WPCN  0~V 0x 0kL 0k 0" 0~ 0: 0 0 0 0  0 01 0C 0V( 0~ 0M 0 0 0X 0 0 0 0KUB %0 0z6 0 1 0 r 0= 0F 0P 1V 0 0O$#Es# 0}u# 0x# 0j$ 0j$ 0ea% 0W% 0W& 0t& 0j& 0b' 0( 0( 0w) 0X* 0L+ 0S, 0-m- 0@. 0/ 00 0#1 01 0^2 03 03 0l4 04 15?6nO6 046 B074M7 0a7^7 0J\8,8 0J9 0T: 0^p:w@: 0@; 0hN; D3; 0r; 0|[< 0< 0]= 1u= 0db>U6>B)>DC%? AMh?U*??@oBv~EvF AOmLL 0DM D/M BMV& 8Document[8]Document Style0..8` ..` V8Document[4]Document Style.. . V 8Document[6]Document Style8..V 8Document[5]Document Style0..V/8Document[2]Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   V& 8Document[7]Document Style0..0` ..` zU :Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..2I.3  Ԁ..0..zh :Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..2A.3  Ԁ..0` ..` V?8Document[3]Document Style.. 21.3  Ԁ   z{ :Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  ..P 21.3  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. z :Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. .. 2a.3  Ԁ .. 0..z :Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..2(1)3  Ԁ..0h..hz :Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..2(a)3  Ԁh..h0..z :Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....2i)3  Ԁ..0..z :Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..2a)3  Ԁ..0p..pVX8Document[1]Document Style  @..8  2I.3  Ԁ     Ԉ l2:Technical[5]Technical Document Style.. 2(1)3  Ԁ. l2:Technical[6]Technical Document Style.. 2(a)3  Ԁ. l/%:Technical[2]Technical Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   .. l,!:Technical[3]Technical Document Style 21.3  Ԁ   .. l(!:Technical[4]Technical Document Style 2a.3  Ԁ   .. l:0:Technical[1]Technical Document Style  2I.3  Ԁ     .. l1:Technical[7]Technical Document Style.. 2i)3  Ԁ. l1:Technical[8]Technical Document Style.. 2a)3  Ԁ. <6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXR& 8BibliogrphyBibliography0....jo4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleS   1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 S CuyTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1fp2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleS #    I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)S !"($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0   A_ekqwDocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a)x?t2PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading Paper % z &(  &XXXXX6G''*d66G''*d6HH1HH2HH3HH4HH5HH6HH7HH8HH910111213141516171819202122232425262728  .+('2$ FT!   p4Heading 2Underlined Heading Flush LeftV4Heading 1Centered Heading@..  b* 8Bullet ListIndented Bullet List0..0` ..` B& $1Document Style0..8` ..` B $2Document Style.. . B $3Document Style8..B $4Document Style0..B-$5Document Style 23  Ԁ   B& $6Document Style0..0` ..` dS $7Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..23  Ԁ..0..df $8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..` 23  Ԁ..0` ..` B=$9Document Style.. 23  Ԁ   fy &10Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. 23  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. f &11Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..23  Ԁ .. 0..f &12Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h23  Ԁ..0h..hf &13Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..23  Ԁh..h0..f &14Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....23  Ԁ..0..f &15Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..p23  Ԁ..0p..pDV!&16Document Style  @..  23  Ԁ     Ԉ X/&17Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&18Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X-(&19Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X*$&20Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X)$&21Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X83&22Technical Document Style  23  Ԁ     .. X/&23Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&24Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ.   CRight ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)3|x<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@( T$   df|$$(G.2Y$ FT!   XX     0  MARVINBERKELESLIEMcWILLIAMS($   0  HARRIMANMcGOVERNNEWCOMBCOOLEYSIMMONSClappGoldstonDonnieLoudonC.F.W.HasslerSwicegoodChildsMcGannon S.W.2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  D++UDӀ("$    26 0Indent40 0 0 23  GGGG'dxd2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  QRSWY\]^ ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 dhhhh7Border 1ddViC << G<  9p`(Arial  F!  #d#g  kk   YYY FILEDkX July30,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.kAppellateCourtClerk   F!#d#g  I$g         Theselocationsaretakenfromthecomplaint.However,Mr.Moore'sanswerstatesrelocationwasfrom"ButtermilkRoadinRoaneCountytoalocationonSwicegoodLane."Mr.Moore'sanswerdoesnotdesignatethecountylocationofSwicegoodLane. e F!