ÿWPC\ \kí’=[‘=J‘Œ¡ÑœŒµw«†™•¥4öÇ7\îÜ/j‰±>w©ÎÝ5æa¡›«&o´ÚV]‰„ÿ¨Œ»÷ÚÍœ¦ߢÜ)± N)„˜IH‘#æçÈ(’‹=Ç÷^‹ú ¤Jf·³mh4iB‡Î9öHÙ\俆ÌG±eß=­ÈUKï…(¢Ê´&ºRAºx^á©“Rnî‚òtúoAy g›pƵ›Øf4ÝÕ“‘‰2 =µÉïEnöL5ý)…é˜A½ÏvÚãªü¼›³M4ŒÞ\ˆl¦¨ÆºÊ~…Š*ÑNóUšˆÎmOØ”§®ÕÍ$ÖS™ÂÈ) O[˜-ì±AÖˆÁeQ,”° ¾÷/h… [ØúÜ„Õ]•Uœ$œ™¿ÉÞv+ÞDîšQ¥Z¥‚i4I™þçoǹϥ 'K¡äd¿M¼x²/vçî”YÐmØþ€1”O mz¨ÿ/J!«cl³¢$g{·ò§?‹°#ãˆß'gUgÆeQͨ±aD§‹”ùñÉJ¹ÆvÆ# Íí\fš €4¾W´Øä”+–›©kZ¼>! IL+uXÚÏ$›í?ó.éÝÍkF-ZË[ÄÅ{ƒ™íuŸqWi‰#5éâ°é2 ˜àb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöw D4Nb zqÒë½ m¿ VÖ #É, Æõ Æ» ÆÆG# N0 0D2vEvvv×xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxbOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0ëWWWW BBB 0¤_ D5 D-8 0Kee AS°Æ 0¤É 0Dm A«±»œ.Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular=ƒ.ê:i¢×+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ DeloresClendellCoburnCentre˜\\IB01S04\CLERKKNOXÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 Ý ƒRÄX$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô³]ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€plaintiff€was€awarded€default€judgments€against€defendants€Robert€Charles€Coburn,€Sr.€and€Ô_ÔGarvisÔ_ÔÐ ° Ðð ðSonnyðð€Ô_ÔWooleyÔ_Ô,€and€there€were€default€judgments€awarded€to€the€Walkers€and€the€church€against€Coburn€and€Ô_ÔWooleyÔ_Ô.€Ð tÄ ÐNone€of€these€judgments€are€before€us€on€this€appeal.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó öÝ ƒRð”$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôªñò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€courtððs€memorandum€opinion,€incorporated€by€reference€into€its€judgment,€includes€the€following:Ð ° ÐÌà  àà8 ` àThe€Court€expressly€finds€and€adopts€as€its€finding€[sic]€of€fact€the€PlaintiffððsÐ 8ˆ Ðproposed€finding€[sic]€of€fact€filed€with€the€Clerk€.€.€.€.€It€is€detailed€and€completeÐ üL Ðand€constitutes€an€accurate€accounting€of€the€facts€of€this€case.ÐÀ` x` x ÐÌòòSee€óóTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€52.01.€€òòSee€alsoóó€ò òòòÔ_ÔDelevanÔ_Ô„Delta€Corp.€v.€Robertsóóó ó,€611€S.W.2d€51,€53€(Tenn.€1981)€(ð ðFindingsÐ H ˜ Ðprepared€by€the€trial€judge€which€represent€his€independent€labor€are€preferable,€however€we€do€not€disapprove€of€party„Ð  ^ Ðprepared€findings.€.€.€.€€We€wish€to€point€out€that€before€adopting€findings€prepared€by€counsel,€the€trial€judge€shouldÐ Ò " Ðcarefully€examine€them€to€establish€that€they€accurately€reflect€his€views€and€conclusions,€and€not€those€of€counsel.ðð).€Ð – æ  ÐWe€are€satisfied€that€Judge€Young€complied€with€this€mandate. ÍÝ ƒRð”$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôªñò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAll€of€these€individuals€were€business€associates€of€the€Walkers€and/or€Coburn.- ù-(|G2ÄX$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ý»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô³]ò»»Ô d(|3{$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ý»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3{$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ý»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ý»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ý»»»ÔÑ8€NXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÜÝÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼Ý»îîÜ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓFebruary€10,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XNX»¼ÝÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ý»XXNö#ÔÔ_ÔCHILHOWEEÔ_Ô€TRAILER€SALES,€INCòò.