundertheprovisionsof664101,unlessthewrittenagreementorcontract,dulyregistered,oracertifiedcopythereoffromtheregistersbooks,isproducedanddeliveredtotherepresentative.Thecompanionstatute,T.C.A.664101,isasfollows: 8 Inallcasesofwrittenagreementsorcontractsfortheconveyanceoflandinthisstate,wherethepersonexecutingtheagreementorcontractdiesbeforefinalconveyanceismade,thedecedentspersonalrepresentativesmayexecutetheconveyancetothepersonwithwhomsuchagreementorcontractwasmade,orthedecedentsheirsorassigns,accordingtotheformsprescribedfortheconveyanceofrealestate.  !#d#)   $       ,,A negativepregnantisdefinedasfollows: 8 Inpleading,anegativeimplyingalsoanaffirmative.Suchaformofnegativeexpressionasmayimplyorcarrywithinitanaffirmative.Adenialinsuchformastoimplyorexpressanadmissionofthesubstantialfactwhichapparentlyiscontroverted;oradenialwhich,althoughintheformofatraverse,reallyadmitstheimportantfactscontainedintheallegationstowhichitrelates.BlacksLawDictionary1032(6thed.1990).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 ! . )  ݛ P \RA'\,\RA'\7ERXXdd7    ќ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEJAMESR.STROUDand   )C/ANO.03A019609CH00307wife,SHELBYJEANSTROUD, )      )  PlaintiffsAppellants,)      )      )      )      )̜R02/A1-j|`  `@Rߛv.      )      )APPEALASOFRIGHTFROMTHE      )KNOXCOUNTYCHANCERYCOURT      )      )ESTATEOFJETEREDWARD  )̜WARDREP,JR.,JETERE.  )̜WARDREP,III,BILLYE.  )̜HAMRICK,JAMESHAMRICK,  )CAROLYNEADS,and   )JAMESC.WARDREP,   )      )HONORABLESHARONJ.BELL,  DefendantsAppellees.)CHANCELLORForAppellants     ForAppelleesDOUGLASL.DUTTON    EARLS.AILORAMYV.HOLLARS     Knoxville,Tennessee̜Hodges,Doughty&CarsonKnoxville,Tennessee@    OPINION,,Xԛ̜REVERSEDANDREMANDED       Susano,J.    Theplaintiffs,JamesR.Stroudandwife,ShelbyJeanϜStroud,proceedingprose, 3   ׀filedacomplaintforspecificperformanceagainstthecoexecutorsoftheEstateofJeterEdwardϜWardrep,Jr.,andMr.Wardrepsheirs.TheyseektoenforceaϜwrittencontractbetweenthemandthedeceasedinwhichthelatteragreedtosellthempropertyat4001CrestfieldRoad,Knoxville.Followinganonjuryhearing,theChancellordismissedthecomplaint.Theplaintiffsappealed,raisingissuesthatpresentthefollowingquestions: 8 1.DidtheChancellorerrindismissingthecomplaintonthegroundthatthecontractwasnotproperlybeforethecourt? 8 2.Isthefailuretorecordthecontractabartoasuitforspecificperformanceagainstthepersonalrepresentativesofthedeceased?̛@ I.@ Facts  Inthethirdparagraphofthecomplaint,theplaintiffsallegethattheyandthedeceasedexecutedacontractonMay30,1995,forthesaleofthesubjectproperty.TheoriginalofthecontractwasattachedtothecomplaintanddesignatedExhibitAtothatpleading.  Allbutoneofthedefendantsfiledajointanswerinwhichtheyrespondedtothethirdparagraphofthecomplaintasfollows: 8 TheyadmitthatJeterEdwardWardrep,Jr.signedacontractasidentifiedbyExhibitAtothecomplaint.Thejointanswergoesontostateanumberofdefensesinavoidanceofthecontract.  Inaseparateanswer,thedefendantJamesC.Wardreprespondedtothethirdparagraphthusly: 8 Defendantdeniestheallegationsofparagraph3oftheComplaint,andspecificallyallegesthatthecontract,datedMay30,1995,byandbetweenJeterEdwardWardrep,Jr.(the Decedent)andthePlaintiffswithrespecttocertainrealestateownedbytheDecedentlocatedat4001CrestfieldRoad,Knoxville,Tennessee,isinvalidandunenforceableduetotheDecedentsincompetencyonthedatethecontractwasexecuted,orinthealternative,thatthecontractisaproductoffraudormisrepresentationbythePlaintiffsorundueinfluenceupontheDecedentbythePlaintiffs.  TheChancellorfoundthatthedefendantsfailedtocarrytheirburdenofproofwithrespecttoallofthemattersallegedasdefensesinavoidanceofthecontract.ShespecificallyrejectedadefensebaseduponthefailureoftheplaintiffstoϜ dulyregister[]thecontract,findingthatT.C.A.664102 4   ׀didnotprecludeadecreeforspecificperformanceagainstthepersonalrepresentatives.  Despitefindinginfavortheplaintiffsonallofthedefensesinavoidanceofthecontract,theChancellorconcludedthatbecausetheplaintiffshadnotformallymovedthecourttoadmitthecontractintoevidence,shehadtofindforthedefendants: 8 ...thecruxofthelawsuit,andthatisthecontractofsale,oranauthenticatedcopythereonhasneverbeenintroducedintoevidence,sowhenDefendantarguestherearetermsmissinginthecontractIcanonlysayasfarastheCourtknows,therearenoterms.ThereisnocontractbeforetheCourt.Itsunfortunatewhenitcomestoatechnicalityofthatnaturebutlawasmedicineandsurveysandanythingelsehavetobedoneright,andiftheyrenotdonerighttheCourtcantdoititself.TheCourthastoletpeoplerepresentthemselves,soIcannotfindthatthereshouldbespecificperformance.  