ÿWPCÄ …« ‚ÇžB?cÔ¾OøW¨Ùff¬ñð+õi±¯ßÛh¢Æ!oLçÞ8$Ñ_³¹óã&Dhz¢e "–¯ÁkaÉVË+³Ãæ„lRbMšn|»ßzOÇrQðœk2’*o«¯ !&Ò®R'ej]¾ñѵ2‚ƒ zö_æ‘Âþ<´ä•šñ¡G/.œ\ÈÇ'QQÜ«Tå»×m_:N2Í:Ò `ÑV^šr%&xÆA¤3P‚݈xŽ×z‹ÎÝ,ù…Ã#u G8 2CânZáY!ÑfMÍLJæ«V4/êIª‚ß7p³æ Â"™ªÄqX”ïνVê‰H¬ȼi¡Ð¹cn³Ïd(ÒAŠãfŒ2#dzì-z_IJÝ3iO d‹ÁèFFÒ3]ô ,d,¯ÁH ~b‡m¹ß£}gX•¿÷m9 ÏÚ‹˜ºh”FíAÌVqzeŽÃK¸X8B¶˜ËGýÇÑÛÊtCôÿ¸ë²…]û¯›‘!/蛤€(n¨Úg¯-ò®c,ßçÖÆFÿMªúgxú¯ÚJ9±™2®ŠÑáSä_ØÌ¸aÒ9oMjÞW6… €ÚïkÒ}øý+r×§ÛØñÏòÓßè6çëß(ýCc}#Á %Ï ^ Õ 0ˆá UNi w· 4» zÏ ÒI  * m, C ÆK ÆÆ×ÆNcccEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeebgggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg 0ëoooo BZZ 0¤w D3 D-N 0K{{ ASÆÆ 0¤ß 0Dƒ A«ÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇ D5r B§˜HP LaserJet 4Si,ü,,,,,ü0»Ž)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular9?Æ(ê:i¢Ø+00 ˜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|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2L$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦d»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X®ëX»»Ô d(|3A$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦d»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3A$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦d»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK€€€€)ûÿ!dxdxüÿP PdÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¦d»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼¦d»»»ÔÑ8€®ëXXdð»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ€îò¿î»¼¦dÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@88$ìàAT€KNOXVILLE€ˆÐ Ü, ÐÓ  ÓJanuary€2000€SessionÔ‡¼¦d»îîò¿ÔÐ X ÐÔ#†îò¿î»¼¦dº#ÔÔ‡X®ëXîîò¿ÔÌò òÔ#†îò¿îXX®ë#ÔÔ‡¼¦d»îîò¿ÔJOE€H.€WALKERòòóó€v.€SIDNEY€Ô_ÔGILREATHÔ_Ô€&€ASSOCIATES,€òòet€alóó.Ô#†îò¿î»¼¦dW#ÔÔ‡X®ëXîîò¿Ôó óÐ $ t ÐÌà@@¼ ¼ ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Knox€CountyÐ , | Ðà@@þ þ ìàNo.€1„319„96€€€€€Dale€C.€Workman,€Judge€Ð  l ÐÌFILED€JULY€20,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ü L  Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<ë` AßÐ ì<  ÐÌà@@$ $ ìàNo.€E1999„01012„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV„€Decided€Ð ë;  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<Ê` AßÐ Ë  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€a€legal€malpractice€action€in€which€Plaintiff€appeals€summary€judgment€entered€for€allÐ Ê ÐDefendants.€€Plaintiff€claims€that€Defendants,€attorneys€who€represented€him€in€a€personal€injuryÐ º  Ðcase,€failed€to€file€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.04€motion€for€discretionary€costs.€€The€trial€court€held€thatÐ ªú Ðcompliance€with€the€applicable€standard€of€care€involved€genuine€issues€of€material€fact€butÐ šê Ðsustained€the€summary€judgment€of€all€Defendants€on€the€basis€of€the€speculative€character€ofÐ ŠÚ ÐPlaintiffððs€damages.€€We€reverse€and€remand.Ð zÊ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€CourtÐ Zª ÐReversed€and€Remandedó óÐ Jš ÐÌòòÓ  ÓWòòILLIAMóó€B.€CainÔ#†îò¿îàX®ëú#ÔÔ‡X®ëXXîò¿Ô,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBòòENóó€H.€Ô_ÔCòòANTRELLÔ_Ôóó,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,€M.S.,óó€andÐ *z ÐòòóóWòòILLIAMóó€C.€KòòOCHóó,€JòòRóó.,€J.,€joined.Ð j ÐÌÔ_ÔNorbertÔ_Ô€J.€Ô_ÔSlovisÔ_Ô,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Joe€H.€Walker.Ð úJ ÐÌR.