óó€v.€Ð úJ ÐINTERNATIONAL€CHRISTIAN€CHURCH,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XNX»¼ÝÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€L„12196€€€€€€W.€Dale€Young,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌññFILED€APRIL€29,€Ô_Ô2003ññÔ_ÔÐ Ò"  Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2002„00901„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€Ð ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€a€suit€to€collect€deficiencies€on€six€retail€installment€contracts.€€These€deficiencies€resultedÐ ŒÜ Ðfollowing€the€repossession€and€sale€of€òòóósix€motor€homes,€part€of€the€collateral€for€the€obligationsÐ xÈ Ðrepresented€by€the€contracts.€€The€motor€homes€had€been€originally€sold€ð!ð€ostensibly€to€an€entityÐ d´ Ðidentified€as€International€Christian€Church€(ð ðthe€churchðð)€ð!ð€by€Ô_ÔChilhoweeÔ_Ô€Trailer€Sales,€Inc€(ð ðtheÐ P  Ðplaintiffðð).€€The€trial€court€held€that€Charles€Clendell€Walker€and€his€wife,€Delores€Walker€(ð ðtheÐ <Œ ÐWalkersðð),€entered€into€a€civil€conspiracy€with€the€church€and€othersÔ_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€to€defraud€the€plaintiff€inÐ (x Ðconnection€with€the€sale€of€the€motor€homes€ð!ð€title€to€all€of€which€had€been€placed€in€the€name€ofÐ d Ðthe€church.€€The€plaintiff€was€awarded€a€judgment,€including€prejudgment€interest,€of€$620,189.43,Ð P Ðagainst€the€Walkers€and€the€church,€jointly€and€severally.€€The€Walkers€and€the€church€appeal,Ð ì< Ðarguing€that€(1)€Ô#†¼Ý»XXNÄ#ÔÔ‡XNX»¼ÝÔthe€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€they€had€been€involved€in€a€civil€conspiracy;€(2)Ð Ø( Ðthe€court€erred€in€finding€that€Robert€Charles€Coburn,€Sr.,€another€defendant,€acted€as€their€agent€soÐ Ä Ðas€to€bind€them€to€the€retail€installment€contracts;€and€(3)€the€award€is€speculative€and€amounts€toÐ ° Ða€windfall.€€We€affirm.Ð œì ÐÓ(ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€CourtÐ t Ä ÐAffirmed;€Case€Remandedó óÐ `!°  ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Ý»XXNL #ÔÔ‡XNX»¼ÝÔòòCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€Franksóó€andÐ 8#ˆ" ÐòòD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð $$t# ÐÔ#†¼Ý»XXNà #ÔÔ‡XNX»¼ÝÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌF.D.€Gibson,€Ô_ÔMaryvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€International€Christian€Church,€CharlesÐ ü%L!% ÐClendell€Walker€and€Delores€Walker.Ð è&8"& ÐÌWilliam€A.€Reeves,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Ô_ÔChilhoweeÔ_Ô€Trailer€Sales,€Inc.Ð À($( ÐÓ” ÓÐ ¬)ü$)ý ÐÔ_Ôò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ý»XXNß #ÔÔ‡XNX»¼ÝÔÐ ° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼Ý»XXNÊ#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XNX»¼ÝÔÌÓ  ÓI.Ð ˆØ ÐÓCÓÌà  àThe€church€is€an€unincorporated€association€operated€by€the€Walkers€out€of€the€officeÐ `° Ðbuilding€owned€by€them€in€Petal,€Mississippi.€€The€Walkers€own€several€corporations€whoseÐ L œ Ðostensible€business€purposes€include€the€selling€of€burial€insurance€and€the€establishing€of€assistedÐ 8 ˆ Ðliving€facilities.€€The€Walkersðð€daughter€was€a€secretary€for€the€church;€but€she€was€not€paid€out€ofÐ $ t Ðchurch€funds,€but€rather€by€another€corporation€wholly€owned€by€the€Walkers.€€The€church€had€noÐ  ` Ðassets€and€was€run€exclusively€by€the€Walkers.