ÿWPCN ÞÐ_ê½±Õ`LæÔ8žÅÀ]D'æP¦U“‡Œ°#”R’¸}:Åð¢>˜à+Y‹Ÿ¶".¾x48~¤plĪwÜ¿ì š CÍ+| ³V'’ ë‚ô·ì’‰ %rqÁxw ð§wEÍXÚj´‹úA#³3­ Øui%5½Õɨ¢×ĨëýŽN¼ŒDÃÈ/î7΋9a—'JoQ–(£ Pÿ8ÎP=À({¬J>ÇŽ$Û}ùÝ)m<26VÏF¦IûôïϯØé…KóDL“§®PG"ϸ‘n76Ò…….Š¼qîvw`°·cÕ“©›‡ƒ#§ŽSn³ƒ›!®z>høQF²¬Íø¼!}LòV‘C£q¹=>è`¤S(]HBŒýðZ¨†ò_>F#±PMn+{.ö"&£0M'jìñúáÀSÈõ”z¶0ÏÏjp{:˜è÷bˆÎ_€#ü@‚áÒpF·c¯1¡º²æw­jkU»û´ßÑ4‚.⃢/5S„ðÜòáMãs9¾¶1M¼Þßöv3I©Î–ô[ mQÆiT–™m®Òu ¯N {¼•äºyÁ [½§—VX(?‹~HíB:èÑF¸ — ÚÛùŠìX‡¤ÇäbUN\ %ª 0ˆ°^ 8wD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ 0DÐ   Æ! Æç Æ­ÆsU N9N‡#Á‰JERRRRÈTTTTU@ã\b????GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG 0ëKKKK B66 0¤S D3÷ D-* 0KWW AS¢Æõ 0¤» 0D_ A«£(ÈhH  Z6Times New Roman Regular»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÙd+â HEô*t)t€Wpdocs3|x ˜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.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒR¯$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôkP ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôkP ò ,ôkPÔóóAn€earlier€trial€resulted€in€a€mistrial€when€Johnson,€purported€Chairman€of€the€Foundation,€was€found€inÐ ° Ðcontempt€for€jury€tampering.€€At€the€first€trial,€Mezvinskyððs€testimony€tended€to€support€the€legitimacy€of€the€Foundation,Ð tÄ Ðand€thus€stood€in€stark€contrast€to€his€testimony€at€the€second€trial€when€he€denounced€the€Foundation€as€a€scam€andÐ 8ˆ Ðaccused€Anderson€as€beingòò€in€pari€delicto:€€óó(ð ðMr.€Anderson€knew€more€about€the€Foundation€than€I€ever€cared€or€wantÐ üL Ðto€know.ðð)òòóóÔ#†ôkP ò òôkP#ÔLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÆúI Z‹6Times New Roman Regular˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0  ¾Ý ƒR¯$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôkP ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôkP ò ,ôkPÔóóThe€plaintiff€recovered€a€judgment€in€the€U.S.€District€Court,€Abingdon,€Va.€against€the€Foundation€andÐ ° ÐJohnson.€€The€defendant€was€dismissed€from€the€action€for€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction.€€The€case€was€not€heard€on€theÐ tÄ Ðmerits;€a€default€was€entered€on€punitive€grounds,€which€was€affirmed€by€the€4òòthóó€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€in€August,Ð 8ˆ Ð1999.€€Its€òòper€curiamóó€opinion€is€reproduced€here€for€informational€purposes,€as€Appendix€A.Ô#†ôkP ò òôkP#Ô(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman  ÙÝ ƒR¯$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôkP ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôkP ò ,ôkPÔóóThis€allegation,€together€with€the€evidence€adduced€in€support€of€it,€is€wholly€contrary€to€the€allegations€ofÐ ° Ða€Federal€Court€complaint€and€related€documents.€€There,€the€defendant€is€alleged€to€have€acted€on€behalf€of€theÐ tÄ ÐFoundation.Ô#†ôkP ò òôkP#Ô- ù- úÝ ƒR¯$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôkP ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòÔ‡ôkP ò ,ôkPÔóóWho€is€a€Pennsylvania€lawyer€and€former€Congressman.Ô#†ôkP ò òôkP#Ô(|G2¯$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€-Í»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôDÁò»»Ô d(|3Íò$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€-Í»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Íò$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€-Í»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€: »»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ƙ»»»ÔÑ8€TÍXXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ƙ»»¼ƘÔà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÓbƘÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼Ƙ»îîÓb+#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€14,€1999€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X‘oX»¼ƘÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ƙ»XX‘o#ÔPAULL€ANDERSON€v.€EDWARD€MEZVINSKY€Ô‡X‘oX»¼ƘÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Washington€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€€17452€€€€€G.€Richard€Johnson,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌFILED€AUGUST€28,€2001Ð ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1998„00795„COA„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓPaull€Anderson€sues€Edward€Mezvinsky,€seeking€damages€for€breach€of€the€contract€to€pay€Mr.Ð xÈ  ÐAnderson€certain€fees€in€connection€with€solicitation€of€donations€to€the€Foundation€forÐ d´ ÐAdvancement,€Education€and€Employment€of€American€Indians.€€The€jury€found€in€favor€of€Mr.Ð P  ÐMezvinsky.€€Mr.€Anderson€appeals,€raising€the€issues€set€out€in€our€opinion.€€We€find€the€issuesÐ <Œ Ðraised€on€appeal€to€be€without€merit€and€affirm€the€judgment€entered.Ð (x ÐÓ–ÓÌò òÌTenn.R.App.P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed;€Ð ì< ÐCause€Remandedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ƙ»àX‘o}#ÔÔ‡X‘oX.¼ƘÔHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€Franksóó€andÐ ° ÐòòD.€Michael€Swiney,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌPaull€Anderson,€Morriswotn,€Tennessee,€Appellant,€òòPro€SeóóÐ tÄ ÐÌFrank€A.€Johnstone,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€and€W.€Gordon€Ball,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ L œ ÐAppellee,€Edward€MezvinskyÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌÌÓ]ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ƙ»XX‘oŒ#ÔÔ‡X‘oX»¼ƘÔÐ è$8 $ ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Ƙ»XX‘o— #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X‘oX»¼ƘÔà  àThis€case€was€originally€heard€on€oral€argument€on€October€14,€1999.€€Thereafter,€Ô‡XTÍXXX‘oÔEdwardÐ À&"& ÐMezvinskyÔ#†X‘oXXXTÍ~ #Ô€filed€a€petition€seeking€protection€of€the€Bankruptcy€Court.