ÿWPCû …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw@ 4W k z ‚ L‚ Î LÖ " 0J* 0Tt 0^È 0h& 0rŽ 0| 0†| 0 1u’ 0dU>k B©U*ÆB)ðDC AM\ D3©éÜv~Å 0@CvÓƒ AOVÆ¥ 0Dk D/¯ BÞ˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÒ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial Regular õ÷øUùUúUûDüýDþÿÓ€f|œ$x3|x C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPTC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd€-(Cþÿ << Gÿÿ%%%%'ÿÿdxd ßÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌò òJuly€31,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€&ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÔ€&ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€¼ôXXdðdÈ7ÑÙ€€ÙßR€)+(A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌALLSTATE€INSURANCE€COMPANY,à à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àò ò)€€Knox€Circuit€No.€2„493„94Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Appeal€No.€03A01„9710„CV„00466Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌW.€ZANE€DANIEL,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óDefendant/Appellee.à àò ò)ó óÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€KNOX€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€HAROLD€WIMBERLY,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òW.€ANDREW€FOXó óÌKnoxville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppellantÌÌÌÌò òW.€ZANE€DANIELÌDANIEL€&€OBERMANó óÌKnoxville,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€œJ.òò›à àœó óóóÌÑ7€L|XXdðXXdð7ÑÓÓà àPlaintiff/appellant,›€Allstate€Insurance€Company€(ð ðappellantðð),€appeals€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€awarding€defendant/appellee,€W.€Zane€Daniel€(ð ðappelleeðð),Ïone„third€of€appellantððs€subrogation€funds.€€For€reasons€stated€hereinafter,€we€affirmÏthe€trial€courtððs€judgment.ÌÌà àIn€April€of€1991,€appellee€was€retained€to€represent€Lisa€œRobinson€(ð ðplaintiffðð)›€inÏher€automobile€accident€litigation.€€€The€accident€occurred€on€April€14,€1991.€€œAppellee›Ïwas€retained€on€œthe€basis€of€a›€contingency€fee€œof›€one„third€of€the€total€recovery.€ÏœEventually,€appellee€represented€plaintiff€in€an€action€concerning€this€accident€styledÏòòRobinson€v.€Heagey,€et€alóó.,€Knox€County€Circuit€Court€Docket€No.€2„253„92.€€Appellant›Ïhad€an€insurance€policy€with€John€H.€and€œWinona€Robinson€which€provided€coverage,Ïincluding€coverage€for€medical€payments€for€plaintiff.ÌÌà àPursuant€to€this€contractual€agreement,€appellee€gave€formal€written€notice€ofÏhis€representation€of€plaintiff€to€all€interested€parties€including,€but€not€limited€to,€theÍappellant.€€The€letter€forwarded€to€appellant€was€dated€April€23,€1991.€ÌÌà àA€little€over€four€months€later€in€correspondence€dated€September€9,€1991,Ïappellant€notified€appellee€of€the€possibility€of€a€subrogation€interest€by€stating:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àAs€a€claimant€carrier,€State€Farm,€has€limits€of€liabilityÏgreater€than€or€equal€to€ours,€we€will€be€closing€allÏcoverages€under€this€policy€other€than€medical€payments.ÌÌà8 àà8 àOnce€treatment€is€completed€or€our€limits€are€exhausted,€weÏwill€be€subrogating€from€the€claimant€carrier€for€ourÏexpenditure€under€the€medical€payments€coverage.