€€Though€the€Walkers€had€articles€of€incorporationÐ ü L  Ðprepared€for€the€church€sometime€in€the€1980s€and€even€signed€them€at€one€point,€the€church€wasÐ è 8  Ðnever€incorporated.€€However,€the€Walkers€kept€a€copy€of€these€articles€on€file€in€their€office.€€TheÐ Ô$  Ðpurported€business€purpose€of€the€church€was€to€provide€a€Christian€ministry€by€assisting€otherÐ À  Ðchurches.€€The€record€does€not€reflect€that€the€church€was€engaged€in€any€religious€activities€duringÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€seven€years€prior€to€trial.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àIn€1997,€the€Walkers€met€Coburn.€€Subsequently,€the€couple€provided€him€with€office€spaceÐ pÀ Ðfree€of€charge.€€This€space€was€in€the€same€building€as€the€one€out€of€which€the€Walkers€operatedÐ \¬ Ðthe€church€and€their€various€corporations.€€The€Walkers€admitted€that€Coburn€had€access€to€all€theirÐ H˜ Ðbusiness€locations€and€their€fax€machine.€€The€heading€on€most€of€the€faxes€sent€to€the€plaintiffÐ 4„ Ðindicates€their€origin€as€that€of€the€Walkersðð€businesses.€€The€plaintiff€received€most€of€theÐ  p Ðcorrespondence€from€Coburn€regarding€the€motor€home€purchases€from€this€fax€machine.€€CoburnÐ  \ Ðalso€used€the€Walkersðð€office€address€as€his€own.Ð øH ÐÌà  àBetween€March€19,€1998,€and€December€11,€1998,€Coburn€arranged€for€the€purchase€of€eightÐ Ð  Ðmotor€homes€from€the€plaintiff.€€On€March€19,€1998,€Coburn€made€the€original€purchase€of€threeÐ ¼  Ðmotor€homes.€€All€of€the€vehicles€were€titled€in€the€name€of€the€church.€€Coburn€presented€theÐ ¨ø Ðplaintiff€with€the€churchððs€unregistered€ð ðarticles€of€incorporation.ðð€€On€this€occasion,€the€WalkersÐ ”ä Ðaccompanied€Coburn€to€the€plaintiffððs€lotòòóó€to€pick€up€the€three€motor€homes.€€The€Walkers€neverÐ €Ð Ðactually€used€any€of€the€original€three€motor€homes.€€Mr.€Walker€testified€that€he€went€on€that€tripÐ l¼ Ðonly€to€help€bring€the€motor€homes€back€to€Mississippi.€€As€was€the€case€with€all€the€transactions,Ð X ¨ ÐCoburn,€as€the€churchððs€trustee,€signed€the€contracts€on€behalf€of€the€church.€€The€plaintiff€was€awareÐ D!” Ðthat€the€Walkers€were€on€its€lot€that€March€day€and€it€was€also€aware€that€they€were€the€principalsÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€church.€€On€April€30,€1998,€Coburn€faxed€a€copy€of€the€churchððs€application€for€a€TennesseeÐ #l! Ðsales€and€use€tax€exemption€to€the€plaintiff.€€On€May€6,€1998,€he€faxed€a€copy€of€the€churchððsÐ $X" Ðcertificate€of€exemption€from€sales€and€use€tax€to€the€plaintiff.€€The€form€was€dated€May€5,€1998,Ð ô$D # Ðand€effective€December€1,€1987.€€The€application€for€this€exemption€was€signed€by€Mr.€Walker.€Ð à%0!$ ÐAttached€to€the€faxed€copy€was€a€memo€from€Coburn€explaining€that€the€sales€of€the€motor€homesÐ Ì&"% Ðwould€not€be€subject€to€the€Tennessee€sales€and€use€tax.€€Over€the€next€seven€months,€Coburn€wouldÐ ¸'#& Ðarrange€for€the€purchase€of€five€additional€motor€homes.€€On€December€11,€1998,€the€WalkersÐ ¤(ô#' Ðreturned€to€the€plaintiffððs€lot€to€pick€up€the€motor€home€they€would€personally€use.€€It€was€one€of€theÐ )à$( Ðâ âeight€motor€homes€titled€to€the€church€and€one€of€three€motor€homes€purchased€on€December€11,Ð |*Ì%) Ð1998.€€The€contract€on€this€motor€home€ð!ð€signed€by€Coburn€on€behalf€of€the€church€ð!ð€was€paid€inÐ ° Ðfull€and€this€obligation€is€not€at€issue€on€this€appeal.