WPCK # VU:a % 0(b w@4 ) 8 0J@ 0T 0^ 0h< 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d AM U* B) DC! AMdv~ B+vH D3 0XN AO 0D D/ B.HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 ,rAZ"Arial RegularX($- - DDDDӀD 3|x2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X- C << G<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d7Border 1dd- C << G !  #d#     YYY FILEDXNovember27,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'h dStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   inion Geneva  inion Geneva %%%%'dxd(0"$       -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .          \RA'\\RA'\\RA'\\RA'\7XXdd7    ћ WESTERNEXPRESS,INC.,  )      ) Plaintiff/Appellant,   )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019605CH00204̜VS.      )      ) DavidsonChancery      ) No.943909II̜R# A1-j|!`  `@RߛINTERESTEDUNDERWRITERSAT )LLOYDS,LONDON,   )      ) Defendant/Appellee.  )@ COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLEAPPEALEDFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFDAVIDSONCOUNTYATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEELLENHOBBSLYLE,CHANCELLOR̜ISHAMB.BRADLEY500WilsonPikeCircle,SuiteF218̜Brentwood,Tennessee37027 AttorneyforPlaintiff/AppellantLEXA.COLEMANRICHARDR.RUTHRUTH,McCARTHY&COLEMAN,P.C.1600FirstTennesseeBuilding701MarketStreetChattanooga,Tennessee37402 AttorneysforDefendant/Appellee@ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:TODD,P.J.,M.S.LEWIS,J.  @ OPINION X  ThisappealraisesthequestionofwhetherTenn.CodeAnn.5637110(d)requiresaninsurerofpersonalpropertytonotifylienholdersthatthecoveragehasbeencancelledbeforethecancellationiseffectiveastothepropertyowner.Weaffirmthechancellorsdecisionresolvingthequestionagainstthepropertyowner.@ I.   WesternExpressisinthetruckingbusiness.OnAugust28,1993WesternobtainedinsurancecoverageonitstractortrailersthroughInterestedUnderwritersatLloydsLondon.Thepolicycontainedthenamesofabankandanindividualasadditionallosspayees.  WesternfinancedtheinsurancepremiumsthroughTransamericanInsuranceFinanceCorporation(TIFCO).TheirarrangementprovidedthatTIFCOwouldpaytheentireyearlypremiumtoLloydsandWesternwouldmakemonthlypaymentstoTIFCOontheamountfinanced.WesternappointedTIFCOasitsattorneyinfactwiththepowertocanceltheinsurancepolicyifWesterndefaultedonitsmonthlypayments.  Westernspaymentswereconsistentlylate.OnMarch8,1994,whenithadnotreceivedthepaymentdueonFebruary28,1994,TIFCOnotifiedWesternthatitwouldcanceltheinsuranceifthepaymentwasnotreceivedbyMarch20.OnMarch28TIFCOsentanoticeofcancellationtoLloydswithacopytoWesternandtheinsuranceagent.TheeffectivedateonthenoticewasMarch29,1994at12:01P.M.SeveralhourslateroneofWesternstruckswasdamagedinanaccident.Nonoticewasgiventothelienholdersnotedinthepolicy.@ II.   Westernassertsthatastatute,Tenn.CodeAnn.5637110(d)requiresnoticetothelienholdersbeforethecancellationiseffective.Thatstatuteprovides: 0   0   0   Allstatutory,regulatoryandcontractualrestrictionsprovidingthattheinsurancecontractmaynotbecancelledunlessnoticeisgiventoagovernmentalagency,mortgageeorotherthirdpartyshallapplyforcancellationseffectedundertheprovisionsofthissection.Theinsurershallgivetheprescribednoticeonbehalfofitselfortheinsuredtoanygovernmentalagency,mortgageeorotherthirdpartyonorbeforethesecondbusinessdayafterthedayitreceivesthenoticeofcancellation,takingintoconsiderationthenumberofdaysnoticerequiredtocompletethecancellation.            ThechancellorconcludedthatthestatutemightprovideadefensetoϜcancellationforthelienholders,butthatthefailuretonotifythelienholdersdidnotprovideadefensetotheinsured.Wearepersuadedthatthechancellorwascorrect.  First,thequotedstatutedoesnotindependentlyobligatethepremiumfinancecompanyortheinsurertogivenoticetolienholders.Itsimplyprovidesthatotherstatutes,regulationsorcontractsthatdoimposesuchrequirementsshouldbecompliedwith.Thereisnoreferenceinthisrecordtoanystatutes,regulations,orcontractsthatimposesuchrequirements.  Second,andmostimportantly,weconstruethestatutetorequirenoticetolienholdersfortheirprotectionandnotfortheprotectionoftheinsured.Foraconsistentinterpretationofsimilarstatutes,seeSzymczakv.MidwestPremiumFinanceCompany,483N.E.2d851(OhioApp.1984)andBrycev.St.PaulFireandMarineInsuranceCompany,783P.2d246(Ariz.App.1989).@ III.   Afterthecourtentereditsjudgmentbelow,RolandM.Lowellfiledamotiontobeaddedasaparty.Insupportofhismotionhefiledhisaffidavitallegingthathewasthelienholderonthevehicleatthetimetheclaimarose.Heisnot,however,theindividuallienholderlistedinthepolicy.ThechancelloroverruledthemotionandWesternassertsonappealthatthemotionshouldhavebeengranted.  Wethinkthechancellorsrulingwascorrect.SincehewasnotlistedinthepolicyandhedoesnotallegethatLloydshadanynoticeofhisinterest,Mr.Lowellwasnotentitledtonoticeofthecancellation.Hedoesnotallegeanyotherbasisonwhichhecouldmakeaclaiminthiscase.  ThejudgmentofthecourtbelowisaffirmedandthecauseisremandedtotheChanceryCourtofDavidsonCountyforanyfurtherproceedingsthatmaybecomenecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellant.      _____________________________      BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:_______________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGEMIDDLESECTION_______________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE  @