€€An€automatic€stay€wasÐ ®'þ"' Ðissued€which€was€lifted€by€order€entered€on€June€6,€2000,€after€which,€by€order€entered€on€SeptemberÐ œ(ì#( Ð5,€2000,€the€case€was€transferred€to€the€active€docket€of€this€Court.Ð ˆ)Ø$) ÐÌà  àWe€first€deal€with€a€motion€filed€by€Mr.€Anderson€asking€that€we€consider€post„judgmentÐ `+°&+ Ðfacts€pursuant€to€Tenn.R.App.P.€14.€€We€deny€the€motion€because€the€facts€sought€to€be€consideredÐ L,œ', Ðdo€not€meet€the€criteria€of€Rule€14.Ð 8-ˆ(-ý ЇÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÌÓY Óòòò ò€à0 @ àà @° àà0@(#(#àà @° àà @ àà @` àà @¸ àà @ àà @h àThe€Pleadingsóóà @p àó óÐ œì ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€plaintiff€alleges€that€he€entered€into€a€contract€(the€ð ðFinderððs€Fee€Agreementðð)€with€anÐ tÄ Ðentity€called€the€Foundation,€and€that€the€defendant€signed€the€Agreement€as€ð ðchairmanðð€of€theÐ `° ÐFoundation.€€The€Finderððs€Fee€Agreement€provided€that€the€plaintiff€would€receive€a€fee€for€anyÐ L œ Ðdonations€he€originated€for€the€Foundation.€€The€plaintiff€alleged€that€he€originated€donations€to€theÐ 8 ˆ ÐFoundation,€specifically€a€donation€of€nursery€stock€of€the€Riverview€Nursery,€a€tree€farm€atÐ $ t ÐLimestone,€Tennessee,€valued€at€$2,837,088,€and€a€Bristol€industrial€plant€(the€Unisys€plant)€of€theÐ  ` Ðvalue€of€$6,000,000.€€The€plaintiff€claimed€to€be€entitled€to€$883,708.80€for€his€services€under€theÐ ü L  Ðterms€of€the€Finderððs€Fee€Agreement.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€further€alleged€that€the€Foundation€entered€into€a€separate€contract€(theÐ À  Ðð ðBrokerage€Agreementðð)€to€pay€him€a€brokerage€commission€for€sales€of€the€nursery€stock.€€TheÐ ¬ü  ÐBrokerage€Agreement€was€also€signed€by€the€defendant€on€behalf€of€the€Foundation.€€The€plaintiffÐ ˜è  Ðalleged€that€although€he€arranged€a€sale€of€the€nursery€stock€by€the€Foundation€for€$2,250,000.00Ð „Ô  Ð(the€ð ðNursery€Stock€Sales€Contractðð),€the€Foundation€refused€to€pay€him.€€The€plaintiff€also€claimsÐ pÀ Ðto€be€entitled€to€$225,000€for€his€services€under€the€Brokerage€Agreement.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€alleged€that€the€Finderððs€Fee€Agreement,€the€Brokerage€Agreement€and€theÐ 4„ ÐNursery€Stock€Sales€Contract€were€all€negotiated€and€executed€by€defendant€Mezvinsky€and€H.Ð  p ÐNicholas€Johnson,€who€was€represented€to€be€president€of€the€Foundation,€and€that€he€performedÐ  \ Ðservices€in€reliance€upon€the€representations€and€promises€in€those€agreements.Ð øH ÐÌà  àMore€specifically,€the€plaintiff€alleged€that€the€defendant€and€Johnson€induced€him€to€signÐ Ð  Ðthe€agreements€with€no€intention€to€perform€them,€and€that€the€defendant€misrepresented€hisÐ ¼  Ðauthority€with€the€Foundation.€€He€alleged€that€the€defendantððs€promises€of€performance€ð ðwereÐ ¨ø Ðintentionally€and€deliberately€made€with€the€present€intention€not€to€compensate€the€plaintiff€for€theÐ ”ä Ðservices€he€performed€pursuant€to€said€contractsðð€or€in€the€alternative,€ð ðthe€defendant€.€.€.€deliberatelyÐ €Ð Ðand€intentionally€misrepresented€his€capacity€with€the€Foundationðð€because€he€was€not€theÐ l¼ Ðð ðchairmanðð€of€the€Foundation€and€ð ð€.€.€.€acted€in€his€individual€capacity€.€.€.ðð€€He€further€alleged€thatÐ X ¨ Ðthe€defendantððs€promises€of€performance€and€his€representations€as€to€his€relationship€with€theÐ D!” ÐFoundation€were€intentionally€and€deliberately€made€for€the€purpose€of€deceiving€him,€or,€in€theÐ 0"€  Ðalternative,€the€promises€of€performance€under€the€contracts€and€his€representations€as€to€hisÐ #l! Ðrelationship€with€the€Foundation€were€recklessly€and€negligently€made€without€regard€for€their€truthÐ $X" Ðor€falsity.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àIn€Count€II€the€plaintiff€alleges€that€the€Foundation€intended€to€perform€the€agreements,€butÐ Ì&"% Ðclaims€that€defendant€and€Johnson€ð ðdeliberately€and€intentionallyðð€conspired€to€breach€them,€andÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€the€defendant€and€Johnson€ð ðacted€in€concert€to€obtain€property€and€money€by€false€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðfraudulent€pretenses,€representations€and€promises.ððÐ )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àIn€Count€III,€the€plaintiff€alleges€that€the€ð ð[d]efendant€is€not€in€fact€an€agent€for€theÐ ° Ðâ âFoundation€and€.€.€.€acted€in€his€individual€capacity€.€.€.,ðð€and€that€he€breached€the€contracts.òòóó׃-×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×òòóóÐ œì ÐÌà  àIn€Count€IV,€the€plaintiff€alleges€that€the€defendant€violated€the€provisions€of€theÐ tÄ ÐRacketeering€and€Corrupt€Organizations€Act,€18€U.S.C.€sec.€1961,€òòet€seq.óóÐ `° ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€changed€lawyers€three€times€during€this€litigation,€and€each€filed€responsiveÐ 8 ˆ Ðpleadings.€€It€may€be€broadly€stated€that€the€defendant€denied€RICO€activity,€while€accusing€theÐ $ t Ðplaintiff€of€RICO€activity,€and€denied€personal€liability€because€the€plaintiffððs€contracts€were€withÐ  ` Ðthe€Foundation.׃Ü×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àThese€are€the€Statements€of€the€Issues€as€propounded€by€the€plaintiff€òòinóó€òòhaec€verba:óóÐ Ô$  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà0 Ø à1.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€charge€was€prejudicial€and€misled€the€juryÐ ¬ü  Ðregarding€the€agency€and€ratification€issues,€improperlyÐ ˜è  Ðtold€the€jury€what€to€find€concerning€a€crucial€issue€ofÐ „Ô  Ðmaterial€fact,€failed€to€comply€with€case€law€authority€reÐ pÀ ÐIn€Pari€Delicto€defense,€failed€to€include€defendantððsÐ \¬ Ðburden€and€level€of€proof,€was€inconsistent€with€theÐ H˜ Ðundisputed€evidence,€and€was€given€in€an€improperÐ 4„ Ðmanner€that€blindsided€the€plaintiff?