WPCV UxWJaLA-#:mNl1dP,0NTR6.5hF`QNTîMColHݴŃ5D5RVVf^Ɗ'J%檍{-O0@#~hMo\TXeI iL?9-ӝx-Z%s/| Lֺ@wNe?2Tjͫ|meGw_X:"]bUaB"]'[ یg #`=RE (D>2t3NsSD B p镊:kdiZQƀr ;Dv.!LxqHG?Uߩ0܀! 9JEDөΜ#V3&r%è K×Nc$z,ϥ9\u @K ლjG b#\ % UN# 0q UN ,G s zh^ w 0D}C4 N.E0 m22222222222222222222222bIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 0QQQQ B<< 0Y D5 D-2 0K__ AS 0 0Dg AHP LaserJet 4Si,,,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular " RX$      2    _ԀItappearsthattheinformationaroseduringasupplementaldepositionofTonyCarricktakenonMarch,3,  _1994._  RX$      3    _ԀTheAppellantshaveputforthanissueregardingthequestionofwhetherTonyCarrickhasmadeconflicting  statementsduringthependencyofthiscase.Wedonotbelieveourconsiderationofthatissuewill,inanyway,affect x theoutcomeofthiscase.EvenifweassumethatTonyCarrickmadestatementsregardinghisfathersestatewhich @ turnedouttobefalse,weareunabletoconcludethatthese falsestatementsweremadewiththeintenttodefraud,as X opposedtobeingmeremistakesderivingfromalackofknowledge. 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~ )L  RX$      1    _ԀTheservicesallegedtohavebeenperformedcanbecharacterizedasgeneralhousekeepingchores.(#$  0  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5~(ʠ b3|xU- -(|G2X$ !.8dd8         0   d(|3 $ !.8dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3 $ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _  8XXdd8  @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE# #Ԉ ,   MARCH2000Session X XX #XX#_EWIN_ԀBUSH,etal.v.TONYWESLEYCARRICKXX   ` @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforBedfordCounty  h @@No.17,949;TheHonorable_Tyrus_ԀH.Cobb,Chancellor  X @@*AV) ` dE<` A (  @@TTNo.M199901236_COA_ԄR3CVFiledAugust9,_2000_ '  AV) ` dE<` A      XXXXThiscaseinvolvestheallegedfraudulenttransferoftheproceedsfromacertificateofdeposit.In  thetrialcourt,theplaintiffssoughttheimpositionofaconstructivetrustoverimprovementsto  propertybuiltwiththefunds.TheChanceryCourtofBedfordCountyruledthattheplaintiffshad  failedtocarrytheirburdenofproofandrenderedjudgmentinfavorofthedefendant.#XXXX##XX#XX z  Tenn.R.App.P.3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmed  V   #X*#XX.AlanE.Highers,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichFarmer,J.,andLillard,J., 6 joined. &v Allen_Shoffner_,_Shelbyville_,forAppellants V TamraL.Smith,_Shelbyville_,forAppellee 6  OPINION #XX #XX  #XX #XX  XXXX_Ewin_ԀBushandWilliamGibsonappealfromthejudgmentoftheChanceryCourtofBedfordCounty. !  Forthereasonsstatedherein,weaffirmthetrialcourtdecision. "!   I.FactsandProceduralHistory  j$#     Thenamedplaintiffsinthiscase,_Ewin_ԀH.BushandWilliamF.Gibson( Appellants),are B&!% thecoadministratorsoftheestateof_Lonnie_ԀMaeLane.Thedefendant,TonyWesleyCarrick .'~"& ( Defendant),wastheadministratoroftheestateofHarveyWesleyCarrick.Thedefendantisalso (j#' thesonofHarveyCarrick. )V$(   FromJanuary5,1978untilJuly9,1985,_Lonnie_ԀMaeLaneresidedinthehomeofHarvey *.&* Carrick.Mr.CarrickdiedintestateonMarch29,1987,andtheDefendantwassubsequently +'+ appointedadministratoroftheestate.OnJune8,1987,_Lonnie_ԀMaeLanefiledaclaimagainstthe ,(, estateofHarveyCarrickallegingthatshehadrenderedpersonalservicesforhimduringthetimeshe -(- residedinhishome.   #  1      ׀OnApril23,1991,afteranevidentiaryhearing,theChanceryCourtofBedford  Countyawarded_Lonnie_ԀM.Laneajudgmentagainsttheestateintheamountof$19,500.     `   OnJune18,1991,theDefendantfiledaNoticeofInsolvencyintheestateofHarveyCarrick, t andthecourtsubsequentlydeclaredtheestateinsolvent.OnJune18,1992,theadministratorsof ` Ms.LanesestatefiledacomplaintagainstTonyCarrickinhisindividualcapacityandas L  administratorofhisfathersestate.Thecomplaintsoughttosetasidecertainconveyancesofland 8  fromHarveyCarricktoTonyCarrickwhich,theplaintiffsclaimed,hadrenderedtheestateofHarvey $ t Carrickinsolvent.Thetrialcourteventuallydismissedthecomplaint,findingthattheplaintiffshad  ` failedtoestablishbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethatHarveyCarrickhadactualintentto  L  defraudhiscreditorsorthatanyoftheconveyancesrenderedhiminsolvent.Thatdecisionwas  8  subsequentlyaffirmedonappeal. $    Atsomepointduringthependencyoftheoriginalcase,informationaroseregardinga   certificateofdepositattheFirstNationalBankin_Shelbyville_,Tennessee.X  #  2      ׀Thecertificateof   deposit,intheamountof$37,254.02,wasajointaccount,heldinthenamesof_H.W._ԀCarrickand/or   TonyCarrick.OnMarch,8,1984,TonyCarrickcashedthecertificateandusedthefundsforthe p constructionofahomeonlandpreviouslyconveyedtohimbyhisfather. \   OnJune3,1994,almosttwoyearsaftertheoriginalcomplaintwasfiled,theplaintiffsmoved 4 toamendthecomplainttoallegethatthetransferoffundsfromthecertificateofdepositrendered  p theestateinsolvent.Thetrialcourtdeniedthemotiontoamend,andtheCourtofAppealsaffirmed  \ thataspectofthetrialcourtsruling,stating: H 8   ` Itappearsthat,duringthetrial,theexistenceofthecertificateofdepositwas   consideredrelevantonlyonthequestionofwhetherdeceasedwasrenderedinsolvent   bytheconveyancesofrealestatementionedinthecomplaint.Theefforttocharge  thedefendantwithconversionofthecertificateofdeposittohisownusecameasan  afterthoughtsixmonthslater.   Bushv.Carrick,1995WL681181(Tenn.Ct.App.,Nov.17,1995). l   Thecomplaintgivingrisetothepresentappealallegedthattheproceedsofthecertificateof D! deposithadbeenfraudulentlyconveyedtoTonyCarrickandthatthetransferofthosefundshad 0"  renderedHarveyCarricksestateinsolvent.Amotionforsummaryjudgmentwasfiledonbehalf #l! ofTonyCarrickandgrantedbythetrialcourtonJuly12,1996.Thatdecisionwasappealedtothe $X" TennesseeCourtofAppealsfortheMiddleSectionofTennessee.Thecourtofappeals,onApril $D #  30,1997,vacatedtheorderofthetrialcourtgrantingTonyCarricksmotionforsummaryjudgment %0!$ andremandedthecasetothetrialcourt.Bushv.Carrick,1997WL210863(Tenn.Ct.App.,April  30,1997).     Uponremand,thecasewasheardintheChanceryCourtofBedfordCountyonMay20, t 1999.Thecourtfoundthattheplaintiffshadnotcarriedtheirburdenofprooftoestablishthata ` fraudulentconveyancewasmadeinregardstothecertificateofdeposit.Additionally,thecourt L  determinedthattheconveyancehadnotcausedtheestatetobecomeinsolvent.Thetrialcourt 8  enteredjudgmentforthedefendant,andthisappealfollowed. $ t   II.LawandAnalysis   L      Thiscasehasalongandcomplexhistory.Ourconsiderationoftheissuespresentedinthis $  appealconstitutesthethirdtripthroughtheappellateprocessfortheseparties.Althoughthefacts   ofthecasemaybecomplex,theresolutionofthepresentdisputeisnotso.Theappellanthas   presentedfourissuesonappeal,butweconsiderallofthoseissuestobesubsumedbythesingle   questionofwhetherthetransferofthefundsfromthecertificateofdepositamountedtoafraudulent   transfer.  #  3      ׀Sincewefindtheanswertothatquestiontobeno,weneednotdelveanyfurther. p   Asaninitialmatter,wenotethatthereappearstobelittle,ifany,evidencethatHarvey H Carrickeverhadanyactualintenttodefraudhiscreditors.WebelievetheAppellantsrecognizethis 4 factsinsofarastheyciteto_T.C.A._Ԁ663305asthebasisforfindingthattheconveyanceatissue  p inthepresentcasewasfraudulent.Thatsectionprovidesthat [_e]very_Ԁconveyancemadeandevery  \ obligationincurredbyapersonwhoisorwillbetherebyrenderedinsolventisfraudulentasto H creditorswithoutregardtosuchperson'sactualintent,iftheconveyanceismadeortheobligation 4 isincurredwithoutafairconsideration.Tenn.Code.Ann.663305.Underthissection,the   Appellantscontendthatthetransferoftheproceedsfromthecertificateofdepositwasfraudulent   irrespectiveofHarveyCarricksactualintent.    WhilewedonotnecessarilydisagreewiththeAppellantsreadingofthestatute,wemust  disagreewiththeinferencestheAppellantsdrawfromthefacts.Thestatutespeaksintermsofa l conveyancebeingfraudulentasto creditors.Atthetimethecertificateofdepositwasconveyed, X  Ms.Lanewasnotacreditor.Herclaimforservicesrenderedwasnotfileduntil1987,somethree D! yearsafterthecertificateofdepositwascashedoutbyTonyCarrick,andherclaimwasnotreduced 0"  tojudgmentuntil1991,sevenyearsaftertheconveyance.AsMs.Lanewasnotacreditoratthetime #l! oftheconveyance,wequestionwhether_T.C.A._Ԁ663305isapplicable.Inthisregard,wequote, $X"  withapproval,thestatementofthetrialcourt: $D # 8   ` Idontbelievetherewasaclearprobableliabilityastowhathehadorwhat   heowed,norwasthisanexistingdebtatthetimeofthetransfer,nordoesitappear  thattherewasanyindicationthattherewouldbeaclaimoradebtsothatthere  wasntanyintentorbeliefonhispartthatdebtswouldaccruesohecouldtransfer t thesepropertiestokeepthemoutofthehandsofcreditors.`       Werecognizethat_T.C.A_Ԁ663307appliestofuturecreditors.However,thatsection 8  requiresthatthetransferorhaveanintentorbeliefthatfuturedebtswillexceedthetransferor's $ t ability.Evenifweweretoassume,_arguendo_,thatHarveyCarrickwasawareofthedebttoMs.  ` Lane,theAppellantshavemadenoshowingoftherequisiteintentorbeliefonthepartofHarvey  L  Carricksoastomake_T.C.A_Ԁ663307applicable.  8    Pursuantto_T.C.A._Ԁ66-3-302,thetestforinsolvencyiswhether thepresentfairsalable   valueoftheperson'sassetsislessthantheamountthatwillberequiredtopaytheprobableliability   onsuchperson'sexistingdebtsastheybecomeabsoluteandmatured.Thereisevidenceinthe   recordthatHarveyCarrickhadotherassetsatthetimeoftheconveyanceatissue,includinganother   certificateofdepositwithaprincipalbalanceofapproximately$20,000.Therefore,theAppellants p havenotshownthatHarveyCarrickbecameinsolventduetotheconveyancepresentlyatissue. \ Havingfailedinthatregard,webelievethetrialcourtwascorrectinconcludingthattheAppellants H failedtocarrytheirburdenofproof. 4   Finally,theAppelleehasaskedustodeclarethatthisappealisfrivolousandawarddamages  \ pursuantto_T.C.A._Ԁ27-1-122.Weareunabletosaythatthisappealwasundertakenforanyreason H whichwouldsupportourfindingittobefrivolous.WearealsounabletosaythattheAppellants 4 argumentsweretotallydevoidofmerit.Whilethetrialcourtsdecisionwasultimatelythecorrect   one,thatfactisnotsufficienttorendertheappealfrivolous.   Ѐ   `        Conclusion       Fortheaforementionedreasons,weaffirmthetrialcourtdecision.Costsofthisappeal l aretaxedtotheAppellants,_Ewin_ԀBushandWilliamGibson,forwhichexecutionmayissueif X  necessary. D!    0"  Ѐ   `     h  #l!    $X" ̀#XXXXs ##XXH #XX %0!$    `     h     ___________________________________ )$(    `     h     ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE