ÿWPCü; ¸£]©€X,-ºKgÈ®Ï ÓÜâþËYª ¸®á‹--;øtñ!ý0¼èÌsrz6e%¤§éÏâgÝC·7ßkß6ë•'¡½§=`×VÔÌi~8Q»Çp¶¬çÝš¢®¥ç»]Ò0jÌj¾}?ä'ÅÓ~¼ø³ÌxÆž³^ŽËœU÷ÕƒøÄø—೹ƹÔ!¹é¬þ¯ß.·‘‘·Ž„@튼pŸzŠa²Z–À ÆoI¯w4¯¥Œ["-ãŒì;ºD $n,@# Ów‚ÅÄ ·.'‹¬Ù7!DdÏU"œF’–ŒG¬ôFÊ4­•uæW²Cøß`ÌnéÖ¯øEÓ+åµOJœÃ\9òúPÍ/VjíõQ"ÇVŒ{Ò¹6 ŸÞ ÈËqË÷w|Ýò'Ù­¼8G:‹‰å…Œm+2þެðçT#4ÎŒ÷zÄwüAPÉ@èqVÓôÇeNº K³´Ñt¿W†êp}æš,ßmŽžççœ  jmÜ%’x82ðC. 7¨—fØú|°‚(žÖ¤”$5fˆ:ŒB¥r¨Lµô¼¿¤ô @Ì9ÔŒ>Ò–ð¹ú"yàVÒ!¤µEÝ9‚wT½7¼b#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 U5N¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ «™ ÆDÆ ÆÐÆ– 0D\N Ò¢ÍtEAËCÒ%àUNSÜmhIS± #%,!%M'd,id.ÉÍ1Y–4–4–4–4–4–4–4bï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6ï6 0ë÷6÷6÷6÷6 Bâ7â7 0¤ÿ7 D5£8 D-Ø8 0K99 ASP9Æ£9 0¤i: 0D ; A«Q;˜\\ib01s01\clerk1nasÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Dz”1î (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularINŽ1ê:i¢×+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.wpt 3|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ¡Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔInitially,€the€Alcantars€were€the€only€plaintiffs.€€Thereafter,€the€complaint€was€amended€to€add€Rajiv€WadhwaÐ ° Ðas€an€additional€plaintiff.€€The€amended€complaint€identifies€Rajiv€Wadhwa€as€a€plaintiff,€€individually€and€as€an€assignorÐ tÄ Ðto€the€Alcantars.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÈÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€allegations€appear€in€paragraphs€35€and€36€of€the€amended€complaint. ÃÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOrtale,€Kelly€initially€filed€a€notice€of€appearance€on€behalf€of€Mr.€Wadhwa,€however,€the€firm€quickly€filedÐ ° Ða€corrected€notice€of€appearance€to€indicate€that€the€firm€represented€Chinedu€Nwagwu,€not€Rajiv€Wadhwa.€€ThisÐ tÄ Ðcircumstance€is€discussed€more€thoroughly€later€in€this€opinion. ÁÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€allegations€appear€in€paragraphs€28€of€the€amended€complaint. ÈÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€allegations€appear€in€paragraphs€25€and€26€of€the€amended€complaint. Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔHaulers€denied€coverage€and€a€defense€to€the€taxi€driver,€Mr.€Wadhwa,€because€the€policy€excluded€injury€orÐ ° Ðdamage€expected€or€intended€from€the€standpoint€of€the€insured,€and€its€investigation€established€that€the€injuries€sufferedÐ tÄ Ðby€the€Alcantars€in€the€collision€were€the€expected€and€intended€result€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔWadhwaÔ_Ôððs€intentional€acts.(@øÐ Z‹6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIf€an€action€is€brought€for€the€purpose€of€impeaching€or€overturning€a€judgment,€it€is€a€direct€attack€upon€it.€Ð ° ÐOn€the€other€hand,€ð ðif€the€action€.€.€.€has€an€independent€purpose€and€contemplates€some€other€relief€or€result,€althoughÐ tÄ Ðthe€overturning€of€the€judgment€may€be€important,€or€even€necessary,€then€the€attack€upon€the€judgment€is€collateral.ðð€Ð 8ˆ ÐòòÔ‡ôî¹òòôî¹ÔGentryóó,€924€S.W.2d€at€680;€Ô#†ôî¹òòôî¹'#ÔòòTurner€v.€Bellóó,€279€S.W.2d€71,€75€(Tenn.€1955)(quoting€òòJordan€v.€Jordanóó,€239€S.W.€423,Ð üL Ð445€(Tenn.€1922)). ÒÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAn€action€is€commenced€by€the€filing€of€a€complaint€with€the€clerk€of€the€court,€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€3,€who€thenÐ ° Ðshall€forthwith€issue€the€required€summons€and€cause€it€and€the€complaint€to€be€delivered€for€service€upon€the€defendant.€Ð tÄ ÐTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€4.01(1).€€A€plaintiffððs€claim€for€relief,€demand€for€judgment,€is€to€be€set€forth€in€the€complaint€or€anÐ 8ˆ Ðamended€or€supplemental€complaint.€€If€a€plaintiff€seeks€additional€relief€prior€to€trial,€the€plaintiff€must€amend€theÐ üL Ðcomplaint€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€15€and€cause€it€to€be€served€on€the€defendant€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€5.€€TheÐ À ÐAlcantars€never€amended€the€complaint€to€set€forth€a€demand€for€judgment€based€on€intentional€or€willful€conduct€byÐ „Ô = ÐMr.€Wadhwa. ^Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.03€provides€an€exception€where€the€parties€litigated€issues€beyond€the€pleadings;€however,Ð ° Ðthat€exception€is€not€available€as€to€a€party€against€whom€a€judgment€is€entered€by€default. IÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€their€brief,€Plaintiffs€correctly€state€that€an€attorney€may€not€withdraw€from€representation€of€a€clientÐ ° Ðwithout€leave€of€court.€€Rule€5.02,€Davidson€County€Local€Rules€of€Court.€€However,€the€firm€never€represented€Mr.Ð tÄ ÐWadhwa.