€Franklin€Norton€and€Geoffrey€D.€Ô_ÔKressinÔ_Ô,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Sidney€Ô_ÔGilreathÔ_ÔÐ Ú * Ð&€Associates.Ð Ê!  ÐÌDarryl€G.€Lowe,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Gary€McDonald€and€Brenda€Hall.Ð ª#ú" ÐÌà@55'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†îò¿îXX®ëÆ#ÔÔ‡X®ëXîîò¿ÔˆÐ Š%Ú $ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†îò¿îXX®ë #ÔÔ‡X®ëXîîò¿Ôà  àPlaintiff,€Joe€H.€Walker,€was€at€the€time€of€the€accident€in€this€case€and€is€presentlyÐ j'º"& Ðincumbent€Public€Defender€for€the€9th€Judicial€District€of€Tennessee.€€On€May€17,€1991,€he€wasÐ Z(ª#' Ðdriving€his€Mazda€automobile€on€Highway€27€in€Harriman,€Ô_ÔRoaneÔ_Ô€County,€Tennessee,€accompaniedÐ J)š$( Ðby€his€son€seated€in€the€front€passenger€seat.€€He€suddenly€stopped€his€automobile,€a€1983€MazdaÐ :*Š%) ÐEX„7€in€order€to€avoid€striking€a€pedestrian,€one€Dennis€Ô_ÔMorelockÔ_Ô.€€His€automobile€was€then€struckÐ *+z&* Ðfrom€the€rear€by€a€truck€belonging€to€Bert€Hatmaker€doing€business€as€Bert€Hatmaker€Trucking€andÐ ,j'+ Ðdriven€by€Andrew€B.€Bolton.€€In€the€accident,€both€Joe€H.€Walker€and€his€son€Andrew€WalkerÐ  -Z(,ýŽ ÐÔ_Ôreceived€catastrophic€spinal€cord€injuries€rendering€both€of€them€quadriplegic.€€The€case€involvingÐ ° ÐAndrew€Walker€is€not€involved€in€this€appeal.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àDefendants€at€bar,€Sidney€Gilreath€&€Associates,€Gary€McDonald€and€Brenda€Hall,€wereÐ €Ð Ðemployed€to€represent€Joe€Walker€and€his€son€in€the€underlying€tort€action€against€Mazda,€BertÐ pÀ ÐHatmaker€Trucking€and€Andrew€Bolton.€€Efforts€at€mediation€and€settlement€were€not€productiveÐ ` ° Ðand,€following€an€extended€jury€trial,€a€verdict€was€rendered€finding€the€pedestrian€Morelock€64%Ð P   Ðat€fault,€Plaintiff€Joe€H.€Walker€13%€at€fault,€the€defendant€Mazda€13%€at€fault,€and€the€defendantsÐ @  ÐBolton€and€Hatmaker€jointly€10%€at€fault.€€The€same€jury€returned€a€verdict€for€damages€in€theÐ 0 € Ðamount€of€$4,292,019.€€The€portion€of€the€judgment€attributable€to€pedestrian€Morelock€wasÐ  p  Ðuncollectible,€and€the€defendants€Bolton/Hatmaker€settled€pre„trial.€€Joe€Walker,€having€been€foundÐ `  Ðless€than€50%€at€fault,€recovered€from€Mazda€the€sum€of€$557,962.47,€same€being€13%€of€the€totalÐ P  Ðdamages€awarded€by€the€jury.Ð ð@  ÐÌà  àThe€underlying€tort€case€was€an€expensive€one€involving€millions€of€dollars€in€damages.€Ð Ð  ÐHowever,€collectibility€of€such€damages€was€largely€dependant€on€the€extent€to€which€fault€couldÐ À Ðbe€attributed€to€Mazda.€€Under€the€contingent€fee€arrangement€between€Plaintiff€and€Gilreath€&Ð ° ÐAssociates,€Plaintiff€was€responsible€for€payment€of€expenses€including€those€advanced€by€GilreathÐ  ð Ð&€Associates.€€The€total€amount€of€advanced€expenses€made€by€Gilreath€&€Associates€on€behalf€ofÐ à ÐJoe€and€Andrew€Walker€was€$241,954.40.€€Of€these€expenses,€Gilreath€&€Associates,€in€the€finalÐ €Ð Ðdistribution€after€the€verdict,€agreed€to€absorb€$20,225.72€leaving€a€balance€in€expenses€ofÐ pÀ Ð$221,728.78€paid€by€Plaintiff€and€his€son,€either€from€independent€funds€or€from€their€final€recovery.Ð `° ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€of€the€trial€of€the€underlying€tort€action,€Rule€54.04(2)€of€the€Tennessee€RulesÐ @ Ðof€Civil€Procedure€provided:€€Ð 0€ ÐÌà8  àà ` àCosts€not€included€in€the€bill€of€costs€prepared€by€the€clerk€are€allowable€onlyÐ ` Ðin€the€courtððs€discretion.