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àIn€addition€to€its€perception€that€the€Walkers€were€involved€in€the€motor€home€purchases,Ð tÄ Ðthe€plaintiff€also€relied€on€a€fax€purporting€to€be€a€copy€of€the€minutes€of€the€churchððs€board€meetingÐ `° Ðauthorizing€Coburn€to€purchase€all€the€motor€homes€for€the€church.€€As€previously€noted,€the€faxesÐ L œ Ðsent€by€Coburn€had€a€heading€of€Mississippi€businesses€owned€by€the€Walkers.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àWhile€Mrs.€Walker€asserted€that€she€had€maintained€the€minutes€of€the€churchððs€board,€sheÐ  ` Ðclaimed€that€the€minutes€were€no€longer€in€existence.€€Apparently,€the€minutes€were€supposedlyÐ ü L  Ðð ðlost.ðð€€Nevertheless,€the€Walkers€both€asserted€that€the€churchððs€board,€consisting€of€themselvesÐ è 8  Ðand€their€daughter,€never€resolved€to€authorize€Coburn€to€make€purchases€beyond€the€one€motorÐ Ô$  Ðhome€they€used.Ð À  ÐÌà  àEven€though€the€church€was€the€title€owner€of€each€of€these€motor€homes,€the€insurance,€inÐ ˜è  Ðeach€case,€was€secured€and€paid€for€by€the€individual€who€used€the€motor€home€in€question.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€AsÐ „Ô  Ðpreviously€mentioned,€the€Walkers€used€only€one€of€the€vehicles,€and€the€debt€associated€with€thatÐ pÀ Ðvehicle€was€paid€off€when€the€Walkers€traded€it€to€another€dealer.€€One€other€motor€home€was€paidÐ \¬ Ðoff€from€the€estate€of€that€vehicleððs€user.€€The€other€six€of€the€eight€loan€contracts€for€the€motorÐ H˜ Ðhomes€titled€in€the€churchððs€names€fell€into€default€and€the€vehicles€were€repossessed.€€It€appearsÐ 4„ Ðthat€no€payments€were€ever€made€on€these€six€contracts.€€It€is€undisputed€that€the€plaintiff€expendedÐ  p Ðsignificant€resources€in€repossessing€the€vehicles.€€Although€the€titles€reflected€the€church€as€theÐ  \ Ðowner,€all€the€repossessions€were€made€from€the€control€of€parties€other€than€the€Walkers€and€theÐ øH Ðchurch.€€Following€repossession€and€sale€of€the€motor€homes,€there€existed€a€total€deficiency€onÐ ä4 Ðprincipal€of€$500,745.43.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€trial,€the€Walkers€testified€that€ð ðcrooksðð€infiltrated€their€enterprises€and,€without€theirÐ ¨ø Ðknowledge,€used€these€businesses€to€perpetrate€this€fraud€upon€the€plaintiff.€€They€assert€that€CoburnÐ ”ä Ðonly€had€authority€to€purchase€the€one€motor€home€used€by€the€Walkers€ð!ð€one€of€the€two€for€whichÐ €Ð Ðpayment€in€full€has€been€made.€€Despite€this€claim,€the€record€shows€that€the€Walkers€hadÐ l¼ Ðknowledge€that€several€people€around€them€had€recently€obtained€motor€homes€from€the€plaintiff.€Ð X ¨ ÐThe€vehiclesðð€operators€even€parked€these€vehicles€in€the€parking€lot€at€the€Walkersðð€office€building,Ð D!” Ðat€times€with€the€Walkersðð€permission.€€Regardless,€the€Walkers€both€testified€that€they€had€no€ideaÐ 0"€  Ðthat€any€motor€home€other€than€the€one€they€personally€used€was€titled€in€the€name€of€the€church.€Ð #l! ÐThey€assert€that€Coburn€had€bought€the€other€motor€homes€from€the€plaintiff€in€deals€having€nothingÐ $X" Ðto€do€with€the€church€and€that€they€had€no€idea€that€these€motor€homes€were€titled€in€the€churchððsÐ ô$D # Ðname.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àAs€another€part€of€the€conspiracy,€the€plaintiff€alleges€the€existence€of€a€series€of€assetÐ ¸'#& Ðtransfers€involving€corporations€and€business€interests€of€the€Walkers,€the€church,€Coburn,€or€theirÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbusiness€associates.