€€Admittedly€it€filed€a€notice€of€appearance€to€that€effect,€but€that€was€a€clerical€error€which€was€promptlyÐ 8ˆ Ðcorrected.€€At€no€time€did€the€firm€represent€Mr.€Wadhwa. Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔHaulers€also€attempted€to€disqualify€counsel€for€Plaintiffs.€€A€motion€to€that€effect€was€filed€and€denied.€€TheÐ ° Ðorder€denying€the€motion€stated€that€the€issue€had€been€referred€to€the€Board€of€Professional€Responsibility,€whichÐ tÄ Ðdetermined€that€there€was€no€conflict€of€interest€and€no€justification€to€disqualify€Plaintiffsðð€counsel,€Barry€E.€Weathers.  "Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€definition€of€ð ðinsuredsðð€in€the€policy€includes€the€following:Ð ° ÐÌà  àà ` àa.à0 ¸ àYou€[the€named€insured]€for€any€covered€ð ðauto.ððÐ8ˆ¸ (#¸ (# Ðà  àà ` àb.à0 ¸ àAnyone€else€while€using€with€your€permission€a€covered€ÐüL¸ (#¸ (# Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àð ðautoðð€you€own,€hire€or€borrow€.€.€.€ Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWhile€Haulers€was€obviously€confident€that€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€not€afforded€coverage€for€the€collision€and€theÐ ° Ðresulting€damages€to€the€Alcantars,€and€it€was€obviously€confident€that€it€had€no€duty€to€provide€a€defense€to€Mr.Ð tÄ ÐWadhwa,€Haulers€had€no€way€of€knowing€whether€the€resulting€judgment€would€be€based€on€Mr.€Wadhwaððs€allegedÐ 8ˆ Ðnegligence€or€on€consequences€intended€by€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€Thus,€Haulers€was€taking€a€calculated€risk€that€the€resultingÐ üL Ðjudgment€would€be€favorable.€€Had€the€judgment€not€provided€that€Mr.€Wadhwa€intended€the€collision€and€resultingÐ À Ðdamages,€Haulers€may€have€had€a€totally€different€situation€on€its€hands.€€But€that€is€not€the€case€here.€€In€essence,Ð „Ô ÐHaulers€guessed€right.€€Moreover,€Plaintiffs€have€no€claim€against€Haulers€for€unilaterally€denying€coverage€and€refusingÐ H ˜ Ðto€provide€a€defense€without€first€seeking€a€declaratory€judgment€to€assure€that€its€calculated€guess€was€correct.€€SeeòòÐ  \ ÐKellyóó,€574€S.W.2d€at€738€(quoting€òòHammer,óó€177€F.2d€at€800).òòóóòòóó öÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThough€the€claim€is€not€before€us,€the€only€conceivable€claim€Mr.€Wadhwa€might€have€against€Haulers€forÐ ° Ðfailing€to€provide€a€defense€in€the€prior€action€would€be€the€cost€of€defending€the€prior€action.€€However,€Mr.€WadhwaÐ tÄ Ðdid€not€defend€the€prior€action€and€did€not€incur€expenses€to€retain€counsel.€€Thus€he€has€no€damages€to€assign. _Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€complaint€specifically€alleges€that€(1)€Rajiv€Wadhwa€was€an€insured€of€Haulers,€(2)€Haulers€owed€andÐ ° Ðbreached€a€duty€to€defend€Mr.€Wadhwa€in€the€previous€action,€(3)€Haulersðð€refusal€to€defend€Mr.€Wadhwa€constitutesÐ tÄ Ðbad€faith,€(4)€Haulers€owed€and€breached€a€duty€to€Mr.€Wadhwa€to€inform€Mr.€Wadhwa€that€the€damages€sought€againstÐ 8ˆ Ðhim€by€the€Alcantars€exceeded€policy€limits,€(5)€Haulers€owed€and€breached€the€duty€to€inform€Mr.€Wadhwa€that€he€hadÐ üL Ða€right€to€retain€independent€counsel,€and€(6)€Haulers€owed€and€breached€the€duty€to€inform€Mr.€Wadhwa€of€the€legalÐ À Ðsignificance€of€Haulersðð€failure€to€provide€a€defense€for€him.€ ¿Ý ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€record€does€not€explain€why€the€judgment€in€the€previous€personal€injury€action€awarded€relief€that€wasÐ ° Ðbeyond€that€sought€in€the€complaint€served€on€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€Though€it€is€irrelevant€to€the€issues€presented,€one€mightÐ tÄ Ðsurmise€that€intentional€acts€may€have€been€added€to€preclude€the€defendant€Rajiv€Wadhwa€from€obtaining€relief€inÐ 8ˆ Ðbankruptcy.€€If€that€is€the€case,€it€is€most€ironic€for€it€is€the€same€language€that€makes€the€judgment€void€as€is€explainedÐ üL Ðin€detail€later€in€this€opinion. OÝ ƒRõ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€judgment€awarded€Ted€Alcantar€damages€in€the€amount€of€$654,460,€of€which€$200,000€is€for€punitiveÐ ° Ðdamages,€and€Judy€Alcantar€damages€in€the€amount€of€$15,000,€of€which€$10,000€is€for€punitive€damages.€€TheÐ tÄ Ðaforementioned€punitive€damages€were€assessed€against€another€defendant,€Mai€Cagle€d/b/a€Music€City€Taxi€Company.Ð 8ˆ ÐThe€judgment€against€Rajiv€Wadhwa€is€the€only€one€that€pertains€to€this€action.