€€Discretionary€costs€allowable€are:€reasonable€and€necessaryÐ P Ðcourt€reporter€expenses€for€depositions€or€trials,€reasonable€and€necessary€expertÐ ð@ Ðwitness€fees€for€depositions€or€trials,€and€guardian€ad€litem€fees;€travel€expenses€areÐ à0 Ðnot€allowable€discretionary€costs.€€Subject€to€Rule€41.04,€a€party€requestingÐ Ð  Ðdiscretionary€costs€shall€file€and€serve€a€motion€within€thirty€(30)€days€after€the€entryÐ À! Ðof€judgment.€€The€trial€court€retains€jurisdiction€over€a€motion€for€discretionary€costsÐ °"  Ðeven€though€a€party€has€filed€a€notice€of€appeal.€€Ð #ð!Ð Ð  ÐÌGilreath€&€Associates,€McDonald€and€Hall€did€not€file€a€motion€to€seek€discretionary€costs€fromÐ €%Ð # ÐMazda€resulting€in€the€present€suit€for€legal€malpractice.Ð p&À!$ ÐÌà  àLawrence€Leibowitz,€an€attorney€licensed€to€practice€in€Tennessee,€reviewed€variousÐ P( #& Ðdocuments€and€facts€in€the€underlying€case.€€He€concluded€that,€in€his€professional€opinion,Ð @)$' ÐDefendants€did€not€deviate€from€or€fall€below€the€standard€of€care€or€standard€of€practice€forÐ 0*€%( Ðattorneys€practicing€law€in€Knox€County€and€Roane€County,€Tennessee€in€not€filing€a€motion€forÐ  +p&) Ðdiscretionary€costs.€€He€further€opined€that€under€the€facts€of€the€underlying€case,€the€trial€courtÐ ,`'* Ðwould€not€have€awarded€discretionary€costs€even€if€a€motion€had€been€filed.€€He€filed€an€affidavitÐ ° Ðto€this€effect€in€support€of€the€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€The€Leibowitz€affidavit€wasÐ  ð Ðcountered€by€the€affidavit€of€Patricia€Murphy,€a€practicing€attorney€in€Roane€County,€Tennessee,Ð à Ðwho€opined€that€discretionary€costs€should€have€been€sought€and€that€Judge€Simmons,€who€tried€theÐ €Ð Ðunderlying€tort€case,€generally€allowed€discretionary€costs€to€the€prevailing€party€under€Rule€54.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àBarbara€Scalf,€Deputy€Circuit€Court€Clerk€of€Roane€County,€filed€an€affidavit€stating€thatÐ P   Ðð ðwhenever€appropriate€motions€and€affidavits€have€been€filed€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Rules€of€CivilÐ @  ÐProcedure€54.04€the€trial€judge€awarded€discretionary€costs€to€the€prevailing€party€or€parties.ðð€€SheÐ 0 € Ðsearched€the€records€in€all€of€the€counties€wherein€Judge€Simmons€presided€over€the€court€and€statedÐ  p  Ðthat€she€was€unable€to€find€a€case€where€Judge€Simmons€had€denied€a€motion€for€discretionary€costsÐ `  Ðto€the€prevailing€party€ð ðwhenever€an€appropriate€motion€and€affidavit€were€filed.ððÐ P  ÐÌà  àAt€a€relatively€early€stage€of€the€pre„trial€proceedings€in€the€underlying€tort€action,€PlaintiffÐ à0  Ðbecame€dissatisfied€with€Mr.€Gilreath€for€not€keeping€him€informed€as€to€the€proceedings.€Ð Ð  ÐParticularly€disquieting€to€Plaintiff€was€the€intervention€by€Blue€Cross/Blue€Shield€for€a€substantialÐ À Ðsubrogation€interest€without€sharing€in€litigation€expenses.€€Plaintiff€thereupon€entered€an€appearanceÐ ° Ðhimself€as€counsel€of€record€along€with€Defendants€Gilreath,€McDonald€and€Hall.