€€The€plaintiff€described€some€of€the€subject€corporations€as€essentially€worthlessÐ )à$( Ðshells.€€The€purpose€of€the€transactions,€so€the€theory€goes,€was€to€create€the€appearance€of€value€inÐ ° Ðvarious€stock€certificates€and€annuities€issued€by€the€corporations.€€At€least€some€of€the€paperÐ œì Ðultimately€became€property€of€the€church€and€was€then€used€as€additional€collateral€on€the€motorÐ ˆØ Ðhome€contracts.€€By€the€time€the€plaintiff€repossessed€the€motor€homes,€these€stock€certificates€andÐ tÄ Ðannuities€provided€to€the€plaintiff€as€additional€collateral€had€essentially€no€value.€€At€least€one€Ô_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔofÔ_ÔÐ `° Ðthese€corporations€Ô_ÔwasÔ_Ô€owned€by€the€Walkers,€while€others€were€owned€by€Coburn€and€the€otherÐ L œ Ðmotor€home€users.€€Interestingly€enough,€the€Walkersðð€address€was€also€the€address€of€some€of€theseÐ 8 ˆ Ðother€corporations.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà@••)ìàII.ˆÐ ü L  ÐÌà  àIn€response€to€the€issues€raised€by€the€Walkers€and€the€church,€the€plaintiff€contends€theÐ Ô$  ÐWalkersðð€actions,€engaged€in€through€the€church,€caused€them€monetary€harm€reasonably€assessedÐ À  Ðby€the€trial€court.€€In€addition,€the€plaintiff€contends€that€the€court€below€correctly€concluded€that€theÐ ¬ü  ÐWalkers,€through€the€church€and€with€the€other€defendants,€engaged€in€a€civil€conspiracy€to€defraudÐ ˜è  Ðthe€plaintiff.€€The€plaintiff€argues€that€Coburn€had€agency€authority€to€deal€with€the€plaintiff€on€theÐ „Ô  Ðchurchððs€behalf.Ð pÀ ÐÌÓ  ÓIII.Ð H˜ ÐÓ„7ÓÌà  àThis€is€a€non-jury€case€and,€as€such,€is€subject€to€our€òòde€novoóó€review€upon€the€record€of€theÐ  p Ðproceedings€below.€€There€is€no€presumption€as€to€the€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€conclusions€ofÐ  \ Ðlaw.€€òòSee€ò òCampbell€v.€Florida€Steel€Corp.óóó ó,€919€S.W.2d€26,€35€(Tenn.€1996).€€However,€as€mandatedÐ øH Ðby€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d),€there€is€a€presumption€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€are€correct€andÐ ä4 Ðwe€must€honor€that€presumption€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€to€the€contrary.€€òòò òUnion€CarbideÐ Ð  ÐCorp.€v.€Ô_ÔHuddlestonÔ_Ôó óóó,€854€S.W.2d€87,€91€(Tenn.€1993).€€Further,€the€trial€court,€having€seen€andÐ ¼  Ðheard€the€witnesses€testify,€is€in€the€best€position€to€determine€the€witnessesðð€credibility.€€òòSeeÐ ¨ø Ðò òBowman€v.€Bowmanó óóó,€836€S.W.2d€563,€567€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).Ð ”ä ÐÌÓ  ÓIV.Ð l¼ ÐÓª;ÓÌÓ  ÓA.Ð D!” ÐÓß;ÓÌà  àThe€Walkers€and€the€church€argue€that€the€damage€award€is€both€speculative€and€a€windfall.€Ð #l! ÐThey€point€to€the€fact€that€the€plaintiff€bid€in€the€motor€homes€at€the€judicial€sale.€€Their€ð ðwindfallððÐ $X" Ðargument€is€based€upon€the€fact€that€the€plaintiff€has€resold€four€of€the€six€motor€homes€and€willÐ ô$D # Ðprobably€sell€the€other€two.€€They€argue€that€this€shows€that€the€plaintiff€will€not€suffer€any€damages.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àIt€is€well€settled€that,€in€the€absence€of€a€commercially€unreasonable€sale€or€other€fraud,€aÐ ¸'#& Ðdebtor€remains€liable€to€a€creditor€for€that€portion€of€a€debt€not€recovered€by€way€of€the€sale€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrepossessed€property.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„9„615€(2001);€òòò òMarriott€Employees€Fed.€Credit€UnionÐ )à$( Ðv.