€- ù-(|G2õ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€X»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôî¹ò»»Ô d(|3Gx$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€X»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Gx$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€X»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€X»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼X»»»ÔÑ8€5XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îRøî»¼XÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼X»îîRø #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓMay€6,€2004€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X5X»¼XÔÌò òÔ#†¼X»XX5ð#ÔTEZOZOMOC€ð ðTEDðð€ALCANTAR,€òòet€al.óó€v.€HAULERS€INSURANCEÐ úJ ÐCOMPANYòòóóÔ‡X5X»¼XÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€01C„2237€€€€€€Carol€Soloman,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ñ` AßÐ Ò"  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„01004„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€20,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ Í  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¤` AßÐ ¥õ  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€an€action€against€an€insurance€company€that€is€alleged€to€have€breached€its€duties€to€anÐ  ð  Ðinsured€by€failing€to€provide€a€defense€in€a€prior€personal€injury€action,€wherein€a€substantial€defaultÐ ŒÜ Ðjudgment€was€entered€against€the€insured.€€The€former€plaintiffs,€now€judgment€creditors,€and€theÐ xÈ Ðpurported€insured,€now€judgment€debtor,€have€joined€forces€as€plaintiffs€in€this€action€to€recoverÐ d´ Ðdamages,€including€the€amount€of€the€default€judgmentÔ#†¼X»XX5™#ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔ,€the€purported€insured€suffered€due€to€theÐ P  Ðinsurerððs€refusal€to€provide€a€defenseÔ#†¼X»XX5#ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔ.€€The€trial€court€dismissed€the€action€on€a€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12Ð <Œ Ðmotion€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€on€which€relief€could€be€granted.€€Ô#†¼X»XX5Ç#ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔWe€affirm.€€The€judgment€onÐ (x Ðwhich€this€action€is€based€is€void,€because€the€relief€granted€therein€by€default€judgment€exceededÐ d Ðthe€relief€sought.€€In€the€alternative,€if€the€previous€judgment€on€which€this€action€is€based€is€valid,Ð P Ðthe€purported€insured€is€not€Ô#†¼X»XX5¥#ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔafforded€coverage;€the€policy€excluded€injury€or€damage€expected€orÐ ì< Ðintended€from€the€standpoint€of€the€insured€and€it€was€held€in€the€previous€judgment€that€theÐ Ø( Ðpurported€insured€intended€the€collision€and€the€Alcantarsðð€injuriesÔ#†¼X»XX5) #ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔ.Ô#†¼X»XX5| #ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔÐ Ä ÐÓÙÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óÐ œì ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼X»àX5¿ #ÔÔ‡X5X.¼XÔFrank€G.€Clement,€Jr.,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€B.€Cainóó€andÐ t Ä ÐòòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð `!°  ÐÌBarry€E.€Weathers,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Tezozomoc€ð ðTedðð€Alcantar,€and€wife,Ð 8#ˆ" ÐJudy€Alcantar.Ð $$t# ÐÌWendy€Lynne€Longmire€and€Julie€Bhattacharya€Peak,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,Ð ü%L!% ÐHaulers€Insurance€Company,€Inc.Ð è&8"& ÐÓp ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼X»XX5Ÿ #ÔÔ‡X5X»¼XÔÐ À($( ÐòòóóÔ#†¼X»XX5ø#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X5X»¼XÔÌà  àThis€action€arises€from€a€previous€personal€injury€action,€òòAlcantar,€et.€ux.€v.€Wadhwa,€et.€al.óóÐ ˜*è%* Ð(the€ð ðprior€actionðð).€€Two€of€our€three€plaintiffs,€Tezozomoc€(Ted)€and€Judy€Alcantar,€were€theÐ „+Ô&+ Ðplaintiffs€in€the€prior€action.€€They€sued€Rajiv€Wadhwa,€along€with€numerous€other€defendants,€forÐ p,À', Ðpersonal€injuries€and€damages€resulting€from€a€vehicular€accident.€€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€the€driver€ofÐ \-¬(-ýY Ða€taxi€which€collided€with€the€Alcantars.€€The€taxi€was€owned€by€Chinedu€Nwagwu,€who€was€theÐ ° Ðnamed€insured€under€a€Business€Auto€Policy€issued€by€Haulers€Insurance€Company.€€HaulersÐ œì Ðprovided€a€defense€to€the€owner€of€the€taxi,€Ô_ÔChineduÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔNwagwuÔ_Ô;€however,€it€denied€coverage€to€theÐ ˆØ Ðtaxi€driver,€Mr.€Wadhwa.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mr.€Wadhwa€did€not€obtain€counsel€or€defend€the€action.€€Thus,€theÐ tÄ ÐAlcantars€were€awarded€a€default€judgment€against€Mr.€Wadhwa€in€the€amount€of€$459,460.׃'Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р`° ÐHaulers,€which€had€previously€denied€coverage€to€Mr.€Wadhwa,€refused€to€indemnify€him€for€theÐ L œ Ðjudgment.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àWithout€the€benefit€of€insurance€coverage,€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€unable€to€satisfy€the€$459,460Ð  ` Ðjudgment.