Ð p0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à2.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€post€trial€actions€of€the€trial€judge€were€mostÐ øH Ðunreasonable€reflecting€abuse€of€discretion€in€denying€theÐ ä4 Ðplaintiff€opportunity€to€submit€an€effective€motion€for€aÐ Ð  Ðnew€trial,€aborting€plaintiffððs€Rule€18€and€Rule€60€motionsÐ ¼  Ðand€right€of€appeal,€and€discriminating€against€plaintiffððsÐ ¨ø Ðright€to€due€process,€equal€justice€and€right€of€appeal?Дä0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à3.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€loss€of€plaintiffððs€evidence,€and€failure€by€theÐ l¼ Ðtrial€judge€to€submit€that€evidence€before€the€jury,€by€theÐ X ¨ Ðtrial€judge€denied€plaintiff€a€fair€trial?ÐD!”0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à4.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€violated,€and€allowed€defendant€toÐ #l! Ðviolate,€his€own€order€and€Local€Rule€5.01?Ð$X"0 0  Їà0 Ø à5.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€in€reversing€his€earlier€rulingÐ ° Ðand€dismissing€plaintiffððs€1962(a)€RICO€claim?Ðœì0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à6.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€in€reversing€his€prior€Rule€56Ð tÄ Ðruling€and€dismissing€plaintiffððs€claim€to€a€fee€concerningÐ `° Ðthe€donation€of€the€Unisys€property?ÐL œ0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à7.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€in€denying€testimonialÐ $ t Ðevidence€from€plaintiffððs€witness€Perry€re€material€issuesÐ  ` Ðof€fact?Ðü L 0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à8.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€by€allowing€defendant€toÐ Ô$  Ðintroduce€and€pursue€evidence,€earlier€ruled€inadmissible,Ð À  Ðconcerning€alleged€prejudicial€statements€by€plaintiffððsÐ ¬ü  Ðcounsel?Иè 0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à9.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€in€denying€the€admission€ofÐ pÀ Ðevidence€of€party€admissions€and€documentary€evidenceÐ \¬ Ðreflecting€upon€the€defendantððs€credibility?ÐH˜0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à10.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€error€by€the€trial€judge€denied€plaintiffÐ  p Ðopportunity€to€develop€issues€on€appeal€from€the€Rule€51Ð  \ Ðconference€and€jury€instruction€draft?ÐøH0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à11.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€and/or€abused€his€discretionÐ Ð  Ðin€abandoning€jury€control€which€resulted€in€the€juryððsÐ ¼  Ðfailure€of€its€legal€duty?Шø0 0  ÐÌà0 Ø à12.à80 Ø X Ø X àWhether€the€trial€judge€erred€and/or€abused€his€discretionÐ €Ð Ðin€failing€to€properly€act€upon€plaintiffððs€motion€for€a€newÐ l¼ Ðtrial,€to€independently€reweigh€all€of€the€evidence€and€thenÐ X ¨ Ðdetermine€whether€it€preponderated€in€favor€of€or€againstÐ D!” Ðthe€verdict?Ð0"€ 0 0  ÐÒ°€ÒÒ°€ÒÌÌòòò òà@žž!ìàStandard€of€Reviewó óóóˆÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àFinding€of€fact€by€a€jury€in€civil€actions€shall€be€set€aside€only€if€there€is€no€material€evidenceÐ Ì&"% Ðto€support€the€verdict.€€Rule€13(d),€T.R.A.P.€€We€are€required€to€take€the€strongest€legitimate€viewÐ ¸'#& Ðof€the€evidence€favoring€the€prevailing€party,€discard€all€contrary€evidence,€allow€all€reasonableÐ ¤(ô#' Ðinferences€to€uphold€the€verdict€and€set€aside€the€verdict€only€when€there€is€no€material€evidence€toÐ )à$( Ðâ âsupport€it.€€òòWitter€vs.€Nesbitóó,€878€S.W.2d€116€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòScott€vs.€Jones€Bros.€Const.Ð |*Ì%) ÐCo.,óó€960€S.W.2d€589€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997);€òòHodges€vs.€S.€C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896€(Tenn.Ð ° Ð1992).Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àIn€reviewing€a€jury€verdict€it€is€not€the€prerogative€of€this€court€to€decide€what€weight€is€toÐ tÄ Ðbe€given€testimony.€€That€decision€is€exclusively€for€the€jury.€€Whether€the€court€agrees€with€theÐ `° Ðjuryððs€determination€of€an€issue€of€fact€is€immaterial.€€If€rational€evidence€is€present€on€either€sideÐ L œ Ðof€a€fact€issue€an€appellate€court€is€bound€by€the€juryððs€determination€of€such€fact,€òòPhillips€vs.€Pittsóó,Ð 8 ˆ Ð602€S.€W.€2d€246€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1980),€and€the€credibility€of€any€party€or€witness€is€within€theÐ $ t Ðprerogative€of€the€jury.€€This€court€is€not€at€liberty€to€reweigh€the€testimony.€€òòPullen€vs.€Textron,€Inc.óó,Ð  ` Ð845€S.W.2d€777€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).Ð ü L  ÐÌò òà@ÅÅ*ìàIó óˆÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àThis€issue€generally€assails€the€charge€as€misleading€the€jury€with€respect€to€(1)€the€agencyÐ ¬ü  Ðof€the€defendant,€and€(2)€by€instructing€the€jury€that€even€if€the€jury€found€that€the€defendantÐ ˜è  Ðmisrepresented€his€agency,€he€would€not€be€liable€if€it€found€that€the€Foundation€accepted€theÐ „Ô  Ðbenefits€of€the€contract.€€The€remaining€sub„issues€are€in€the€main€verbal€denunciations.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€responds€that€alleged€errors€in€the€charge€were€not€alleged€as€grounds€for€aÐ H˜ Ðnew€trial,€and€are€thus€beyond€appellate€reach,€since€in€ð ðall€jury€cases,€the€specific€issue€must€beÐ 4„ Ðincluded€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trial.