€Harrisó óóó,€897€S.W.2d€723,€726€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994)€(applying€former€ðð€47„9„504).€€The€fact€thatÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€secured€party€successfully€purchases€the€property€for€resale€is€of€no€consequence€to€theÐ h+¸&* Ðcalculation€of€deficiency€liability.€€In€this€case,€the€plaintiff€was€not€made€whole€by€the€sale€of€theÐ ° Ðmotor€homes€at€auction.€€Therefore,€it€is€entitled€to€seek€recovery€of€the€deficiencies€remaining€afterÐ œì Ðthe€sale.€€This€issue€is€found€adverse€to€the€Walkers€and€the€church.Ð ˆØ ÐÌÓ  ÓB.Ð `° ÐÓ»AÓÌà  àThe€Walkers€and€the€church€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€a€civil€conspiracy.€€AÐ 8 ˆ Ðcivil€conspiracy€has€been€defined€thusly:Ð $ t ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[The]€tort€[of€civil€conspiracy]€has€been€defined€as€a€ð ðcombinationÐ ü L  Ðbetween€two€or€more€persons€to€accomplish€by€concert€an€unlawfulÐ è 8  Ðpurpose,€or€to€accomplish€a€purpose€not€in€itself€unlawful€by€unlawfulÐ Ô$  Ðmeans.ðð€€òòò òDale€óóó ó[ò òòòv.€Thomas€H.€Temple€Co.óóó ó],€186€Tenn.€[69,]€90,€208Ð À  ÐS.W.2d€344,]€353€[(1948)].€€[Additional€citations€omitted].€€ThisÐ ¬ü  ÐCourt€in€òòò òDaleó óóó€further€explained€that€a€conspiracy€to€defraud€means€aÐ ˜è  Ðð ðcommon€purpose,€supported€by€a€concerted€action€to€defraud,€thatÐ „Ô  Ðeach€[conspirator]€has€the€intent€to€do€it,€and€that€it€is€common€toÐ pÀ Ðeach€of€them,€and€that€each€has€the€understanding€that€the€other€hasÐ \¬ Ðthat€purpose.ðð€€òòò òDaleó óóó,€186€Tenn.€at€90,€208€S.W.2d€at€353-54.€€€Also,Ð H˜ Ðthe€ð ðagreement€need€not€be€formal,€the€understanding€may€be€a€tacitÐ 4„ Ðone,€and€it€is€not€essential€that€each€conspirator€have€knowledge€ofÐ  p Ðthe€details€of€the€conspiracy.ðð€€òòò òIdó óóó.€Ð \` x` x ÐÌò òòòÔ_ÔChenaultÔ_Ô€v.€Walkeró óóó,€36€S.W.3d€45,€52€(Tenn.€2001)€(bracketing€around€ð ðconspiratorðð€in€original).€Ð ä4 ÐThe€Walkers€urge€that€the€burden€of€proof€in€a€civil€conspiracy€case€is€that€of€clear€and€convincingÐ Ð  Ðevidence.€€We€disagree.€€It€is€clear€that€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€all€that€is€required.€€òòSeeÐ ¼  Ðò òDaleó óóó,€186€Tenn.€at€90,€208€S.W.2d€at€354;€ò òòòCunningham€v.€Ô_ÔCryeÔ_Ô„Ô_ÔLeikeÔ_Ô,€Inc.ó óóó,€No.Ð ¨ø Ð02A01-9203-CH-00058,€1993€WL€11721,€at€*3„*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Ô_ÔW.S.Ô_Ô,€filed€January€22,€1993).€Ð ”ä ÐInterestingly€enough,€the€trial€courtððs€memorandum€opinion€recites€that€its€finding€of€a€civilÐ €Ð Ðconspiracy€was€supported€by€the€evidence€whether€the€burden€of€proof€be€that€of€a€preponderanceÐ l¼ Ðof€the€evidence€or€clear€and€convincing€evidence.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€Walkers€and€the€church€argue€that€rather€than€being€engaged€in€a€civil€conspiracy,€theyÐ 0"€  Ðwere€merely€used€by€people€around€them.€€The€trial€court€expressly€found€that€this€their€testimonyÐ  #l! Ðin€this€regard€was€not€credible.€€The€trial€court€adopted€the€plaintiffððs€proposed€findings€of€fact.Ô_Ô׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_Ô€€AÐ ° Ðcopy€of€those€findings€are€attached€as€an€appendix€to€this€opinion.€€After€carefully€reviewing€theÐ œì Ðevidence€in€this€case,€we€have€concluded€that€it€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€factualÐ ˆØ Ðfindings.