€€Being€of€the€opinion€that€he€was€insured€under€the€Haulers€Business€Auto€Policy€and€thatÐ ü L  Ðhe€had€a€cause€of€action€against€Haulers€for€breaching€its€duties€to€defend€and€indemnify€him€for€hisÐ è 8  Ðliability€to€the€Alcantars,€Mr.€Wadhwa€entered€into€an€agreement€with€the€Alcantars€whereby€heÐ Ô$  Ðassigned€his€cause€of€action€against€Haulers.€€Consequently,€the€Alcantars,€the€former€plaintiffs€andÐ À  Ðnow€judgment€creditors,€and€Rajiv€Wadhwa,€the€former€defendant€and€now€judgment€debtor,€joinedÐ ¬ü  Ðforces€to€bring€the€present€action€against€Haulers.׃ ´×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Alcantars,€as€the€assignees€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔWadhwaÔ_ÔððsÐ ˜è  Ðcause€of€action,€allege€that€Haulers€erroneously€denied€coverage€to€Mr.€Wadhwa€and€therebyÐ „Ô  Ðbreached€its€duties€under€the€policy€and€therefore€is€liable€for€the€damages€suffered€by€Mr.€Wadhwa,Ð pÀ Ðincluding€the€$459,460€judgment€the€Alcantars€obtained€by€default€judgment.׃%È ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Haulers€deniesÐ \¬ Ðliability.€Ð H˜ ÐÌà@VVìàò òTheòòóó€Personal€Injury€ActionˆÐ  p Ðà@__ìàòòAlcantar,€et.€ux.€v.€Wadhwa,€et.€al.ó óˆÐ  \ ÐóóÌà  àIn€order€to€properly€analyze€the€issues€presented,€we€must€conduct€an€examination€of€theÐ à0 Ðprior€actionòòóó.€€The€Alcantars€in€the€prior€action€were€the€plaintiffs.€€The€defendants€in€the€prior€actionÐ Ì Ðincluded€Rajiv€Wadhwa,€Mai€Cagle€d/b/a€Music€City€Taxi€Company,€Chinedu€Raphael€Nwagwu,Ð ¸ Ðand€Nasir€Auto€Sales,€Inc.€€Of€the€defendants,€only€Chinedu€R.€Nwagwu€was€a€named€insured€underÐ ° Ðthe€Haulers€Business€Auto€Policy.€€The€policy€identified€Chinedu€Nwagwuððs€1993€Ford€CrownÐ œì ÐVictoria€as€the€ð ðcovered€auto.ðð€€The€policy€also€acknowledged€that€the€covered€auto€was€leased€toÐ ˆØ ÐMusic€City€Taxi.€€The€complaint€alleged€that€Rajiv€Wadhwa€was€the€driver€of€the€covered€auto,€aÐ tÄ Ðtaxi,€that€his€negligence€caused€the€collision€with€the€Alcantars.€€The€complaint€further€alleged€thatÐ `° ÐRajiv€Wadhwa€was€driving€the€taxi€within€the€scope€of€his€employment€and/or€on€the€business€ofÐ L œ Ðthe€other€named€defendants.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àHaulers€provided€a€defense€in€the€prior€action€for€Chinedu€Nwagwu,€its€named€insured€andÐ  ` Ðowner€of€the€covered€auto.€€The€firm€of€Ortale,€Kelly,€Herbert€&€Crawford€was€retained€to€representÐ ü L  ÐChinedu€Nwagwu.€€Haulers€did€not€provide€a€defense€for€Rajiv€Wadhwa€and€Ortale,€Kelly,€HerbertÐ è 8  Ð&€Crawford€did€not€represent€Rajiv€Wadhwa,€only€Chinedu€Nwagwu.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àIn€the€prior€action,€the€Alcantars€alleged€òòinter€aliaóó€that€Rajiv€Wadhwaððs€negligence€andÐ ¬ü  Ðnegligence€òòper€seóó€was€the€proximate€cause€of€their€personal€injuries.€€Specifically,€the€AlcantarsÐ ˜è  Ðalleged€in€paragraph€14€of€their€amended€complaint€that€ð ðDefendant€Wadhwa€negligently,€recklessly,Ð „Ô  Ðand€wantonly€operated€the€vehicle€he€was€driving,€in€violation€of€Plaintiff€Ted€Alcantarððs€right€ofÐ pÀ Ðway,€in€that€he€had€a€duty€to€make€a€proper€lookout€before€entering€said€lane,€to€obey€the€traffic€laneÐ \¬ Ðrestrictions€and€to€drive€carefully.ðð€€The€Alcantars€alleged€in€Count€I,€entitled€ð ðNegligence€ofÐ H˜ ÐDefendant€Rajiv€Wadhwa,ðð€that€the€negligence€of€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€ð ða€direct€and€proximate€causeÐ 4„ Ðof€the€collision€and€of€the€severe€injuries€and€other€damages€suffered€by€Plaintiffs.ðð€€Count€I€furtherÐ  p Ðalleged€specific€acts€of€common€law€negligence,€including€failure€to€keep€a€proper€lookout,€failureÐ  \ Ðto€maintain€proper€control€of€his€vehicle€and€failure€to€yield€the€right€of€way.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€Count€II,€entitledÐ øH Ðð ðNegligence€Per€Se€of€Defendant€Rajiv€Wadhwa,ðð€the€Alcantars€alleged€that€ð ðDefendant€WadhwaÐ ä4 Ðwas€guilty€of€negligence€òòper€seóó€in€violating€statutes€of€the€State€of€Tennessee€and€the€NashvilleÐ Ð  ÐMetropolitan€Code€which€were€in€full€force€and€effect€at€the€time€and€place€of€the€collision.€.€.€.ðð€Ð ¼  ÐThe€only€statute€identified€was€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„10„205€(reckless€driving).€€The€NashvilleÐ ¨ø ÐMetropolitan€Ordinances€identified€were€ðð€12.68.180€(reckless€driving),€ðð€12.68.170€(failure€toÐ ”ä Ðoperate€a€vehicle€in€a€careful€and€prudent€manner),€and€ðð€12.12.110€(changed€lanes€beforeÐ €Ð Ðascertaining€that€such€movement€could€be€made€safely).