ðð€€Rule€3(e),€T.R.A.P.;€òòTerry€vs.€Plateau€Elec.€Co„opóó.,€825Ð  p ÐS.W.2d€418€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àThe€grounds€asserted€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trial€[see,€Appendix€B]€are€non„conforming€butÐ ä4 Ðupon€consideration€of€the€unusual€posture€and€circumstances€of€this€case€we€conclude€that€neitherÐ Ð  Ðprocedural€nor€substantive€rules€will€suffer€if€we€address€the€thrust€of€the€plaintiffððs€argument.€€ToÐ ¼  Ðaccomplish€this,€an€overview€of€the€predicative€facts€will€be€helpful.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€says€that€he€is€entitled€to€two€distinct€finderððs€fees€for€two€donations€heÐ €Ð Ðoriginated:€(1)€the€Riverview€Nursery€Plants€donated€by€his€client,€Dr.€Walter€Harber,€in€SeptemberÐ l¼ Ð1992€with€an€ð ðagreed€valueðð€of€$2,837,088.80,€and€the€Unisys€property€donated€by€Sam€Grigsby€inÐ X ¨ ÐJanuary€1994€with€an€ð ðagreed€valueðð€of€$6,000,000.00.€€The€second€brokerage€agreement,€datedÐ D!” ÐMarch€1992,€provided€the€plaintiff€was€to€receive€10%€of€the€sales€price€of€the€aforementionedÐ 0"€  Ðnursery€stock€to€American€Nursery€Products€for€$2,250,000.00.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð #l! ÐÌà  àThe€various€defenses€asserted€by€the€defendant€included€the€rule€that€he€was€acting€as€agentÐ ô$D # Ðfor€a€disclosed€principal€and,€as€such,€was€not€liable€for€the€principal's€nonperformance.€€HeÐ à%0!$ Ðconceded€that€an€agent€can€be€liable€if€he€contracts€in€a€manner€contrary€to€his€instructions€andÐ Ì&"% Ðauthority,€but€only€if€his€principal€refuses€to€ratify€the€contract.€€He€also€asserted€that€the€plaintiffÐ ° Ðwas€òòin€pari€delictoóó€with€the€Foundation,€apparently€in€response€to€the€plaintiffððs€insistence€that€theÐ œì Ðdefendant€misrepresented€his€authority€in€furtherance€of€an€unlawful€scheme€„€RICO€„€to€defraud€theÐ ˆØ Ðplaintiff€of€his€fees€and€commission.òòòòóóóóÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àAt€this€juncture€we€note€the€convoluted€nature€of€the€evidence€in€this€case€which€apparentlyÐ L œ Ðrepulsed€the€jury.€€Keeping€in€mind€that€the€Federal€Court€action€resulted€in€a€judgment€for€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðplaintiff€against€the€Foundation,€the€plaintiff€was€clearly€hard€pressed€to€maintain€his€insistence,€inÐ $ t Ðthe€state€court,€that€the€defendant€was€also€liable€to€him€because€he€did€not€reveal€his€principal€„€theÐ  ` ÐFoundation€„€or€because€he€agreed€to€be€personally€bound.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àOn€January€23,€1992,€the€defendant׃2×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€sent€the€plaintiff€the€following€letter:Ð Ô$  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Ò"The€Foundation€for€Advancement,€Education€and€Employment€of€AmericanÐ ¬ü  ÐIndians€was€authorized€to€commence€business€on€December€15,€1976,€by€theÐ ˜è  ÐInternal€Revenue€Service€and€the€Department€of€the€U.€S.€Treasury€as€anÐ „Ô  Ðorganization€described€as€a€501€(c)(3),€with€an€employer€identification€numberÐ pÀ Ð510204431.€€Both€are€still€in€effect.Ð \¬ Ðà Ø àÌThe€Foundation€hereby€agrees€to€pay€you€and/or€your€designees€a€finderððs€fee€ofÐ 4„ Ðten€(10%)€percent€of€the€agreed€value€of€any€contribution€that€you€cause€theÐ  p ÐFoundation€to€receive€under€Article€VI,€section€1€of€the€Foundationððs€Articles€ofÐ  \ ÐIncorporation.ððÐ øH ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Ò€à  àOn€October€2,€1992,€Johnson€sent€the€following€letter€to€the€plaintiff:Ð Ð  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà8 Ø àð ðEnclosed€you€will€find€the€following:ШøØ Ø  ÐÌà8 Ø à1.€€Walter€Harber€and€David€Holtsclaw€contract.ЀÐØ Ø  ÐÌà8 Ø à2.€€Copy€of€the€Foundations€Articles€of€Incorporation.ÐX ¨Ø Ø  ÐÌà8 Ø à3.€€Information€package€of€our€Foundation.Ð0"€ Ø Ø  ÐÌà8 Ø àThis€is€to€further€assure€you€that€you€will€receive€your€10%€findersÐ $X" Ðfee€on€the€Harber€project,€also€10%€fee€for€selling€the€timber.Ðô$D #Ø Ø  Ðà8 Ø àÐ Ø Ø  Ðà8 Ø àFurther€you€will€receive€10%€on€any€donation€to€our€group€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðyou€originate.ððи'#&Ø Ø  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Ò€€à  àOn€March€23,€1992,€the€Foundation€and€the€plaintiff€entered€into€the€following€contract:Ð )à$( ЇÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø à"This€contract€made€and€entered€into€this€23òòrdóó€day€of€March,€1992,€by€andÐ ° Ðbetween€the€Foundation€for€Advancement,€Education€and€Employment€ofÐ œì ÐAmerican€Indians,€Party€of€the€First€Part,€and€Paull€Anderson,€2757€Kings€MillÐ ˆØ ÐPike,€Bristol,€Virginia,€24201,€Party€of€the€Second€Part.Ð tÄ ÐÌà Ø àWITNESSETH:€That€in€consideration€of€the€covenants€and€agreementsÐ L œ Ðhereinafter€contained€on€the€part€of€said€Party€of€the€Second€Part,€the€said€PartyÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€the€First€Part€does€agree€as€follows:Ð $ t ÐÌà Ø àThe€First€Party€has€acquired€the€nursery€stock€located€on€the€RiverviewÐ ü L  ÐNursery€in€Limestone,€Tennessee,€with€an€estimated€value€of€$2,837,088.00.Ð è 8  ÐÌà Ø àThe€First€Party€hereby€gives,€to€the€Second€Party€an€exclusive€salesÐ À  Ðcontract€of€ten€percent€(10%)€commission€of€the€monies€produced€by€theÐ ¬ü  Ðharvesting€and€sales€of€this€inventory.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà Ø àIf€the€First€Party€should€sell,€devise€or€otherwise€transfer€the€title€to€theÐ pÀ Ðpremises€such€transfer€shall€be€subject€to€the€provisions€of€this€contract.