€€Furthermore,€we€hold€that€these€findings€support€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€theÐ tÄ ÐWalkers€and€the€church,€along€with€others,€engaged€in€a€civil€conspiracy€to€defraud€the€plaintiff€inÐ `° Ðconnection€with€the€purchase€of€the€motor€homes.€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€expressly€noted€Mr.€Walkerððs€testimony€that€ð ðCoburn€would€just€putÐ $ t Ðsomething€in€front€of€me€and€Iððd€just€sign€it....ðð€€This€was€Walkerððs€explanation€as€to€how€hisÐ  ` Ðsignature€came€to€be€on€the€tax€exemption€application.€€It€is€clear,€however,€that€the€Walkers€knewÐ ü L  Ðof€the€purchases€of€the€motor€homes.€€Mr.€Walker,€on€behalf€of€the€Mississippi„based€church,€signedÐ è 8  Ðan€application€for€a€Tennessee€sales€and€use€tax€exemption€well€in€advance€of€the€Walkersðð€ð ðownððÐ Ô$  Ðmotor€home€purchase,€but€at€a€time€when€the€form€could€be€available€for€the€other€transactions.€€ThisÐ À  Ðevidence,€coupled€with€the€unexplained€disappearance€of€the€churchððs€minutes,€is€consistent€withÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€trial€courtððs€finding€of€a€civil€conspiracy.€€We€also€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€there€is€clear€andÐ ˜è  Ðconvincing€€evidence€that€the€Walkers,€the€church,€and€others€were€involved€in€a€civil€conspiracyÐ „Ô  Ðto€defraud€the€plaintiff.Ð pÀ ÐÌÓ  ÓC.Ð H˜ ÐÓ.TÓÌà  àAs€previously€stated,€the€Walkers€and€the€church€insist€that€Coburn€lacked€sufficientÐ  p Ðauthority€to€bind€them€and€the€church€to€the€retail€installment€contracts€with€the€plaintiff.€€TheÐ  \ Ðplaintiff€counters€that€the€Walkers,€at€the€very€least,€created€an€appearance€that€Coburn€was€actingÐ øH Ðas€the€agent€for€the€church.€€This€court€has€recently€described€the€criteria€for€the€creation€of€apparentÐ ä4 Ðagency€authority€as€follows:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àApparent€authority€is€most€often€defined€as:Шø` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà8¸ ` x` xàSuch€authority€as€the€principal€knowingly€permits€theÐ €Ð Ðagent€to€assume€or€which€he€holds€the€agent€out€asÐ l¼ Ðpossessing;€€such€authority€as€he€appears€to€have€byÐ X ¨ Ðreason€of€the€actual€authority€which€he€has;€€suchÐ D!” Ðauthority€as€a€reasonably€prudent€man,€using€diligenceÐ 0"€  Ðand€discretion,€in€view€of€the€principalððs€conduct,Ð ° Ðwould€naturally€suppose€the€agent€to€possess.Ðœì¸ ¸  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àòòò òRich€Printing€Co.€v.€Ô_ÔMcKellarÔ_Ôððs€Estateó óóó,€[46€Tenn.€App.€444,€479,]Ð tÄ Ð330€S.W.2d€361,€376€[(1959)];€òòsee€ò òÔ_ÔV.L.Ô_Ô€Nicholson€Co.€v.€Ô_ÔTransconÔ_ÔÐ `° ÐInv.ó óóó,€595€S.W.2d€474,€483€(Tenn.€1980).ÐL œ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIt€is€well€settled€that€apparent€authority€must€be€established€throughÐ $ t Ðthe€acts€of€the€principal€rather€than€those€of€the€agent.€€òòE.g.óó,€òòò òFranklinÐ  ` ÐÔ_ÔDistribÔ_Ô.€€Co.€v.€Crush€Ô_ÔIntððlÔ_Ôó óóó,€726€S.W.2d€926,€931€(Tenn.€[Ct.]€App.Ð ü L  Ð1986).€€Such€requirement€was€adopted€by€our€state€supreme€court€inÐ è 8  Ðòòò òSouthern€Railway€Co.€v.€Pickleó óóó,€138€Tenn.€238,€197€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€675Ð Ô$  Ð(1917),€when€stating:ÐÀ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà8¸ ` x` xàThe€apparent€power€of€an€agent€is€to€be€determined€byÐ ˜è  Ðthe€acts€of€the€principal€and€not€by€the€acts€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðagent;€a€principal€is€responsible€for€the€acts€of€anÐ pÀ Ðagent€within€his€apparent€authority€only€where€theÐ \¬ Ðprincipal€himself€by€his€acts€or€conduct€has€clothedÐ H˜ Ðthe€agent€with€the€appearance€of€authority,€and€notÐ 4„ Ðwhere€the€agentððs€own€conduct€has€created€theÐ  p Ðapparent€authority.