׃h×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€their€Amended€Complaint,€the€AlcantarsÐ l¼ Ðfurther€alleged€that€ð ðas€a€direct€and€proximate€result€of€one€(1)€or€more€acts€of€negligence€andÐ X ¨ Ðâ ânegligence€òòper€seóó€of€Defendant€Wadhwa,€Plaintiff€Ted€Alcantar€has€suffered€and€continues€to€sufferÐ D!” Ðprolonged€personal€injuries€and€damages.€.€.€.ðð€€Similar€allegations€were€made€in€the€followingÐ ° Ðparagraph€concerning€the€injuries€and€damages€allegedly€suffered€by€Judy€Alcantar.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àContrary€to€the€allegations€of€negligence€in€the€complaint,€the€judgment€in€the€prior€actionÐ tÄ Ðsets€forth€findings€that€ð ðRajiv€Wadhwa€acted€willfully€and€maliciously€in€that€he€intended€theÐ `° Ðharmful€consequences€of€the€collision€and€knew€that€it€would€occur.ðð€€The€judgment€in€the€priorÐ L œ Ðaction€does€not€set€forth€any€findings€that€Rajiv€Wadhwa€acted€negligently€or€that€he€was€negligentÐ 8 ˆ Ðor€negligent€òòper€seóó€or€that€the€Alcantarsðð€injuries€and€damages€were€the€result€of€his€negligence.€€ToÐ $ t Ðthe€contrary,€the€judgment€expressly€states€that€Mr.€Wadhwa€acted€ð ðwillfully€and€maliciouslyðð€andÐ  ` Ðthat€he€ð ðintended€the€harmful€consequencesðð€suffered€by€the€Alcantars.€€Furthermore,€the€judgmentÐ ü L  Ðexpressly€states€ð ð[t]hat€as€a€direct€and€proximate€result€of€the€acts€of€the€Defendants,ðð€which€wouldÐ è 8  Ðbe€the€intentional€acts€of€Mr.€Wadhwa,€Ted€Alcantar€ð ðsuffered€and€continues€to€suffer€painðð€andÐ Ô$  Ðð ðpermanent€personal€injuries€and€damages.ðð€€It€further€states€ð ð[t]hat€as€a€direct€and€proximate€resultÐ À  Ðof€the€acts€of€the€Defendants,ðð€which€again€would€be€the€intentional€acts€of€Mr.€Wadhwa,€JudyÐ ¬ü  ÐAlcantar€ð ðsuffered€and€continues€to€suffer€painðð€and€ð ðpermanent€personal€injuries€and€damages.ðð׃&T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р˜è  ÐThere€is€nothing€in€the€judgment€which€states€that€either€Ted€or€Judy€Alcantar€suffered€any€injuriesÐ „Ô  Ðas€a€result€of€Rajiv€Wadhwaððs€negligence€or€that€they€were€awarded€damages€as€a€result€of€RajivÐ pÀ ÐWadhwaððs€negligence.Ð \¬ ÐÌà@} } ìàò òDefault€Judgments:€€Restrictions€on€obtaining€additional€reliefó óˆÐ 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€from€the€prior€action€was€a€default€judgment.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.03€providesÐ  \ Ðthat€a€judgment€by€default€shall€not€be€different€in€kind€from€that€prayed€for€in€the€demand€forÐ øH Ðjudgment.€€A€plaintiffððs€claim€for€relief€is€to€be€set€forth€in€the€complaint.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€8.€€TheÐ ä4 Ðcomplaint€that€was€served€on€Rajiv€Wadhwa€contained€numerous€allegations€that€the€AlcantarsÐ Ð  Ðsuffered€injuries€and€damages€as€a€result€of€Mr.€Wadhwaððs€negligence€and/or€negligence€òòper€seóó.€€TheÐ ¼  Ðcomplaint€that€was€served€upon€Mr.€Wadhwa,€however,€did€not€contain€any€allegations€that€Mr.Ð ¨ø ÐWadhwa€acted€intentionally€or€willfully€or€that€the€injuries€suffered€by€the€Alcantars€were€the€resultÐ ”ä Ðof€intentional€or€willful€acts.׃ð×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р€Ð Їà  àThe€complaint€in€the€personal€injury€action€alleged€that€negligent€acts€and€omissions€by€Mr.Ð ° ÐWadhwa€caused€the€injuries€and€damages€suffered€by€the€Alcantars.€€The€judgment,€however,€statedÐ œì Ðthat€the€injuries€and€damages€suffered€by€the€Alcantars€were€the€proximate€result€of€the€intentionalÐ ˆØ Ðacts€of€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€That€judgment€expressly€stated€that€Rajiv€Wadhwa€acted€ð ðwillfully€andÐ tÄ Ðmaliciously€in€that€he€intended€the€harmful€consequences€of€the€collision.ðð€€Thus,€the€only€damagesÐ `° Ðawarded€the€Alcantars€were€for€injuries€and€damages€they€sustained€as€a€proximate€result€of€Mr.Ð L œ ÐWadhwaððs€intentional€acts.€€Stated€another€way,€the€Alcantars€were€not€awarded€damages€based€onÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€negligent€acts€or€omissions€of€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€Therefore,€the€relief€the€Alcantars€obtained€againstÐ $ t ÐMr.€Wadhwa€in€the€personal€injury€action€exceeded€the€relief€sought€in€the€complaint€that€wasÐ  ` Ðserved€on€Mr.€Wadhwa.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.03€provides€that€a€court€òòshall€not€óógive€the€successful€party€relief€whereÐ Ô$  Ðð ðthe€opposing€party€had€no€opportunity€to€assert€defenses€to€such€relief.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€basic€premise€ofÐ À  ÐRule€54.03€is€neither€new€nor€novel€and€is€consistent€with€prior€case€law.€€ð ð[A]€judgment€or€a€decreeÐ ¬ü  Ðwhich€is€beyond€the€fair€scope€of€the€pleadings€is€void."€òòElectric€Controls€v.