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àIt€is€undisputed€in€this€record€that€no€motion€under€Rule€54.04(2)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ €Ð ÐCivil€Procedure€for€discretionary€costs€was€ever€filed€in€the€underlying€tort€case.€€The€record€beforeÐ pÀ Ðthis€court€in€this€appeal€is€very€limited€in€this€respect€and€provides€very€little€insight€into€the€reasonsÐ `° Ðno€such€motion€was€filed.€€However,€the€record€does€disclose€a€sharp,€factual€dispute€as€to€who€madeÐ P  Ðthe€decision€not€to€file€the€Rule€54.04€motion.€€Says€Mr.€Gilreath€in€response€to€interrogatory:Ð @ ÐÌà8  àANSWER:€Post€trial€motions,€including€a€motion€for€discretionary€costs,€wereÐ  p Ðdiscussed€with€Joe€Walker€on€several€occasions€by€phone€and€in€person,€some€ofÐ ` Ðwhich€were€in€the€presence€of€Gary€McDonald.€€The€substance€of€the€conversationsÐ P Ðincluded€the€quotient€verdict,€discretionary€costs,€and€the€possibility€of€Mazda€filingÐ ð@ Ða€motion€for€new€trial€which€we€wanted€to€avoid.€€I€told€Joe€Walker€that€I€would€notÐ à0 Ðfile€any€post€trial€motions,€including€a€motion€for€discretionary€costs.€€Joe€WalkerÐ Ð  Ðwas€an€attorney€of€record.€€He€could€file€a€motion€for€discretionary€costs€if€he€soÐ À! Ðchose.а" Ð Ð  ÐÌMr.€McDonald,€in€affidavit,€says:Ð $à" ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€any€attorney„client€relationship,€the€attorney€provides€information€andÐ p&À!$ Ðadvice€to€the€client,€and€the€client€makes€the€decision€as€to€all€matters.€€In€thisÐ `'°"% Ðspecific€instance,€Plaintiff€and€Defendants€engaged€in€a€telephone€conference€duringÐ P( #& Ðwhich€several€matters,€including€the€question€of€filing€for€discretionary€costs,€wereÐ @)$' Ðdiscussed.€€The€Defendant€Attorneys€advised€Walker€not€to€file€a€motion€forÐ 0*€%( Ðdiscretionary€costs€and€it€was€his€specific€decision€not€to€file€such€a€motion.€€Further,Ð  +p&) Ðsince€he€was€attorney€of€record€as€well€as€the€Plaintiff,€Walker€was€fully€capable€ofÐ ,`'* Ðfiling€his€own€motion€for€discretionary€costs€if€he€did€not€agree€with€the€adviceÐ ° Ðprovided€to€him€by€the€Defendant€Attorneys.РðÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€one€affidavit,€Plaintiff€made€the€following€statement:Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àThe€only€attorney€in€the€Walker€v.€Mazda€suit€that€Joe€Walker€has€ever€spoken€withÐ ` ° Ðregarding€discretionary€costs€was€Mr.€John€McReynolds,€attorney€for€Mazda.€€ThisÐ P   Ðconversation€took€place€subsequent€to€Mr.€Walkerððs€conversation€with€Mr.Ð @  ÐLeibowitz.€€Mr.€McReynolds€advised€that€he€and€Mr.€Gilreath€discussedÐ 0 € Ðdiscretionary€cost€applications€after€the€judgment€had€been€entered€and€the€Mr.Ð  p  ÐGilreath€filed€no€discretionary€cost€motion.€€Mr.€McReynolds€stated€that€he€wasÐ `  Ðconsidering€filing€an€application€for€a€large€amount€of€discretionary€cost[s]€on€behalfÐ P  Ðof€Mazda€and€that€although€there€was€no€actual€agreement,€neither€filed€forÐ ð@  Ðdiscretionary€cost[s].ððÐà0 Ð Ð  ÐÌIn€the€second€affidavit,€Plaintiff€stated:€ð ðAs€to€paragraph€five€in€the€Gary€McDonald€Affidavit,Ð À ÐPlaintiff€Joe€H.€Walker€emphatically€denies€each€and€every€statement€therein.€€As€the€defendantsððÐ ° Ðformer€client,€the€Plaintiff€denies€he€made€the€decisions€as€to€all€matters€at€any€time.€€The€telephoneÐ  ð Ðconference€Mr.€McDonald€alludes€to€is€a€figment€of€Mr.€McDonaldððs€imagination€or€else€is€anÐ à Ðintentional€misstatement€of€fact.