Ð \¬ ÐÌà Ø àIN€WITNESS€WHEREOF€the€above€named€parties€have€hereunto€set€theirÐ 4„ Ðhands€on€the€day€above€written€and€for€themselves,€their€heirs,€administrators€andÐ  p Ðassigns,€and€hereby€agree€to€do€the€full€performance€of€the€covenants€andÐ  \ Ðagreements€as€hereinabove€set€forth.ððÐ øH ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àIn€light€of€the€plain€language€of€these€instruments€it€is€not€surprising€that€the€Federal€CourtÐ Ð  Ðentered€judgment€against€the€Foundation,€keeping€in€mind,€as€it€were,€that€the€entire€factual€scenarioÐ ¼  Ðwas€not€presented,€as€we€have€seen.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThere€is€material€evidence€from€which€the€jury€could€have€found€the€following€facts€fromÐ €Ð Ðthe€evidence€presented:Ð l¼ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø àPlaintiff€is€€a€self€described€farmer,€businessman€and€a€business€consultant.€Ð D!” ÐHe€is€not€a€licensed€real€estate€broker.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà Ø àIn€September€or€October€1990,€plaintiff€met€Nicholas€Johnson,€whoÐ $X" Ðidentified€himself€as€the€president€of€the€Foundation,€a€charity€approved€by€theÐ ô$D # ÐInternal€Revenue€Service.€€Johnson€told€the€plaintiff€that€the€Foundation€wouldÐ à%0!$ Ðpay€a€fee€to€anyone€who€originated€a€donation.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà Ø àThe€plaintiff€managed€a€nursery€in€Virginia€for€Paul€Cipro.€€He,€withÐ ¤(ô#' ÐJohnson,€attempted€to€arrange€a€donation€from€Cipro€to€the€Foundation.€€He€alsoÐ )à$( Ðtried€to€interest€Larry€Dishner,€a€Kingsport€real€estate€agent,€in€the€nursery.€€TheÐ |*Ì%) Ðcontribution€of€the€Virginia€nursery€to€the€Foundation€was€never€completed,€andÐ h+¸&* Ðaccording€to€the€plaintiff,€the€deal€collapsed€sometime€in€February€or€March€1991.€Ð ° ÐAt€the€plaintiffððs€urging,€Dishner,€who€had€no€experience€in€nursery€management,Ð œì Ðformed€Green€Valley€Farms€to€buy€the€nursery€from€Andersonððs€client.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà Ø àWalter€Harber,€a€Johnson€City€orthodontist,€and€David€Holtsclaw€operatedÐ `° Ðthe€Riverview€Nursery€in€Limestone,€Tennessee.€€Harber€owned€the€real€estate.€Ð L œ ÐHe€and€Holtsclaw€owned€the€nursery€stock.€€Harber€and€Holtsclaw€wanted€to€sellÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€nursery,€including€the€real€estate,€for€a€price€of€$750,000.Ð $ t ÐÌà Ø àSometime€in€1991,€the€plaintiff€recommended€that€Harber€contribute€theÐ ü L  Ðnursery€to€the€Foundation€for€certain€tax€benefits.€€On€January€20,€1992,€HarberÐ è 8  Ðcontributed€the€plants€to€the€Foundation,€although€he€was€unaware€that€AndersonÐ Ô$  Ðhad€an€arrangement€with€Johnson€and€the€Foundation€to€receive€a€fee€for€theÐ À  Ðcontribution.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà Ø àThe€defendant,€at€Johnsonððs€request,€sent€the€letter€on€his€professionalÐ „Ô  Ðstationery€to€Anderson€on€January€23,€1992,€which€we€have€reproduced.Ð pÀ ÐÌà Ø àThe€plaintiff€told€Dishner€that€the€Internal€Revenue€Service€requiredÐ H˜ Ðappraisals€for€contributions€of€property€to€charitable€organizations.€Ð 4„ ÐRepresentatives€of€the€Virginia€Extension€Service€valued€the€nursery€stock€forÐ  p Ð$900,000.€€The€plaintiff€prepared€an€appraisal,€purportedly€based€on€the€VirginiaÐ  \ ÐExtension€Service€review,€which€valued€the€nursery€stock€at€$2,837,088€and€sentÐ øH Ðit€to€Dishner,€who€admitted€he€was€not€a€qualified€appraiser,€but€neverthelessÐ ä4 Ðcopied€the€appraisal€on€the€letterhead€of€Green€Valley€Farms.€€Dishner€then€sentÐ Ð  Ðthe€appraisal€to€the€plaintiff,€who,€in€turn€sent€it€to€Harber,€who€paid€Dishner€forÐ ¼  Ðthe€appraisal.€€Dishner€believed€that€the€values€were€based€on€the€judgment€of€theÐ ¨ø ÐVirginia€Extension€Service.€€Dishner€signed€IRS€Form€8283€for€Harber€whichÐ ”ä Ðreported€the€value€of€donated€property€to€the€Internal€Revenue€Service€as€$2.8Ð €Ð ÐMillion€based€on€the€appraisal€prepared€by€Anderson€and€signed€by€Dishner.€Ð l¼ ÐHarber€was€not€aware€of€the€fact€that€Anderson€had€written€the€appraisal€forÐ X ¨ ÐDishner.Ð D!” ÐÌà Ø àOn€March€23,€1992,€the€plaintiff€and€the€defendant,€on€behalf€of€theÐ #l! ÐFoundation,€signed€an€agreement€giving€Anderson€another€fee€if€he€òòsoldóó€theÐ $X" Ðnursery€stock€for€the€Foundation.€€The€agreement€provided€in€part,€as€we€haveÐ ô$D # Ðseen,€that€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÒp€ÒÒp€ÒThe€First€Party€[the€Foundation]€hereby€gives€the€Second€Party€[Anderson]Ð ¸'#& Ðan€exclusive€sales€contract€of€ten€percent€(10%)€commission€of€the€moniesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðproduced€by€the€harvesting€and€sales€of€the€inventory.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐÒ€pÒÒ€pÒà Ø àBy€letter€dated€March€31,€1992,€the€defendant€on€behalf€of€the€Foundation,Ð ° Ðâ âacknowledged€receipt€of€Harberððs€contribution.€€He€also€signed€a€Form€8283€onÐ œì Ðbehalf€of€the€Foundation€acknowledging€receipt€of€the€nursery€plants.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà Ø àHoltsclaw€objected€to€the€contribution€of€the€trees€to€the€Foundation.€TheÐ `° Ðdispute€was€resolved€and€the€contribution€completed€in€September€1992.€€TheÐ L œ ÐFoundation€agreed€to€pay€Holtsclaw€for€his€interest€in€the€nursery.€€On€OctoberÐ 8 ˆ Ð2,€1992,€Johnson€sent€a€letter€to€the€plaintiff€confirming€their€earlier€agreement.Ð $ t ÐÌà Ø àThe€plaintiff€then€purported€to€sell€the€trees€for€the€Foundation.€€AccordingÐ ü L  Ðto€his€testimony,€he€arranged€for€the€trees€to€be€brokered€through€a€longtimeÐ è 8  Ðacquaintance,€Judson€DeCell.€€Johnson,€for€the€Foundation,€and€DeCell€signed€anÐ Ô$  Ðagreement€dated€December€10,€1992.