€Ponderosa€Fibres€ofÐ ˜è  ÐAmericaóó,€19€S.W.3d€222,€227€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999);€(citingòòóó€òòBrown€v.€Brownóó,€281€S.W.2d€492,€497Ð „Ô  Ð(Tenn.€1955));€òòaccord€Myers€v.€Wolfóó,€34€S.W.2d€201,€203€(Tenn.€1931);€òòLieberman,€Loveman€&Ð pÀ ÐCohn€v.€Knightóó,€283€S.W.€450,€452€(Tenn.€1926);€òòPhifer€v.€Mutual€Benefit€Health€&€Accident€Ass'nóó,Ð \¬ Ð148€S.W.2d€17,€23€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1940).Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  à[T]he€rule€is€firmly€established€that€irrespective€of€what€may€be€proved€a€courtÐ  p Ðcannot€decree€to€any€plaintiff€more€than€he€claims€in€his€bill€or€other€pleadings."€Ð  \ ÐòòFidelity-Phenix€Fire€Ins.€Co.€v.€Jacksonóó,€181€Tenn.€453,€181€S.W.2d€625,€629€(Tenn.Ð øH Ð1944).€€In€order€to€sustain€a€judgment,€therefore,€a€plaintiff's€complaint€must€containÐ ä4 Ðsufficient€allegations€to€support€a€finding€of€liability€on€the€part€of€the€defendant.€€òòSeeóóÐ Ð  ÐòòLancaster€Mills€v.€Merchants'€Cotton-Press€&€Storage€Co.óó,€89€Tenn.€1,€14€S.W.€317,Ð ¼  Ð324€(Tenn.€1890).€€Moreover,€the€judgment€cannot€award€relief€that€differs€from€theÐ ¨ø Ðrelief€sought€by€the€plaintiff's€complaint€or€that€is€based€upon€a€theory€of€liability€thatÐ ”ä Ðdiffers€from€that€alleged€in€the€complaint.€òò€Fidelity-Phenix€Fire€Ins.€Co.óó,€181€S.W.2dÐ €Ð Ðat€629;€òòLancaster€Millsóó,€14€S.W.€at€324.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌòòElectric€Controlsóó,€19€S.W.3d€at€227.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àThe€principle€underlying€this€rule€is€that,€"[Ô_ÔS]inceÔ_Ô€the€purpose€of€pleadings€is€to€give€noticeÐ #l! Ðto€all€concerned€regarding€what€may€be€adjudicated,€a€judgment€beyond€the€scope€of€the€pleadingsÐ $X" Ðis€beyond€the€notice€given€the€parties€and€thus€should€not€be€enforced."€òòBrownóó,€281€S.W.2d€at€497.€Ð ô$D # ÐOur€supreme€court€has€explained€that€the€rationale€behind€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€54.03€is€that€à8 @@ àà8 @@ àð ða€party€hasÐ à%0!$ Ða€right€to€assume€that€the€judgment€following€his€default€will€not€go€beyond€the€issues€presented€byÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€complaint€and€the€relief€asked€therein,€and€if€a€judgment€other€than€that€demanded€is€takenÐ ° Ðagainst€him,€he€is€deprived€of€his€day€in€court.€.€.€."€òòElectric€Controlsóó,€19€S.W.3d€at€227€(citingòòÐ œì ÐCushman€v.€Cushmanóó,€178€Cal.App.2d€492,€3€Cal.Rptr.€24,€26€(1960)).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àThe€theory€of€this€provision€is€that€once€the€defending€party€receives€the€originalÐ `° Ðpleading€he€should€be€able€to€decide€on€the€basis€of€the€relief€requested€whether€heÐ L œ Ðwants€to€expend€the€time,€effort,€and€money€necessary€to€defend€the€action.€€It€wouldÐ 8 ˆ Ðbe€fundamentally€unfair€to€have€the€complaint€lead€defendant€to€believe€that€only€aÐ $ t Ðcertain€type€and€dimension€of€relief€was€being€sought€and€then,€should€he€attempt€toÐ  ` Ðlimit€the€scope€and€size€of€the€potential€judgment€against€him€by€not€appearing€orÐ ü L  Ðotherwise€defaulting,€allow€the€court€to€give€a€different€type€of€relief€or€a€largerÐ è 8  Ðdamage€award.€€In€a€similar€vein,€unless€all€the€parties€in€interest€have€appeared€andÐ Ô$  Ðvoluntarily€litigated€an€issue€not€within€the€pleadings,€the€court€should€consider€onlyÐ À  Ðthose€issues€presented€in€the€pleadings.€€In€sum,€then,€a€default€judgment€may€notÐ ¬ü  Ðextend€to€matters€outside€the€issues€raised€by€the€pleadings€or€beyond€the€scope€ofÐ ˜è  Ðthe€relief€demanded.€Wright€and€Miller,€òòFederal€Practice€and€Procedure€óóðð€2263,€atÐ „Ô  Ð99„100€(1973).€ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌòòElectric€Controlsóó,€19€S.W.3d€at€227„28€(citingòòóó€òòQualls€v.€Quallsóó,€589€S.W.2d€906,€909-10€(Tenn.Ð H˜ Ð1979));€òòaccordóó€òòHolder€v.€Drakeóó,€908€S.W.2d€393,€395€(Tenn.€1995);€òòPittman€v.€Pittmanóó,€No.Ð 4„ Ð01A01-9301-€CH-00014,€1994€WL€456348,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.24,€1994)€(òòno€perm.€app.Ð  p Ðfiledóó);€òòHarris€v.€Harrisóó,€No.€01A01-9101-PB-00017,€1991€WL€111434,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€JuneÐ  \ Ð26,€1991)€(òòno€perm.€app.€filedóó).Ô‡X5XXX5ÔÐ øH ÐÌà  àA€prior€judgment€is€void€where€ð ðthe€decree€is€wholly€outside€of€the€pleadings.ðð€€òòSee€GentryÐ Ð  Ðv.€Gentryóó,€924€S.W.2d€678,€680€(Tenn.€1996)Ô#†X5XXX5-P#ÔÔ‡X5XXX5Ôòòóó(citingòòóó€William€H.€Inman,€òòGibsonððs€Suits€in€ChanceryóóÐ ¼  Ððð€228€at€219„20€(7òòthóó€ed.€1988)).Ô#†X5XXX58Q#Ô€€Ô‡X5XXX5ÔWhile€a€ð ðvoidableðð€judgment€is€not€subject€to€a€collateral€attack€andÐ ¨ø Ðis€valid€and€binding€until€it€is€either€reversed€by€an€appellate€court€or€is€set€aside€on€a€complaint€filedÐ ”ä Ðto€impeach€it,€a€ð ðvoidðð€judgment€is€subject€to€collateral€attack.