€€ÌÌÌÓÓà àSuit€was€filed€in€the€Knox€County€Circuit€Court€on€April€10,€1992.€€(Id.).€€SoonÏthereafter,€appellant€intervened€in€the€suit.€€Appellant€was€represented€in€thisÏintervention€by€Ron€Cunningham,€attorney.€Ìà àÌà àOn€May€26,€1992,€appellee€forwarded€a€letter€to€Cunningham€which€stated:ÌÓÓ€ò òòòà8 àà8 àó óóóEnclosed€you€will€find€the€Order€wherein€you€haveÏintervened€on€behalf€of€Allstate€Insurance€Company€in€theÏabove„styled€action.ÌÌà8 àà8 àI€will€expect€you€to€be€present€at€all€depositions,€and€yourÏcompany€pay€for€the€necessary€costs€in€proving€the€medicalÏbills€and€expenses€to€establish€your€claim.ÌÌà8 àà8 àLikewise,€any€and€all€costs€should€be€split€equally€betweenÏyour€company€and€my€client,€which€is€necessary€in€order€toÏpursue€this€matter€for€trial.€€I€assume€there€will€be€noÏquestions€pertaining€to€this€but€if€there€are,€please€notify€meÏimmediately€and€I€will€ask€the€Court€for€an€Order€directingÏthat€your€client€share€in€the€expenses€in€pursuing€thisÏmatter.€ÌÌà8 àà8 àPlease€notify€me€if€there€are€any€questions€or€otherwise€IÍwill€assume€that€any€and€all€depositions,€et€cetera,€will€beÏshared€equally€between€our€clients.€ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€July€29,€1992,€attorneys€for€appellant€wrote€appellee€stating€that€they€wouldÏrelay€this€information€to€appellant.€€They€further€stated€that€there€was€an€anticipationÏthat€defendants€in€the€initial€matter€would€stipulate€as€to€medical€bills€and€that€a€moreÏdefinite€reply€would€follow.€ÌÌà àThereafter,€on€October€7€of€that€same€year,€attorneys€representing€appellantÏresponded€that€appellant€would€not€assume€costs€and,€once€again,€that€appellantÏanticipated€defendants€stipulating€to€the€amount€of€medical€bills.€ÌÌà àNo€further€contact€was€made€by€appellant€with€appellee€until€the€day€of€trial.ÌÌà àOn€December€11,€1992,€pretrial€depositions€were€taken€of€all€partiesÏconcerned.€€This€involved€four€different€individuals.€€Appellant€was€cognizant€of€theseÏdepositions€but€failed€to€appear€to€represent€their€interest.€ÌÌà àOne€month€later,€the€deposition€of€Dr.€John€Soldano€was€taken,€and,€onceÏagain,€appellant€failed€to€have€its€attorney€present€to€represent€its€interest.€€Thereafter,Ïon€January€25,€1993,€Dr.€James€David€Johnsonððs€deposition€was€taken.€€Again,€noÏone€appeared€on€appellantððs€behalf.€ÌÌà àAll€costs€of€taking€the€above€depositions€and€proving€the€medical€bills€andÍexpenses€which€are€the€subject€of€this€subrogation€claim€were€borne€by€the€originalÏplaintiff€and€appellee,€her€counsel,€€with€appellant€refusing€to€take€part.€ÌÌà àOn€February€3,€1993,€the€matter€was€set€for€trial€and€an€attorney€for€appellantÏappeared€at€the€courthouse€at€approximately€8:45€a.m.€€Appellee€then€advisedÏappellantððs€attorney€that€he€felt€that€appellantððs€attorney€should€not€participate€in€theÏtrial€inasmuch€as€he€had€virtually€no€knowledge€of€the€case.€€Prior€to€this€time,€noÏrepresentative€of€appellant€was€ever€requested€not€to€participate€in€the€investigationÏand€preparation€of€this€matter€for€trial.€ÌÌà àContrary€to€appellantððs€anticipation,€defendants€in€òòRobinson€v.€Heagey,€et€alóó€didÏnot€stipulate€to€plaintiff€Robinsonððs€medical€bills.€€Consequently,€medical€proof€throughÏthe€doctors€was€required€in€order€to€prove€Robinsonððs€injuries€and€that€the€medicalÏbills€were€related€to€the€automobile€accident.