€€Although€the€agreement€recites€that€DeCellÐ À  Ðmade€a€down€payment€of€$100,000,€no€money€changed€hands.€€The€plaintiff€usedÐ ¬ü  Ða€part€of€his€claimed€commission€as€the€down€payment,€and€described€himself€asÐ ˜è  Ðthe€primary€broker€of€the€nursery€stock€and€DeCell€as€the€secondary€broker.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà Ø àThe€DeCell€contract€was€not€completed.€€The€Foundation€sold€the€trees€toÐ \¬ Ða€third€party,€Ben€Frizzell,€for€$550,000€with€Harber€ultimately€receiving€a€taxÐ H˜ Ðdeduction€of€$400,000.€The€plaintiff€claims€totalòò€feesóó€in€excess€of€$500,000€forÐ 4„ Ðthe€nursery€which€was€sold€for€$550,000.Ð  p ÐÌà Ø àThe€plaintiff€also€claims€a€$600,000€fee€on€the€transfer€of€the€Unisys€plantÐ øH Ðin€Bristol€to€the€Foundation€despite€evidence€of€all€principals€to€the€transfer€thatÐ ä4 Ðhe€played€no€part€in€the€transfer.€€This€claim€was€dismissed€prior€to€trial.Ð Ð  ÐÌà Ø àThe€jury€could€have€found€that€the€plaintiff€attempted€to€recover€a€feeÐ ¨ø Ðbased€on€his€inflated€appraisal€which€he€attempted€to€pass€off€as€the€work€ofÐ ”ä Ðanother,€and€rejected€his€claims.à8 8 àЀÐ8 8  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àThe€plaintiff€complains€of€this€portion€of€the€charge€as€being€inconsistent€with€the€evidence:Ð X ¨ ÐÒ€°ÒÒ€°ÒÌ"We€also€had€an€issue€of€agency€arise,€and€Iððm€going€to€now€charge€you€on€thisÐ 0"€  Ðcontract€theory,€the€Law€of€Agency€that€applies€to€this€case.€€The€defendantÐ #l! Ðalleges€he€was€an€agent€of€his€principal,€the€Indian€Foundation.€€The€defendantÐ $X" Ðcontends€that€he€acted€within€his€scope€of€authority€as€agent€of€the€IndianÐ ô$D # ÐFoundation.€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌIn€this€case€the€defendant€claims€he€was€acting€at€all€relevant€times€as€an€agent€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€Indian€Foundation.ððÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àThis€statement€by€the€Judge€was€merely€a€recitation€of€the€respective€theories.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðò òà@žž)ìàIIó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àThe€jury€was€instructed€that:Ð ˆØ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Ò"intentional€misrepresentation€in€RICO€involves€deception,€and€if€one€knows€theÐ `° Ðtruth€or€is€involved€in€the€deception,€he€is€not€defrauded.€€The€intentionalÐ L œ Ðmisrepresentation€brought€by€the€plaintiff€involves€fraud€and€deception.€€If€youÐ 8 ˆ Ðfind€that€the€plaintiff€was€involved€in€the€fraud€and€deception,€he€cannot€recoverÐ $ t Ðfrom€the€defendant€under€any€circumstance.ððÐ  ` ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àThe€jury€heard€evidence€that€the€plaintiff€òòtripledóó€the€value€initially€assigned€to€the€NurseryÐ è 8  Ðstock€by€the€Virginia€Extension€Service.€€These€inflated€values€were€forwarded€to€the€real€estateÐ Ô$  Ðbroker,€who€adopted€them€as€his€own€for€appraisal€purposes.€€The€jury€could€reasonably€have€foundÐ À  Ðthat€the€appraisal€was€the€handiwork€of€the€plaintiff.€€If€so,€an€element€of€fraud€appeared.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€was€the€prime€instigator€of€these€activities.€€He€persuaded€the€owner€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðnursery€to€give€it€to€the€Foundation;€he€negotiated€the€finderððs€fee;€he€prepared€the€inflated€appraisal;Ð pÀ Ðhe€was€òòpaid€a€fee€by€the€owner.óóÐ \¬ ÐÌà  àThis€record€consists€of€hundreds€of€pages€of€testimony€replete€with€accusations€of€fraudulentÐ 4„ Ðconduct€by€the€plaintiff,€by€the€Foundation,€its€Chairman€Johnson,€and€by€the€defendant.€€Many€ofÐ  p Ðthe€accusations€involved€criminal€conduct€designed€to€cheat€the€United€States€Treasury.€€We€see€noÐ  \ Ðreason€to€enlarge€upon€these€mutual,€splenetic€accusations.€Suffice€to€say€that€fraud€vitiates€allÐ øH Ðtransactions€and€the€court€will€not€lend€its€aid€in€furtherance€thereof.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€says€that€the€ð ðmindset€of€the€defendant€is€to€try€to€beat€and€cheat€anyone€heÐ ¼  Ðcanðð,€and€alleges€specific€instances€of€such€conduct.€€He€refers€to€the€defendantððs€ð ðshameful€recordððÐ ¨ø Ðwith€some€particularity,€and€to€ð ðhis€Foundation€and€crooked€ððgood€friendðð€and€convicted€fraud€felonÐ ”ä ÐH.€N.€Johnson.ðð€€The€defendant€counterattacked€with€the€òòIn€Pari€Delictoóó€defense.Ð €Ð Ðò òÌà@ww)ìàIIIó óˆÐ X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€next€insists€that€the€court€erroneously€charged€the€jury€that€the€defendant€couldÐ 0"€  Ðnot€be€held€liable€for€misrepresenting€his€authority€if€it€found€that€the€Foundation€had€accepted€theÐ #l! Ðbenefit€of€this€contract.€€The€plaintiff€argues€that€ratification€is€not€a€defense€where€the€agent€wasÐ $X" Ðguilty€of€fraud€and€misrepresentation.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àIt€is€well€settled€that€a€contract€with€a€known€agent€for€a€disclosed€principal€is€the€contractÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€principal€unless€circumstances€show€that€the€agent€intended€to€be€bound€or€assume€theÐ ¸'#& Ðcontractual€obligations.€€òòHolt€vs.€American€Progressive€Life€Insurance€Co.óó,€731€S.W.2d€923€Ð ¤(ô#' Ð(Tenn.Ct.€App.€1987).Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àIt€was€the€prerogative€of€the€jury€to€determine€from€all€of€the€evidence€whether€the€defendantÐ ° Ðâ âhad€agreed€to€be€personally€bound,€or€whether€he€had€committed€such€fraud€as€to€render€himselfÐ œì Ðpersonally€liable.