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ô#†X5XXX5R#ÔÐ €Ð ÐÌà  àBased€on€the€foregoing,€we€find€the€Alcantarsðð€default€judgment€against€Mr.€Wadhwa€voidÐ X ¨ Ðand€therefore€of€no€legal€effect.€€òòóóSince€the€Alcantarsðð€judgment€against€Mr.€Wadhwa€is€void,€thereÐ D!” Ðis€no€$459,460€judgment€for€Mr.€Wadhwa€to€assign€to€the€Alcantars.€€Since€the€Alcantars€are€noÐ 0"€  Ðâ âlonger€the€assignees€of€a€judgment€against€Mr.€Wadhwa€upon€which€Mr.€Wadhwa€could€base€theÐ #l! Ðpresent€claim€against€Haulers,€there€is€no€basis€for€Plaintiffsðð€claim€against€Haulers.׃$×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Without€theÐ ° Ðâ âbenefit€of€the€judgment€from€the€prior€action,€neither€Mr.€Wadhwa€or€the€Alcantars€sustainedÐ œì Ðdamages€for€which€relief€could€be€granted€in€this€action.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€judge€acted€properlyÐ ˆØ Ðby€dismissing€Plaintiffsðð€action€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(6)€for€failing€to€state€a€claim€uponÐ tÄ Ðwhich€relief€can€be€granted.Ð `° ÐÌò òà@6 6 ìàHaulersðð€Duty€to€Defend€and€Inform€Wadhwaó óˆÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àWe€have€determined€that€the€judgment€in€the€prior€action€is€void.€€€Though€we€are€confidentÐ  ` Ðin€our€ruling,€should€we€be€incorrect€and,€thus,€should€the€judgment€be€valid,€Plaintiffs€are€still€notÐ ü L  Ðentitled€to€recover.€€The€reason€for€this€is€that€the€prior€judgment,€if€valid,€sets€forth€findings€whichÐ è 8  Ðestablish€that€Mr.€Wadhwaððs€actions€and€the€consequences€thereof€were€intended.€€The€policyÐ Ô$  Ðexcludes€coverage€for€intentional€acts€by€an€insured.€€Thus,€if€the€previous€judgment€were€valid€Mr.Ð À  ÐWadwha€would€not€be€afforded€coverage,€he€would€not€be€entitled€to€a€defense,€and€he€would€notÐ ¬ü  Ðbe€entitled€to€indemnification€for€the€consequences€of€his€intentional€acts.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àOn€the€day€of€the€accident€with€the€Alcantars,€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€driving€the€taxi,€the€coveredÐ pÀ Ðð ðautoðð,€with€the€permission€of€Music€City€Taxi,€which€was€identified€in€the€policy€as€the€companyÐ \¬ Ðto€which€the€covered€ð ðautoðð€was€leased.€€The€named€insured,€Chinedu€Nwagwu,€leased€the€coveredÐ H˜ Ðauto€to€Music€City€Taxi,€which€was€authorized€in€the€policy.€€The€policy€defines€ð ðinsuredsðð€toÐ 4„ Ðinclude€anyone€using€with€your€permission€a€covered€automobile€the€named€insured€owns,€hires€orÐ  p Ðborrows.׃"Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thus,€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€an€additional€insured€and€therefore€was,€or€would€be,€affordedÐ  \ Ðcoverage€under€the€policy€unless€an€exclusion€applied.€€The€Haulers€Business€Auto€Policy€at€issueÐ øH Ðexcluded€ò òó óinjury€or€damage€ð ðexpected€or€intended€from€the€standpoint€of€the€insured.ðð€€The€exclusionÐ ä4 Ðin€the€policy€reads,€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà8 ` àThis€insurance€does€not€apply€to€any€of€the€following:€Ð¨ø` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` à1.à0 ¸ àExpected€or€Intended€Injury€€Ð€Ð¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌà8  àà0` Ð Ð àà0¸ ` Ð ` Ð àð ðBodily€injuryðð€or€ð ðproperty€damageðð€expected€or€ÐX ¨¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àintended€from€the€standpoint€of€the€ð ðinsured.ððÐ D!” Ðâ âÐ 0"€  Ðà  àThe€judgment€upon€which€this€action€is€based€expressly€states€that€the€Alcantarsðð€damagesÐ ° Ðâ âð!ð€the€damages€Plaintiffs€seek€to€recover€ð!ð€were€the€proximate€result€of€the€intentional€acts€of€Mr.Ð œì ÐWadhwa.€€Though€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€an€additional€insured,€based€on€the€fact€he€was€using€theÐ ˆØ Ðvehicle€with€permission,€he€was€not€afforded€coverage,€and€therefore€he€is€not€entitled€toÐ tÄ Ðindemnification€for€damages€resulting€from€such€intentional€acts.€€Accordingly,€Mr.€Wadhwa€wasÐ `° Ðnot€insured€for€the€damages€awarded€the€Alcantars,€and€there€was€and€is€no€coverage.€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àPlaintiffs€argue€that€Haulers€is€bound€by€the€prior€judgment€against€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€ThisÐ $ t Ðargument€however€is€terribly€flawed.€€The€prior€judgment,€if€valid,€does€not€hold€Haulers€liable;€itÐ  ` Ðholds€Mr.€Wadhwa€liable.€€Moreover,€since€Haulers€was€not€a€party€to€the€prior€action,€the€judgmentÐ ü L  Ðresulting€from€that€action€is€not€binding€on€Haulers.€Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  à[T]he€binding€effect€of€a€judgment€against€an€insured€does€not€extend€to€mattersÐ À  Ðoutside€the€scope€of€the€insurance€contract,€and€.