WebelievetheChancellorwascorrectinconcludingthatT.C.A.664102didnotpreventherfromdecreeingspecificperformance.However,wedisagreewithherconclusionthatthesubjectcontractwasnotproperlybeforeher.@ II.@ LawӜ  In Rastv.Terry ,532S.W.2d552(Tenn.1976),suitwasbroughttosetasideataxdeed.Theformerpropertyownersclaimedthattheydidnothaveactualorconstructivenoticeofthetaxsale.OneofthefactsallegedinthecomplaintwasthatprocessastooneofthepropertyownershadbeenreturnedbytheSheriffmarked nottobefoundinmyCounty.Id.at55354.Tothisallegation,thedefendantrespondedthat 8 [i]tisadmitted...thattheSheriff,beingunabletoservethesummonsinthematterontheTerrys,oreitherofthem,returnedsaidsummonsmarked nottobefoundinmyCounty.Id.at554.CitingGibsonsSuitsinChancery,410(5thed.),theSupremeCourtpointedoutthelegaleffectoftheanswer: 8 Whentheallegationsofthecomplaintareadmittedintheanswerthesubjectmatterthereofisremovedasanissue,noproofisnecessaryanditbecomesconclusiveontheparties.Id.(Emphasisadded).  In JohnP.Saad&Sonsv.NashvilleThermalTransferCorp. ,642S.W.2d151(Tenn.App.1982),theCourtofAppealsopinedthat 8 [f]actsconfessedinpleadingsarebindingonthepartiesandofferedevidenceofsuchfactsisproperlyexcludedasirrelevant.(citationomitted).Id.at152.Asintheinstantcase,the JohnP.Saad&Sons caseinvolvesananswerwhichadmittedthatthepartiestothelitigationhadenteredintoacontract,acopyofwhichwasattachedtothecomplaint.  In Irvinv.CityofClarksville ,767S.W.2d649(Tenn.App.1988),anownerofpropertysuedtheCityofϜClarksvilleseekingdamagesbecauseoftheCitysdemolitionofafiredamagedhouseinwhichtheplaintiffallegedthatheownedaninterest.Thetrialcourtfoundthattheplaintifffailedtoproveanownershipinterestinthepropertybecausehe failedtointroduceacopyofthedeedduringthepresentationofhisevidence.Id.at653.TheCourtofAppealsheldthatthisfindingwasinerrorbecausethecomplaintallegedtheplaintiffsownershipinterestandthatinterestwasadmittedintheanswer.Insoholding,theCourtofAppealssaidthefollowing: 8 InlightoftheCitysadmission,thetrialjudgeshouldnothaverequired[theplaintiff]toprovethatheownedaninterestintheproperty.Admissionsinpleadingsarejudicialadmissionsthatareconclusiveonthepleaderuntilwithdrawnoramended.(citationomitted).Thus,whentheallegationsinacomplaintareadmittedintheanswer,thesubjectmatteroftheallegationsisremovedasanissue,andnoproofisnecessary.Ϝ(citationsomitted).Id.@ III.@ Analysis  Theanswersintheinstantcaseadmittheexecutionofthecontract.WhiletheanswerofthedefendantJamesC.Wardreppurportstodenytheallegationsofparagraphthreeofthecomplaint,hisansweractuallyamountstoaresponsewhichisproperlycharacterizedasa negativepregnant. 5   כTheresponseisactuallyanaffirmationofthecontractwithallegationsofmattersinavoidance.Itiscleartousthatnoneofthedefendantsdenythatthedeceasedandtheplaintiffsexecutedthesubjectcontract.  Sincethecontractexhibitedtothecomplaintwasadmittedbythedefendants,itwasnotnecessaryfortheplaintiffstoformallymovethecourttoadmititintoevidence.Itwasalreadybeforethecourtbyvirtueoftheadmissionsintheanswers. JohnP.Saad&Sons ,642S.W.2dat152.Wefindthattheappellantsfirstissuehasmerit.  ThedefendantsarguedattrialthatT.C.A.664102barsasuitagainstthemintheirrepresentativecapacity.TheChancellorrejectedthiscontention,findingthat Bristerv.ϜBrubakersEstate ,336S.W.2d326(Tenn.App.1960)holdstothecontrary.Weagree. Brister expresslyholdsthatT.C.A.664102willnotservetobarasuitagainstapersonalrepresentativeforspecificperformanceofacontracttosellrealproperty,notingthat 8 ...ifthecontractreliedonby[theplaintiff]isotherwisesufficient,itisbinding,asbetweenthepartiestosameandtheirheirsandrepresentatives,withoutϜregistration.336S.W.2dat331.  Theexecutionofthesubjectcontractwasprovenbelow.TheChancellordeterminedthatthemattersallegedinavoidanceofthecontractwerenotsustainedbytheproof.Whiletheselatterfindingswerenotraisedasissuesonthisappeal,wefindthattheevidencedoesnotpreponderatethem.Webelieveitisappropriatetoremandthiscasetothetrialcourtsoitcanfashionbyanappropriateordertherelieftowhichtheplaintiffsareentitledunderthetermsofthecontract.  Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisreversed.Thismatterisremandedtothetrialcourtfortheentryofanappropriateorder,consistentwiththeopinionofthiscourt.Costsonappealareassessedtotheappellees.      ______________________________      CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.CONCUR:______________________________HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.______________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.