Ð ˆØ ÐÌò òà@}})ìàIVˆÐ `° ÐÌó óà  àThe€plaintiff€next€argues€that€the€charge€ð ðtold€the€jury€what€to€find€concerning€a€crucial€issueÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€material€fact€regarding€the€defendantððs€òòin€pari€delicto€óódefense,ðð€pointing€out€that€in€his€openingÐ $ t Ðstatement€defense€counsel€characterized€the€plaintiffððs€claimòò€as€fraudulently€in€concert€with€theÐ  ` ÐFoundationóó€and€the€defendant,€and€stressing€the€point€throughout€the€trial.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àCounsel€for€the€defendant€dealt€with€this€matter€rather€harshly,€as€was€his€prerogative.€€HeÐ Ô$  Ðargued€thatÐ À  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Ò".€.€.€if€you€find,òò€as€the€Judge€is€going€to€tell€youóó,€that€Paull€Anderson€participated,Ð ˜è  Ðknew€about€it,€then€obviously€Paull€Anderson€should€not€benefit€from€somethingÐ „Ô  Ðthat€wasnððt€there€in€the€first€place.€.€.ðð€€(Emphasis€supplied.)à ˜ àÐ pÀ ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àWe€agree€with€plaintiff€that€this€argument€was€inappropriate.€It€is€not€permissible€to€predictÐ H˜ Ðto€the€jury€what€the€trial€judge€will€charge.€€òòZang€v.€Leonardóó,€643€S.W.2d€657€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð 4„ Ð1982).€€The€court€charged:Ð  p ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°ÒIntentional€misrepresentation€in€RICO€involves€deception,€and€if€one€knows€theÐ øH Ðtruth€or€is€involved€in€the€deception,€he€is€not€defrauded.€€The€intentionalÐ ä4 Ðmisrepresentation€brought€by€the€plaintiff€involves€fraud€and€deception.€€If€youÐ Ð  Ðfind€that€the€plaintiff€was€involved€in€the€fraud€and€deception,€he€cannot€recoverÐ ¼  Ðfrom€the€defendant€under€any€circumstances.Ð ¨ø ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àThere€is€nothing€in€the€instruction€to€indicate€ð ðthat€Paull€Anderson€participated,€knew€aboutÐ €Ð Ðit€.€.€.ðð€€€The€charge€is€a€correct€statement€of€the€law,€and€in€no€way€does€it€infringe€upon€the€provinceÐ l¼ Ðof€the€jury.€€As€it€developed,€the€Judge€did€not€charge€as€predicted€by€Counsel.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àWe€have€studied€the€charge€in€its€entirety.€€It€is€thirty„five€pages€long€and€runs€the€gamut.€Ð 0"€  ÐWe€find€nothing€in€it€to€justify€a€reversal€of€this€case,€including€the€argument€that€the€court€modifiedÐ #l! Ðthe€charge€without€affording€the€parties€an€opportunity€to€review€the€modified€version.€€In€thisÐ $X" Ðconnection,€the€plaintiff€argues€that€the€modification€ð ðthe€intentional€misrepresentation€brought€byÐ ô$D # Ðthe€plaintiff€involves€fraud€and€deceptionðð€was€so€subtle€it€went€undetected€and€its€effect€was€notÐ à%0!$ Ðconsidered€until€after€his€motion€for€a€new€trial€was€denied.€The€Rule€59€motion€addressing€thisÐ Ì&"% Ðissue€was€not€appropriate.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àAs€heretofore€noted,€one€of€the€plaintiffððs€theories€of€recovery€was€an€allegation€that€theÐ )à$( Ðâ âdefendant€engaged€in€RICO€activities.€€The€Chancellorððs€jury€instructions€included€a€comprehensiveÐ |*Ì%) Ðexposition€of€RICO,€but€did€not€include€a€charge€specifically€directed€to€section€1962(a)€of€whichÐ ° Ðthe€plaintiff€complains.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€difficulty€with€this€argument€is€to€be€found€in€the€fact€that€the€1962(a)€claim€wasÐ tÄ Ðdismissed€on€summary€judgment,€and€hence€was€not€before€the€jury.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€complains€that€the€òòin€pari€delicto€óódefense€was€inapplicable,€that€it€was€assertedÐ 8 ˆ Ðtoo€broadly,€that€the€Court€erred€in€failing€to€charge€the€jury€respecting€the€burden€of€proof,€and€thatÐ $ t Ðthe€Court€erred€in€charging€the€jury€that€òòin€pari€delictoóó€was€a€valid€defense€to€a€civil€action€allegingÐ  ` ÐRICO€violations.€€We€will€discuss€these€complaints€of€error€generally.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àFirst,€the€Chancellor€did€not€allude€to€the€òòin€pari€delictoóó€defense€except€to€the€extentÐ Ô$  Ðpreviously€noted€with€respect€to€fraud€and€deception,€a€correct€statement€of€the€law.€€Secondly,€theòòÐ À  Ðin€pari€delicto€óódefense€was€not€objected€to.€€Thirdly,€we€do€not€find€anywhere€in€the€charge€that€theÐ ¬ü  ÐChancellor€instructed€the€jury€as€claimed€by€the€plaintiff.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àIn€any€event€any€asserted€errors€in€the€instructions€were€clearly€harmless€in€light€of€all€theÐ pÀ Ðevidence€in€the€case.€€òòChilds€vs.€Roane€County€Bd.€of€Educ.óó,€929€S.W.2d€364€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).Ð \¬ ÐÌò òà@¤¤*ìàVˆÐ 4„ ÐÌó óà  àThe€plaintiff€next€argues€that€ð ðthe€post„trial€actions€of€the€trial€judge€were€unreasonable,Ð  \ Ðprejudicial€and€reflected€abuse€of€discretion,€violated€the€rules,€laws,€and€constitution€of€Tennessee.ðð€Ð øH ÐThe€lack€of€specificity€precludes€consideration€of€this€argument.Ð ä4 ÐÌò òà@}})ìàVIˆÐ ¼  Ðó óÌà  àThe€plaintiff€next€argues€that€the€ð ðtrial€judge€error€resulted€in€the€loss€of€the€plaintiffððsÐ ”ä Ðevidence€which€should€have€reached€the€jury.ðð€€This€issue€was€not€raised€in€the€motion€for€a€newÐ €Ð Ðtrial,€and€cannot€be€considered.€€Rule€3(a)€T.R.A.P.Ð l¼ ÐÌà@VV)ìàò òVIIó óˆÐ D!” ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€next€argues€that€the€court€erred€in€dismissing€his€RICO€claim,€which€alleges€theÐ #l! Ðdefendant€violated€28€U.€S.€C.€ðð€1962:Ð $X" ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òððò ò€€ó ó1962ò ò.€€ó óProhibited€activitiesÐ à%0!