€.€.€the€insurance€company€is€neitherÐ ¬ü  Ðobligated€to€defend€nor€is€it€bound€by€the€findings€of€a€court€if€the€claim€against€theÐ ˜è  Ðinsured€is€not€covered€by€the€policy.€€To€hold€otherwise€would€be€to€estop€theÐ „Ô  Ðinsurance€company€by€the€acts€of€parties€in€a€transaction€in€which€it€has€no€concernÐ pÀ Ðand€over€which€it€has€no€control,€and€to€deprive€it€of€its€day€in€court€to€show€that€theÐ \¬ Ðtransaction€is€foreign€to€the€insurance€contract.€€ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌòòKelly€v.€Cherokee€Insurance€Co.óó,€574€S.W.2d€735,€738€(Tenn.€1978)(citing€òòFarm€Bureau€MutualÐ  p ÐAutomobile€Ins.€Co.€v.€Hammer,óó€177€F.2d€793,€800€(4òòthóó€Cir.€1949)).€òòóó€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAssuming,€òòarguendo,€óóthe€judgment€from€the€prior€actionòòóó€is€valid,€the€judgment€establishesÐ ä4 Ðthat€Mr.€Wadhwaððs€actions€and€the€damages€resulting€Ô_ÔtherefromÔ_Ô€are€excluded€from€coverage.€€Thus,Ð Ð  ÐHaulers€owed€no€duty€to€defend€Mr.€Wadhwa€in€the€prior€action,€it€was€not€obligated€to€inform€himÐ ¼  Ðof€his€rights,€andòòóó€it€is€not€obligated€to€indemnify€Mr.€Wadhwa€as€alleged.׃#×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò òó ó€€Accordingly,€if€theÐ ¨ø Ðjudgment€from€the€prior€action€were€valid,€as€Plaintiffs€contend,€the€trial€judge€acted€properly€byÐ ”ä Ðdismissing€Plaintiffsðð€action€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(6)€for€failing€to€state€a€claim€uponÐ €Ð Ðwhich€relief€can€be€granted.Ð l¼ ÐÌÐ  D!” Ðà@º º ìàò òPlaintiffsðð€Efforts€to€Disqualify€Haulersðð€Legal€Counseló óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àPlaintiffs€further€allege€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€removing€the€firm€of€Ortale,€Kelly,Ð ˆØ ÐHerbert€&€Crawford.€€Plaintiffsðð€motion€to€disqualify€the€firm€was€based€on€the€premise€that€the€firmÐ tÄ Ðrepresented€Mr.€Wadhwa,€at€least€initially,€in€the€underlying€personal€injury€action,€and€therefore,Ð `° Ðwas€precluded€from€representing€a€client€who€was€adversarial€to€Mr.€Wadhwaððs€interests€in€thisÐ L œ Ðlitigation.€€The€trial€court€correctly€denied€the€motion€because€the€premise€of€the€motion€is€withoutÐ 8 ˆ Ða€factual€foundation.€The€firm€never€represented€Mr.€Wadhwa.€€Admittedly,€the€firm€submitted€aÐ $ t ÐNotice€of€Appearance€which€listed€Mr.€Wadhwa€as€its€client;€however,€the€firm€promptly€filed€aÐ  ` Ðcorrected€Notice€of€Appearance€indicating€that€it€did€not€represent€Mr.€Wadhwa,€that€it€onlyÐ ü L  Ðrepresented€Mr.€Nwagwu.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Moreover,€the€firm€never€notified€Mr.€Wadhwa€that€they€representedÐ è 8  Ðhim,€and€Mr.€Wadhwa€was€never€informed€that€they€represented€him€nor€was€he€of€the€impressionÐ Ô$  Ðthat€they€represented€him.€€The€first€notice€of€appearance€was€a€mere€clerical€error€that€was€promptlyÐ À  Ðcorrected€without€prejudice€to€Mr.€Wadhwa,€for€at€no€time€did€Mr.€Wadhwa€rely€on€the€mistakenÐ ¬ü  Ðimpression€that€the€firm€represented€him.€€Thus,€the€issue€is€without€merit.׃  ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà@ÔÔ$ìàò òOther€Issuesó óˆÐ pÀ ÐÌà  àPlaintiffs€have€raised€two€other€issues.€They€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€grantedÐ H˜ ÐHaulersðð€motion€for€summary€judgment€based€on€the€finding€that€the€Alcantars€breached€the€ReleaseÐ 4„ Ðand€Settlement€of€Claims€Agreement€when€they€brought€this€action€against€Haulers.€€We€find€thisÐ  p Ðruling€is€now€moot€based€on€our€holding€above,€and€we€decline€to€discuss€it€further.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àPlaintiffs€also€assert€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€ordered€the€Alcantars€to€pay€HaulersÐ ä4 Ð$1,160.05€in€discretionary€costs.€€The€premise€of€their€argument€is€that€Haulers€should€not€haveÐ Ð  Ðprevailed€in€the€trial€court,€and€therefore€it€is€not€entitled€to€discretionary€costs.€€Since€we€affirm€theÐ ¼  Ðtrial€courtððs€dismissal€of€Plaintiffsðð€complaint,€Haulers€still€prevails.€€Thus,€Haulers€is€entitled€toÐ ¨ø Ðrecover€discretionary€costs.€€We€therefore€affirm€the€award€of€discretionary€costs€to€Haulers.Ð ”ä ÐÌÐ  l¼ Ðà@••$ìàò òIn€Conclusionó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€granting€Haulersðð€Rule€12€Motion€to€Dismiss€PlaintiffsððÐ ˆØ Ðcomplaint€is€affirmed.€€This€matter€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€other€proceedings€as€mayÐ tÄ Ðbe€necessary.€€Costs€are€assessed€against€Tezozomoc€Alcantar€and€Judy€Alcantar.€Ð `° ÐÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àFRANK€G.€CLEMENT,€JR.,€JUDGEÐ Ô$  Ð