ððÐ €Ð ÐÌà  àIn€sustaining€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€filed€by€Defendants,€the€trial€court€held:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€is€a€unique€action€for€legal€malpractice.€€The€sole€complaint€by€theÐ @ ÐPlaintiff,€who€is€a€licensed€attorney,€is€that€the€Defendant€attorney,€after€a€significantÐ 0€ Ðrecovery€in€a€multi„party€tort€case,€was€negligent€in€not€filing€a€motion€forÐ  p Ðdiscretionary€costs.€€Having€found€there€is€at€least€a€contested€issue€of€material€factÐ ` Ðas€to€whether€Defendants[ðð]€failure€to€file€a€motion€is€a€violation€of€the€standard€ofÐ P Ðcare,€the€sole€issue€is€whether€the€record€establishes€damages€for€which€the€PlaintiffÐ ð@ Ðcould€maintain€a€cause€of€action.€€Plaintiffððs€counsel€indicated€in€the€hearing€the€soleÐ à0 Ðbasis€of€establishing€damages€would€be€the€affidavits€and€particularly€the€affidavitÐ Ð  Ðand€attachments€of€Barbara€Scalf.ÐÀ!Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€review€of€the€affidavits€and€attachments€would€create[d]€only€speculationÐ  #ð! Ðas€to€whether€Plaintiff€was€damaged€and€the€extent€of€such€damages.€€To€recover,Ð $à" ÐPlaintiffs€must€establish€that€it€is€more€probable€tha[n]€not:€1)€The€trial€court€in€theÐ €%Ð # Ðtort€case€would€have€granted€a€Rule€54.04€motion€for€discretionary€costs€if€it€hadÐ p&À!$ Ðbeen€filed€and€2)€the€amount€of€the€discretionary€costs€that€would€have€been€granted.Ð`'°"%Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€only€material€submitted,€neither€party€having€offered€the€testimony€of€theÐ @)$' Ðtrial€judge,€is€the€attachments€to€the€Scalf€affidavit€that€the€trial€judge€had€partiallyÐ 0*€%( Ðor€fully€granted€discretionary€costs€in€certain€cases€where€such€motions€had€beenÐ  +p&) Ðfiled.€€How€can€Plaintiff€prove€that€a€trial€judge€would€exercise€discretion€referredÐ ,`'* Ðto€in€Rule€54.04€(2)?€€There€is€no€supporting€material€indicating€previous€discretionÐ ° Ðbeing€granted€in€similar€comparative€fault€cases€as€complicated€as€the€underlying€tortÐ  ð Ðcase€of€the€Plaintiff.ÐàÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIf€this€Court€assumes€that€there€is€created€a€contested€issue€of€fact€as€toÐ pÀ Ðwhether€the€Court€would€have€exercised€itððs€[sic]€discretion,€the€record€is€devoid€ofÐ ` ° Ðany€evidence€from€which€a€reasonable€person€could€determine€an€amount€that€wouldÐ P   Ðhave€been€granted.€€The€record€would€create€pure€and€absolute€speculation€as€to€anÐ @  Ðamount€that€more€probably€than€not€would€have€been€granted.€€The€authorities€citedÐ 0 € Ðby€the€plaintiff€each€have€some€factually€established€grounds€to€indicate€the€amountÐ  p  Ðof€damages€although€the€exact€amount€is€not€subject€to€precise€calculation.€€In€theÐ `  ÐPlaintiffððs€case,€there€is€not€criteria€from€which€a€general€amount€of€the€cost€thatÐ P  Ðwould€have€[been]€granted€can€be€established.€€To€say€the€amount€of€discretionaryÐ ð@  Ðcost[s]€that€would€have€been€granted€to€the€Plaintiff€is€$1.00€or€$100,000.00€orÐ à0  Ðanywhere€between€those€figures€is€pure€speculation.€ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€standard€of€review€on€appeal€from€summary€judgment€is€settled€and€familiar.