$ ÐÌ(a)€€€€It€shall€be€unlawful€for€any€person€who€has€received€any€income€derived,Ð ¼' #& Ðdirectly€or€indirectly,€from€a€pattern€of€racketeering€activity€or€through€collectionÐ ¨(ø#' Ðof€an€unlawful€debt€in€which€such€person€has€participated€as€a€principal€within€theÐ ”)ä$( Ðmeaning€of€section€2,€title€18,€United€States€Code,€to€use€or€invest,€directly€orÐ €*Ð%) Ðindirectly€any€part€of€such€income,€or€the€proceeds€of€such€income,€in€acquisitionÐ l+¼&* Ðof€any€interest€in,€or€the€establishment€or€operation€of,€any€enterprise€which€isÐ ° Ðengaged€in,€or€the€activities€of€which€affect,€interstate€or€foreign€commerce.€€AÐ œì Ðpurchase€of€securities€on€the€open€market€for€purposes€of€investment,€and€withoutÐ ˆØ Ðthe€intention€of€controlling€or€participating€in€the€control€of€the€issuer,€or€ofÐ tÄ Ðassisting€another€to€do€so,€shall€not€be€unlawful€under€this€subsection€if€theÐ `° Ðsecurities€of€the€issuer€held€by€the€purchaser,€the€members€of€his€immediateÐ L œ Ðfamily,€and€his€or€their€accomplices€in€any€pattern€or€racketeering€activity€or€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcollection€of€an€unlawful€debt€after€such€purchase€do€not€amount€in€the€aggregateÐ $ t Ðto€one€percent€of€the€outstanding€securities€of€any€one€class,€and€do€not€confer,Ð  ` Ðeither€in€law€or€in€fact,€the€power€to€elect€one€or€more€directors€of€the€issuer.Ð ü L  Ðà Ø àà 0 àÌ(b)€€€€€It€shall€be€unlawful€for€any€person€through€a€pattern€of€racketeering€activityÐ Ô$  Ðor€through€collection€of€an€unlawful€debt€to€acquire€or€maintain,€directly€orÐ À  Ðindirectly,€any€interest€in€or€control€of€any€enterprise€which€is€engaged€in,€or€theÐ ¬ü  Ðactivities€of€which€affect,€interstate€or€foreign€commerce.Ð ˜è  ÐÌ(c)€€€€It€shall€be€unlawful€for€any€person€employed€by€or€associated€with€anyÐ pÀ Ðenterprise€engaged€in,€or€the€activities€of€which€affect,€interstate€or€foreignÐ \¬ Ðcommerce,€to€conduct€or€participate,€directly€or€indirectly,€in€the€conduct€of€suchÐ H˜ Ðenterpriseððs€affairs€through€a€pattern€of€racketeering€activity€or€collection€ofÐ 4„ Ðunlawful€debt.Ð  p ÐÌ(d)€€€€It€shall€be€unlawful€for€any€person€to€conspire€to€violate€any€of€the€provisionÐ øH Ðof€subsections€(a),€(b),€or€(c)€of€this€section.Ð ä4 ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àWhether€a€civil€action€for€damages€alleging€RICO€violations€may€be€filed€in€a€state€court€isÐ ¼  Ðnot€an€issue.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€insisted,€and€the€trial€court€agreed,€that€the€complaint€failed€to€allege€withÐ €Ð Ðparticularity€the€requisite€racketeering€activity.€€The€claim€must€be€pleaded€with€the€sameÐ l¼ Ðparticularity€that€is€required€in€the€pleading€of€fraud.€€òòTaylor€v.€Bear€Stearns€&€Co.óó,€572€F.€Supp.Ð X ¨ Ð667€(N.€D.€Ga.€1983).€€A€generalized€accusation€of€racketeering,€or€the€perpetuation€of€fraud,€is€notÐ D!” Ðsufficient;€specificity€€must€show€that€crimes€were€committed.€€òòBache€Halsey€Stuart€Shields€Inc.€v.Ð 0"€  ÐTracy€Collins€Bank€and€Trust€Co.óó,€558€F.€Supp.€1042€(D.€Utah€1983).€€The€thrust€of€the€complaintÐ #l! Ðalleges€that€the€Foundation€and€Johnson€maintain€control€of€and€operate€the€Foundation€through€aÐ $X" Ðpattern€of€racketeering€activity.€€This€assertion€is€merely€conclusory€and€falls€far€short€ofÐ ô$D # Ðparticularizing€criminal€conduct.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌò òà@//(ìàVIIIˆÐ ¸'#& Ðó óÌà  àThe€plaintiff€next€argues€that€the€court€erred€in€dismissing€his€action€to€recover€a€feeÐ )à$( Ðð ðconcerning€the€donation€of€the€Unisys€property.ððÐ |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àSimply€stated,€the€Unisys€property€was€purchased€by€Sam€Grigsby€in€May€1993.€€He€donatedÐ ° Ðthis€property€to€the€Foundation€in€January€1994,€and€the€Foundation€sold€it€to€Exide€Corp.,€on€theÐ œì Ðsame€day.€€The€plaintiff€concedes€that€he€had€no€role€in€the€sale€of€the€property;€rather,€he€argues€thatÐ ˆØ Ðhis€involvement€was€limited€to€ð ða€singular€distinct€role€concerning€the€Unisys€property€donation€wasÐ tÄ Ðto€identify,€ððoriginate,ðð€the€possible€donor,€Grigsby,€to€Johnson.ððÐ `° ÐÌà  àThe€trial€judge€dismissed€this€claim€principally€owing€to€the€fact€that€the€plaintiff€was€notÐ 8 ˆ Ða€licensed€agent€or€broker,€and€that€T.C.A.€ðð€62„13„105€precludes€his€recovery€of€a€commission€inÐ $ t Ðthe€sale.€€See,€òòBusiness€Brokerage€Centre€vs.€Dixonóó,€874€S.W.2d€1€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€plaintiffÐ  ` Ðargues€that€his€finderððs€fee€agreement€is€not€within€the€ambit€of€T.C.A.€ðð€62„13„105,€and€that€he€doesÐ ü L  Ðnot€seek€a€commission€on€the€òòsale€óóof€the€Unisys€property.€€He€insists€that€he€ð ðoriginatedðð€theÐ è 8  Ðdonation€of€the€property€to€the€Foundation,€and€such€act€was€within€the€scope€of€his€contract.€€Hence,Ð Ô$  Ðhe€argues€that€the€jury€should€have€been€allowed€to€consider€the€issue.Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€verdict€settled€the€issue€of€the€defendantððs€personal€liability€in€this€case.€€We€find€noÐ ˜è  Ðevidence€in€this€record€which€would€fasten€liability€upon€the€defendant.€€The€contracts€upon€whichÐ „Ô  Ðthis€litigation€is€based€clearly€indicate€that€it€is€the€Foundation,€and€not€the€defendant,€who€is€theÐ pÀ Ðcontractor,€and€there€the€matter€ends.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àWe€have€considered€the€remaining€issues€and€conclude€that€for€lack€of€specificity,€orÐ 4„ Ðrelevance,€or€non„inclusion€in€the€motion€for€a€new€trial,€none€of€them€need€be€considered.Ð  p ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€collection€of€costsÐ øH Ðbelow.€€Costs€of€appeal€are€adjudged€against€the€plaintiff,€Paull€Anderson,€€and€his€sureties.Ð ä4 ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHOUSTON€M.€GODDARD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÐ €Ð Ð