€ÌÌà àAppellee€investigated€the€case,€prepared€interrogatories€and€requests€forÏadmission€to€the€defendant,€and€answered€the€interrogatories€of€the€defendant.€€InÏshort,€appellee€fully€prepared€the€case€for€deposition€and€trial.€ÌÌà àAppellant€performed€no€work€on€the€case€at€any€time.€€In€fact,€the€onlyÏappearance€made€by€appellantððs€counsel€was€on€the€morning€of€the€trial€whereinÏcounsel€appeared€for€approximately€one€hour€before€the€case€commenced.€ÌÌà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,€judgment€was€entered€for€plaintiff€in€the€amount€of€Ï$4,153.56,€and€appellant€contacted€appellee€and€informed€him€that€they€would€beÏrequesting€the€$4,153.56€allegedly€due€under€their€subrogation€rights.€€The€appelleeÏthen€withheld€monies€allegedly€payable€to€appellant€under€its€subrogation€interestÏupon€the€basis€that€he€was€entitled€to€reasonable€attorneyððs€fees€and€costs€for€hisÏservices€in€securing€payment€of€appellantððs€subrogation€claim.€ÌÌà àUpon€the€conclusion€of€the€case,€appellee€tendered€two„thirds€of€the€above€sumÏto€appellant€for€its€subrogation€interest€and€retained€one„third€for€himself.€€AppellantÏfiled€this€action€and€stated€that€they€would€not€pay€attorneyððs€fees€for€the€workÏperformed€and€asked€that€plaintiff€pay€the€full€subrogation€amount€of€$4,153.56.€ÌÌà àThis€cause€was€heard€before€the€Judge€€Wimberly€in€chambers,€and€heÏreviewed€the€statements€of€the€parties€and€the€different€documents.€€Judge€WimberlyÏwas€the€same€judge€who€heard€the€case€of€òòRobinson€v.€Heagey,€et€alóó.€€€In€view€of€theÏfact€that€appellant€had€not€performed€any€work€or€services,€or€advanced€any€expenseÏin€order€to€collect€their€subrogation€claim,€the€court€decided€that€appellee€was€entitledÏto€one„third€attorneyððs€fees€for€the€work€performed€in€collecting€this€money.€€€CaseÏexpense€was€not€an€issue€raised€at€trial.€€Therefore,€the€trial€court€did€not€consider€theÏissue.€€This€appeal€ensued.ÌÌà àThe€issue€presented€by€this€case€was€considered€by€the€Tennessee€SupremeÏCourt€inòò€Travelers€Ins.€Co.€v.€Williamsóó,€541€S.W.2d€587€(Tenn.1976),€and€by€this€CourtÍin€òòTennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.€Co.€v.€Pritchettóó,€54€Tenn.App.€410,€391€S.W.2d€671Ï(1964),€andòò€Motors€Ins.€Corp.€v.€Blakemoreóó,€584€S.W.2d€204€(Tenn.App.1978).€€€InÏòòPritchettóó,€this€Court€held€that€the€insurer€was€obligated€to€pay€its€insured's€attorney€aÏfee€for€collecting€a€subrogation€claim.€€€Specifically,€the€Court€found€an€impliedÏcontract€to€pay€a€reasonable€attorneyððs€fee€for€recovery€of€the€subrogation€claim€whereÏthe€insurer€acquiesced€in€the€action€of€the€insured's€attorney€on€its€behalf.€€€In€òòWilliamsÏóóand€òòBlakemoreóó,€the€Supreme€Court€and€this€Court€found€that€because€the€insurerÏnotified€the€insured's€attorney€prior€to€the€performance€of€beneficial€services€that€itÏwould€handle€its€own€subrogation€claim€the€attorney€was€not€entitled€to€a€fee.ÌÌà àThe€applicable€legal€principle€is€recognized€in€all€of€the€above€cases.€€€It€isÏstated€in€òòWilliamsóó,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThere€are,€of€course,€many€situations€in€which€the€work€ofÏan€attorney€proves€useful€to€persons€other€than€his€ownÏclient.