€€We€mustÐ ° Ðtake€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€non„moving€party€allowing€allÐ  ð Ðreasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party€and€discard€all€countervailing€evidence.€€òòByrd€v.€Hallóó,Ð à Ð847€S.W.2d€208€(Tenn.€1993).€€If€under€such€review€of€the€record€there€is€a€genuine€dispute€as€toÐ €Ð Ðmaterial€facts€or€there€is€doubt€as€to€such€dispute,€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€must€fail€andÐ pÀ Ðthe€case€must€be€tried€on€its€merits.€€òòEvco€Corp.€v.€Rossóó,€528€S.W.2d€20,€25€(Tenn.€1975).Ð `° ÐÌà  àIn€a€suit€for€legal€malpractice,€a€plaintiff€must€prove€three€elements€in€order€to€prevail.€€TheseÐ @ Ðare€1)€employment€of€the€defendants,€2)€neglect€on€the€part€of€the€defendants€of€a€reasonable€dutyÐ 0€ Ðand,€3)€damages€resulting€from€such€neglect.€€òòSammons€v.€Rotroffóó,€653€S.W.2d€740,€745€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð  p ÐApp.€1983).€€The€trial€judge€held€that€disputed€issues€of€material€fact€were€evidenced€by€this€recordÐ ` Ðas€to€elements€numbers€one€and€two.€€In€this€holding,€we€agree€with€the€trial€judge€since€there€is€noÐ P Ðdispute€but€that€Defendants€were€employed€as€counsel€for€Plaintiff€Joe€Walker€in€prosecuting€hisÐ ð@ Ðpersonal€injury€action€against€Mazda€and€other€defendants.€€It€is€further€clear€that€the€affidavits€ofÐ à0 ÐBarbara€Scalf€and€Patricia€Murphy,€together€with€the€deposition€of€Plaintiff,€the€affidavits€of€GaryÐ Ð  ÐMcDonald€and€the€answer€to€interrogatory€of€Sidney€Gilreath€are€sufficient€to€establish€a€dispute€asÐ À! Ðto€material€questions€of€fact€regarding€whether€or€not€the€failure€to€file€a€motion€for€discretionaryÐ °"  Ðcosts€under€Rule€54.04(2)€deviated€from€the€standard€of€care€required€of€an€attorney.Ð  #ð! ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€granted€the€summary€judgment€motion€because€he€concluded€that€the€evidenceÐ €%Ð # Ðin€the€record€was€insufficient€to€establish€damages€without€resorting€to€ð ðpure€speculation.ðð€€In€thisÐ p&À!$ Ðrespect,€we€disagree€with€the€trial€courtððs€analysis€of€the€evidence.€€Taken€to€its€logical€conclusion,Ð `'°"% Ðthe€position€of€the€trial€court€as€to€damages€would€completely€insulate€an€attorney€for€a€party€fromÐ P( #& Ðthe€consequences€of€failure€to€file€a€Rule€54.04(2)€motion€in€any€case,€no€matter€how€meritoriousÐ @)$' Ðthe€motion€might€be.€€This€is€so€because€the€granting€of€a€Rule€54.04(2)€motion€is€discretionary€withÐ 0*€%( Ðthe€trial€court,€and€if€the€trial€court€never€has€an€opportunity€to€exercise€such€discretion,€furtherÐ  +p&) Ðinquiry€would€be€pure€guess€work.Ð ,`'* Їà  àPlaintiff€Joe€Walker€is€a€ð ðprevailing€partyðð€as€to€Mazda€within€the€meaning€of€Rule€54.04Ð ° Ðof€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€He€was€found€to€be€13%€at€fault€and€Mazda€was€foundÐ  ð Ðto€be€13%€at€fault.€€Since€Plaintiff€is€found€less€at€fault€in€this€multiple€tort€feasor€litigation€than€theÐ à Ðcombined€fault€of€all€other€persons€to€whom€fault€was€attributed€by€the€jury,€he€prevailed€againstÐ €Ð ÐMazda.€€òòSee€McIntyre€v.€Balentineóó,€833€S.W.2d€52€(Tenn.€1992).€€€He€thus€received€a€verdict€againstÐ pÀ ÐMazda€in€the€amount€of€$557,962.47.€€To€what€extent,€if€any,€the€trial€court€would€have€allowed€himÐ ` ° Ðdiscretionary€costs€against€Mazda€can€never€be€known€because€the€Rule€54.04€motion€was€neverÐ P   Ðfiled.