Ð \¸ ¸  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àòòò òSouthern€Railwayó óóó,€[138€Tenn.€at€246,]€197€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€at€677;€€òòsee€alsoÐ ä4 Ðò òFranklin€Ô_ÔDistribÔ_Ô.ó óóó,€726€S.W.2d€at€931.ÐÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðò òòòBells€Banking€Co.€v.€Jackson€Centre,€Inc.ó óóó,€938€S.W.2d€421,€424„25€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€Walkers€and€the€church€assert€that€the€plaintiff€relied€solely€upon€the€words€and€acts€ofÐ €Ð ÐCoburn€to€conclude€that€Coburn€had€agency€authority€to€act€for€the€church.€€The€record€clearlyÐ l¼ Ðindicates€otherwise.€€The€Walkers€provided€Coburn€with€an€office€in€their€building.€€From€thisÐ X ¨ Ðbuilding,€Coburn€had€access€to€a€fax€machine€that€provided€a€fax€heading€associated€with€WalkersððÐ D!” Ðenterprises.€€The€Walkers€provided€Coburn€with€access€to€their€business€files.€€The€Walkers€gaveÐ 0"€  ÐCoburn€certificates€and€annuities,€some€originating€from€a€Walker„controlled€entity€and€others€titledÐ #l! Ðin€the€churchððs€name,€that€were€used€by€Coburn€as€collateral€for€the€contracts€with€the€plaintiff.€€TheÐ $X" ÐWalkers€provided€Coburn€with€a€sales€and€use€tax€exemption€for€which€Mr.€Walker€had€applied.€Ð ô$D # ÐCoburn€sent€the€plaintiff€a€resolution€of€the€churchððs€board.€€Because€these€actions€could€cause€a€manÐ à%0!$ Ðof€reasonable€prudence€and€diligence€to€believe€that€Coburn€acted€as€the€churchððs€agent€in€the€motorÐ Ì&"% Ðhome€purchases,€we€find€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€thatÐ ¸'#& ÐCoburn€ð ðhad€been€clothed€with€the€apparent€authority€to€deal€for€and€in€behalf€of€[the€church].ðð€€ThisÐ ¤(ô#' Ðissue€is€resolved€against€the€Walkers€and€the€church.Ð )à$( ÐÐ  |*Ì%) ÐÓ  ÓD.Ð ° ÐÓ|hÓÌà  àThe€Walkers€and€the€church€also€argue€that€the€doctrine€of€comparative€fault€should€haveÐ ˆØ Ðbeen€applied€in€this€case.€€The€allegations€in€the€complaint€and€the€evidence€do€not€implicate€thisÐ tÄ Ðdoctrine.€€In€any€event,€we€do€not€find€any€evidence€of€the€plaintiffððs€fault€in€the€transactionsÐ `° Ðpertaining€to€the€motor€homes.ò òòòó óóóÐ L œ ÐÌà  àIn€their€brief,€the€Walkers€and€the€church€assert€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€theyÐ $ t Ðwere€jointly€and€severally€liable,€relying€upon€the€case€of€ò òòòMcIntyre€v.€Ô_ÔBalentineÔ_Ôó óóó,€833€S.W.2d€52Ð  ` Ð(1992).€€In€a€civil€conspiracy,€all€conspirators€have€liability€for€all€damages€flowing€from€theÐ ü L  Ðconspiracy.€€òòò òÔ_ÔTrauÔ_Ô„Med€of€America,€Inc.€v.€Allstate€Ins.€Co.ó óóó,€71€S.W.3d€691,€703€(Tenn.€2002).Ð è 8  ÐÌÓ  ÓV.Ð À  ÐÓ‘lÓÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€This€matter€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€forÐ ˜è  Ðenforcement€of€its€judgment€and€for€collection€of€costs€assessed€below,€all€pursuant€to€applicableÐ „Ô  Ðlaw.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellants,€International€Christian€Church,€Charles€ClendellÐ pÀ ÐWalker€and€Delores€Walker.Ð \¬ ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_______________________________€Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCHARLES€D.€SUSANO,€JR.,€JUDGE