€€€The€normal€rule€in€such€cases€is€that€he€must€lookÏonly€to€his€client,€with€whom€he€has€contracted,€for€hisÏcompensation,€notwithstanding€the€acceptance€of€benefitsÏby€others.€€€But,€an€exception€to€this€rule€is€made€wheneverÏone€person,€having€assumed€the€risks€and€expense€ofÏlitigation,€has€succeeded€in€securing,€augmenting,€orÏpreserving€property€or€a€fund€of€money€in€which€otherÏpeople€are€entitled€to€share€in€common.€€€In€that€event,€theÏexpenses€of€the€action€are€borne€by€each€participantÏaccording€to€his€interest.€€€The€fairest€and€most€efficientÏmeans€of€distributing€these€costs€is€thought€to€be€to€makeÏthem€a€charge€upon€the€fund€itself.€€€This€device,€known€asÏthe€'fund€doctrine,'€was€invented€by€courts€of€equity€toÏprevent€passive€beneficiaries€of€the€fund€from€beingÏunjustly€enriched.€€€It€is,€therefore,€never€applied€againstÏpersons€who€have€employed€counsel€on€their€own€accountÏto€represent€their€interests.€€€Thus,€the€right€to€employÏcounsel€of€one's€own€choosing€is€preserved.€.€.Ìà8 àà8 àÌà8 àà8 à[v]aried€fact€situations€are€disclosed€by€the€reported€casesÏdealing€with€this€problem.€€€We€doubt€the€advisability€ofÏattempting€to€devise€a€single€'rule'€to€govern€all€such€cases,Ïwhatever€the€facts€might€be.€€€Instead,€each€case,€with€itsÏpeculiar€facts€must€be€decided€by€applying€general,Ïfundamental€principles€of€contract€law.€.€.Ìà8 àà8 àÌà8 àà8 à[i]t€follows€that€whether€or€not€an€attorney€is€entitled€toÏcollect€from€the€insurer€a€fee€with€respect€to€a€subrogationÏclaim€depends€upon€whether€an€express€or€implied€contractÏor€a€quasi€contractual€relation€exists€between€them.€€ÌòòÌTravelers€Ins.€Co.€v.€Williamsóó,€541€S.W.2d€at€589„90€(citations€omitted).Ìà àÌÌÌÓÓà àImplied€contracts€do€that€which€the€law€says€ought€to€be€done€as€a€matter€ofÏright€and€justice.€€They€are€such€as€reason€and€justice€dictate,€and€which,€therefore,Ïthe€law€presumes€that€every€man€undertakes€to€perform.€€Generally€an€impliedÏcontract€is€one€which€is€inferred€from€the€conduct€of€the€parties;€€it€is€not€necessarilyÏexpressed€in€words.€€7€Tenn.Juris.,€Contracts,€ðð€98.€€ð ðA€contract€implied€in€law€isÏimposed€by€operation€of€law,€without€regard€to€the€assent€of€the€parties,€on€grounds€ofÏreason€and€justice."òò€€Continental€Motel€Brokers,€Inc.€v.€Blankenshipóó,€739€F.2d€226,€232Ï(6th€Cir.1984)€(citations€omitted).€€Courts€are€directed€to€look€to€the€conduct€of€theÏparties€in€light€of€all€the€circumstances€to€determine€whether€an€implied€contract€exists.€ÏOne€Tennessee€court€has€explained€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIn€Tennessee,€any€conduct€from€which€a€reasonable€personÏin€the€offeree's€position€would€be€justified€in€inferring€aÏpromise€in€return€for€the€requested€act,€amounts€to€an€offer,Ïand€that€such€a€request€might€be€implied€when€the€factsÏand€circumstances€are€such€that€the€person€receiving€theÏbenefit€of€such€work€or€services€know,€or€reasonably€shouldÏhave€known,€that€the€person€doing€the€work€expected€to€beÍcompensated.€€ÌÓÓÌòòCummins€v.€Brodieóó,€667€S.W.2d€759,€764€(Tenn.App.1983)€(quotingòò€In€re€Estate€ofÏHoldingóó,€61€Tenn.App.€654,€663„64,€457€S.W.2d€545,€549€(1969)).