€€The€inquiry,€however,€does€not€end€at€this€point.€€The€affidavit€of€Barbara€Scalf€asserts€thatÐ @  ÐJudge€Simmons,€who€tried€the€underlying€tort€case,€always€granted€discretionary€costs€to€theÐ 0 € Ðprevailing€party€ð ðwhenever€appropriate€motions€and€affidavits€have€been€filed€pursuant€to€TennesseeÐ  p  ÐRules€of€Civil€Procedure€54.04.ðð€At€trial,€the€burden€is€upon€the€plaintiff€to€prove€by€aÐ `  Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€the€amount€of€her€damages.€€In€order€to€preponderate,€the€evidenceÐ P  Ðmust€have€the€greater€convincing€effect€on€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòAustin€v.€City€of€Memphisóó,€684€S.W.2dÐ ð@  Ð624,€634€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).Ð à0  ÐÌà  àBecause€the€Rule€54.04€motion€for€whatever€reason€was€never€filed,€one€can€never€knowÐ À Ðwhat€the€judge€in€the€underlying€tort€action€might€have€done.€€The€Scalf€affidavit€gives€someÐ ° Ðindication€of€what€he€had€done€in€the€past.€€This€is€sufficient€to€withstand€summary€judgment€on€theÐ  ð Ðquestion€of€the€ð ðspeculativeðð€character€of€Plaintiffððs€alleged€damages.Ð à ÐÌà8  àThe€courts€will€allow€recovery€even€if€it€is€impossible€to€prove€the€exact€amount€ofÐ pÀ Ðdamages€from€the€breach€of€contract.€€Otherwise,€in€certain€instances,€the€courtsÐ `° Ðwould€be€powerless€to€help€some€wronged€parties.€€ð ðExact€justice€is€not€alwaysÐ P  Ðattained,€and€the€law€does€not€require€exactness€of€computation€in€suits€that€involveÐ @ Ðquestions€of€damages€growing€out€of€contract€o[r]€tort.ðð€€òòóóIn€òòCoverdell€v.€Mid„SouthÐ 0€ ÐFarm€Equipment€Assoc.,€Inc.óó,€335€F.2d€9€(6th€Cir.€1964),€the€court€appliedÐ  p ÐTennessee€law€to€determine€that€an€insurance€company€agent€who€was€informed€byÐ ` Ðtrustees€of€the€defendant€corporation€that€he€had€been€hired€under€a€personal€serviceÐ P Ðcontact€to€organize€their€group€insurance,€worked€an€entire€weekend€on€the€project,Ð ð@ Ðand€cancelled€an€appointment€in€Texas€was€damaged€when€the€trustees€gave€theÐ à0 Ðcontract€to€another€agent.€€Uncertain€and€speculative€damages€are€prohibited€onlyÐ Ð  Ðwhen€the€existence€of€damage€is€uncertain,€not€when€the€amount€is€uncertain.€€WhenÐ À! Ðthere€is€substantial€evidence€in€the€record€and€reasonable€inferences€may€be€drawnÐ °"  Ðfrom€that€evidence€mathematical€certainty€is€not€required.€€òòId.óó€at€14.Р#ð!Ð Ð  ÐÌòòCummins€v.€Brodieóó,€667€S.W.2d€759,€765€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983)€(citation€omitted).€€We€thereforeÐ €%Ð # Ðhold€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgment€to€the€defendants€on€the€basis€thatÐ p&À!$ ÐPlaintiffððs€proof€of€damages€is€ð ðpure€speculation.ððÐ `'°"% ÐÌà  àLastly,€Defendants€assert€that€Plaintiff€Joe€Walker,€a€licensed€attorney,€entered€his€own€nameÐ @)$' Ðas€counsel€of€record€and€could€have€filed€his€own€motion€for€discretionary€costs€and€was€at€leastÐ 0*€%( Ð50%€at€fault€in€this€respect€which€should€bar€his€recovery.€€It€is€true€that€Plaintiff€entered€his€nameÐ  +p&) Ðas€counsel€of€record€but€nothing€in€the€record€before€the€court€in€this€appeal€indicates€the€extent€ofÐ ,`'* Ðthe€participation€of€Plaintiff€in€the€actual€trial€of€the€case.€€Plaintiff€asserts€that€all€decisions€onÐ ° Ðtactics€and€strategy€were€those€of€Mr.€Gilreath€and€that€Plaintiff€was€physically€unable€to€activelyÐ  ð Ðparticipate€in€decision€making.€€He€further€denies€an€awareness€of€the€particulars€of€Rule€54€since,Ð à Ðin€1989,€he€had€stopped€practicing€civil€law€and€devoted€himself€to€the€full€time€practice€of€criminalÐ €Ð Ðlaw€in€his€position€as€public€defender.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àIn€this€respect,€Rule€54€was€first€amended€to€allow€for€the€type€of€discretionary€costs€soughtÐ P   Ðin€this€case€in€1986€and€it€was€not€until€April€1991,€one€month€before€the€accident€in€this€case,€thatÐ @  Ðthe€Supreme€Court€issued€its€opinion€in€òòLock€v.€National€Union€Fire€Insurance€Co.,€óó809€S.W.2d€483Ð 0 € Ð(Tenn.€1991).€€In€the€òòLockóó€case,€the€Supreme€Court€said:€ð ðThis€is€the€first€time€this€court€has€beenÐ  p  Ðasked€to€interpret€our€1986€amendment€to€Rule€54.04€dealing€with€discretionary€costs.€€It€was€ourÐ `  Ðintent€that€reasonable€and€necessary€costs,€in€the€preparation€and€trial€of€a€case,€could€be€assessedÐ P  Ðas€discretionary€costs€by€the€trial€court.€€The€awarding€of€such€costs€is€a€discretionary€matter€withÐ ð@  Ðthe€trial€court€.€.€.€.€ðð€€It€was€not€until€the€1993€amendment€to€Rule€54.04(2),€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.,€€thatÐ à0  Ðthe€Supreme€Court€conformed€the€specific€language€of€the€rule€to€its€opinion€in€òòLockóó.€€Since€theÐ Ð  Ðrecord€before€this€court€simply€does€not€provide€us€sufficient€information€as€to€the€actualÐ À Ðparticipation€of€Plaintiff€as€an€attorney€in€the€underlying€tort€action,€we€are€not€in€a€position€toÐ ° Ðconsider€summary€judgment€on€such€a€basis.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àWe€do€not€in€this€opinion€decide€the€extent€of€Joe€Walkerððs€duty€as€an€attorney€of€record€toÐ €Ð Ðprotect€his€own€interest€in€this€cause.€€We€are€holding€that€since€none€of€the€record€before€this€courtÐ pÀ Ðat€this€summary€judgment€stage€of€the€proceedings€establishes,€as€a€matter€of€law,€what€the€actualÐ `° Ðparticipation€of€Joe€Walker€was€or€was€not€in€the€underlying€tort€case,€the€record€before€us€simplyÐ P  Ðprovides€no€adequate€basis€for€us€to€grant€summary€judgment€on€this€issue€to€either€party.Ð @ ÐÌà  àIn€argument€before€this€court,€counsel€for€Defendants€asserted€that€Gilreath€&€AssociatesÐ  p Ðdeclined€to€file€a€Rule€54.04(2)€motion€because€such€might€have€precipitated€a€new€trial€motion€fromÐ ` ÐMazda€and€counsel€did€not€believe€a€new€trial€was€in€the€best€interest€of€Plaintiff.€€Such€statementÐ P Ðindicative€of€a€tactical€trial€decision€is€not€supported€by€the€record€in€this€case.€€No€undisputedÐ ð@ Ðreason€appears€in€the€record€for€the€failure€to€file€such€motion.€€Sound€trial€tactics€may€well€haveÐ à0 Ðdictated€this€decision€not€to€file€the€motion,€but€the€record€before€this€court€provides€no€adequateÐ Ð  Ðbasis€to€address€such€question€on€summary€judgment.Ð À! ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversed,€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€trial€on€the€merits.€Ð  #ð! ÐCosts€of€the€appeal€are€assessed€to€Defendants/Appellees.Ð $à" ÐÌà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à__________________________________________Ð `'°"% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEà x à