€ÌÌà àAs€noted€òòsupraóó,€the€principle€recognized€in€òòWilliamsóó,€òòPritchettóó,€and€òòBlakemoreóó€isÏthis:€€after€notice€to€the€insurer€by€the€insured's€attorney€of€his/her€representation,€theÏattorney€will€be€entitled€to€be€compensated€for€services€rendered€the€insurer€until€suchÏtime€as€the€attorney€is€notified€by€the€insurer€that€it€will€be€responsible€for€asserting€itsÏclaim€for€subrogation.€€òòSee€Boston,€Bates,€and€Holt€v.€Tennessee€Farmers€MutualÏInsurance€Companyóó,€857€S.W.2d€32€(Tenn.€1993).€€€ÌÌà àThe€conduct€of€the€parties€indicates€that€an€implied€contract€did€exist,€thatÏappellee€was€obligated€to€provide€his€services€as€an€attorney,€and€that€appellant€wasÏobligated€to€pay€for€such€services.€€ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€appellee€advised€appellant€of€his€representation€of€plaintiff.ÏThereafter,€appellantððs€response€was,€at€best,€equivocal:€ð ðOnce€treatment€is€completedÏor€our€limits€are€exhausted,€we€will€be€subrogating€from€the€claimant€carrier€for€ourÏexpenditure€under€the€medical€payments€coverage.ðð€€Although,€no€doubt,€appellantÏplanned€to€pursue€its€subrogation€interest,€there€is€no€indication€from€appellant€as€toÏhow€appellant€planned€to€go€about€securing€payment€of€such€interest.€€After€appellantÏintervened€in€this€matter,€appellee€asked€appellant€to€be€present€at€all€depositions€andÍto€share€in€the€costs€of€proving€medical€bills€and€expenses€had€by€plaintiff.€€AfterÏmedical€bills€were€not€stipulated€to€by€defendants,€appellee€set€up€depositions€toÏprove€medical€bills€and€expenses€incurred€by€plaintiff€Robinson.€€Appellant€failed€toÏattend€any€of€the€depositions€or€to€supply€appellee€with€funds€to€aid€in€proving€theÏmedical€bills€and€expenses.€€In€fact,€appellant€failed€even€›minimallyœ€to€involve€itself€inÏthis€matter€until€the€morning€of€the€trial.€€Under€these€circumstances,€it€is€the€opinion€ofÏthis€court€that€a€reasonable€person€in€appelleeððs€position€would€be€justified€inÏassuming€that€appellant€wanted€appellee€to€secure€payment€of€their€subrogationÏinterest.€€Appellee,€undoubtedly,€could€not€safely€abandon€any€portion€of€his€client'sÏcause€of€action.€ÌÌà àAppellant€cites€this€court€to€the€òòWilliamsóó€case€mentioned€above.€€This€presentÏcase,€however,€is€distinguishable€from€òòWilliams€óóin€that€the€insurer€in€òòWilliamsóóÏunequivocally€stated€that€it€would€ð ðhandle€its€own€subrogation.ðð€€As€mentioned€òòsupraóó,Ïappellant€merely€stated€somewhat€equivocally€that€it€would€subrogate€from€theÏclaimantððs€carrier.€€However,€appellant€failed€to€apprise€appellee€of€who€would€handleÏits€subrogation€interest.€€This€fact€coupled€with€the€fact€that€appellant€failed€evenÏremotely€to€participate€in€any€aspect€of€this€matter€is€strong€evidence€that€appellantÏknew€or€should€have€known€that€appellee€expected€to€be€compensated€for€hisÏservices.ÌÌà àBased€on€the€evidence€in€the€record€and€in€light€of€the€foregoing,€we€think€theÏtrial€court€properly€found€an€implied€contractual€relationship€between€appellee€andÍappellant€thereby€awarding€attorneyððs€fees€to€appellee.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€ofÏthe€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€are€taxed€against€appellant,€for€which€execution€mayÏissue€if€necessary.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àÌÌà à€€€€€€€€ÌÌà àÌÌà àÌÌà à€€€€ÌÌà à