#d#g  I$g         TheportionofthewreckerbillnotallowedbytheTrialJudgewasthatrelatingtoaclassAwrecker,whichhereducedfrom$673to$180,andthehourlylaborchargeonSeptember18,whichhereducedfrom$972to$324.ItwouldappearthereductionsmadebytheTrialCourtwoulddictateajudgmentof$4698.47ratherthanthe$4239awarded.However,becauseneitherpartyquestionsthisfigure,wewillnoticeitnofurther.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva VC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd F! . g    7ZXXdd7\RA'\ `    , 5  h u` RjliA1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALS@ @ ATKNOXVILLEC.J.CLAPPMOBILEHOME@ @ ) ROANECOUNTY MOVERS,INC.,and   ) 03A019707CV00288CLARAJ.CLAPP@ )@ ) Plaintiffs/Cross@ )̀DefendantsAppellants@ )@ ) v.  @ ) HON.RUSSELLE.SIMMONS,JR.,     @ ) JUDGEBILLGOLDSTON,d/b/a@ ) @ GOLDSTON'SWRECKERSERVICE@ ) and@ ) DONNYandTAMMYMOORE@ ) @ )  Defendants/Cross@ ) PlaintiffsAppellees@ ) AFFIRMEDANDREMANDEDMICHAELP.McGOVERNOFKNOXVILLEFORAPPELLANTSWILLIAMA.NEWCOMBOFHARRIMANFORAPPELLEEGILLGOLDSTONJ.POLKCOOLEYOFROCKWOODFORAPPELLEESDONNYANDTAMMYMOORE    OPINION         Goddard,P.J.  C.J.ClappMobileHomeMovers,Inc.,andClaraJ.ClappappealjudgmentsrenderedagainsttheminfavorofBillGoldston,d/b/aGoldston'sWreckerService,andDonnyandTammyMooreinthefollowingamounts:1. $500tothePlaintiffsforlossofuseofMs.Clapp'sequipmentwhileinthepossessionofMr.Goldston.2. $4239toMr.Goldstonforwreckerservice.3. $11,500toMr.andMrs.Moorefordamagestotheirmobilehome.  ThegenesisforthissuitwasacontractenteredintobetweentheMooresandClappMobileHomeMoverstorelocatetheir16by70footresidentialmobilehomefromButtermilkRoadinwestKnoxCountytoHasslerMillRoadinRoaneCounty m   ׀forafeeof$750.  OnSeptember17,1996,ClappMobileHomeMoversinitiatedthemovebyattachingaxlesandwheelstothemobilehomeandtowingitwitha1984InternationaltractorownedbyMs.Clapp,whichwasdesignedformovingmobilehomes.Itisknowninthetradeasa"toter."Considerableproblemswereencounteredinthemove.Wheelscameofftheaxles,andalsotiresblewout.Thisnecessitatedprocuringtheservicesofawreckertopullthemobilehomeoffthehighwayuntilthenextmorning,atwhichtimeitwastakentothelotofBillGoldston,d/b/aGoldston'sWreckerService.Thiswasdoneforsecurityreasonstoprotectthemobilehomeandarticlesinsidebecauseofthedamageoccurringduringtransit.  WhenthemobilehomewasdeliveredtotheGoldstonlotMr.GoldstonpresentedMs.Clappabillforsome$5800,whichshewasunableorunwillingtopay.Mr.Goldstonthereuponclaimedalienforhisservicesonthetoteranddeterminedtoholdituntilthebillwaspaid.  TheinitialsuitwasbroughtonOctober9,1996,bythePlaintiffsseekingawritofpossessionastothetoterandalsotorecovercompensatorydamagesandpunitivedamagesforfraud,conversionofpropertyandbreachofcontractfromtheDefendants.ThePlaintiffs'suitalsosoughttrebledamagesforviolationoftheTennesseeConsumerProtectionAct.  OnOctober10,1996,Mr.GoldstonsurrenderedthetoterinquestionuponthePlaintiffspostingabondintheamountof$6000,andshortlythereafteritwasagreedthecasewouldbetriedinCircuitCourtonFebruary19,1997.OnNovember21,1996,Mr.Goldstonfiledananswertothecomplaintandacountercomplaintseeking$5000forwreckerservicesrendered.Onthenextday,November22,1996,Mr.Moorefiledananswerandheandhiswifeacounterclaimseeking$35,000fordamagestohismobilehome.ThecasewastriedonFebruary19,1997,resultinginthejudgmentshereinbeforestated.  ThePlaintiffsraise10separateissuesonappeal.(Seeappendix.)TheevidencerelativetotheliabilityofthevariouspartieswassharplydisputedastoissuesII,VI,VIIandVIII,whichprincipallyquestionstheTrialJudge'sfindingoffactorhisexerciseofjudicialdiscretion.WebelieveinviewofthedeferenceweaccordatrialjudgeinsuchmattersthatitisappropriatehebeaffirmedinaccordancewithRule10(a)ofthisCourtastoissuesII,VI,VIIandVIII.  WewillnowaddresstheremainingissuesraisedbythePlaintiffs.@ ISSUEI  Thecase,byagreementofthepartiesreachedonNovember19,1996,wassetfortrialonFebruary19,1997.Atthetimetheagreementwasmade,theanswerandcounterclaimofMr.GoldstonandtheMooreshadnotbeenfiled,butwerefiledimmediatelythereafter,Mr.Goldston'sonNovember21andtheMooresonNovember22.Themotionforacontinuance,whichinthemainwaspredicateduponthegroundcounselforthePlaintiffsdidnothavesufficienttimetorespondtothecounterclaimsfiled,wasnotmadeuntilFebruary18,1997,thedaybeforetrial.WedonotbelieveunderthesecircumstancestheTrialCourtabuseditsdiscretion,whichisthestandardweapplywhenreviewing,grantingordenyingcontinuances.̜Ǜ@ ISSUEIII  AwrittencontractwasenteredintobetweenClappMobileHomeMovers,whichwasexecutedbyoneofitsemployees,DanWebbandDonnyMoore,whichprovidesthefollowing:    /s/DonnyMoore󀀀򀀀91696CustomerSignature  Date/s/DanWebb  򀀀91696Employee'sSignature   Date I,DonnyMoore,understandthatIamresponsibleforanywreckerserviceneeded.I,DonnyMoore,releaseC.J.ClappMobileHomeMoversandServicefromanyresponsibilityofdamagesoccurringtomymobilehomeduetorainyweather.C.J.ClappMobileHomeMoversandServicenormallydonotpullmobilesinthesetypeofweatherconditions.      Thereisproofintherecord,asfoundbytheTrialJudge,thattheintentofthesentencerelativetoprovidingwreckerservice,astestifiedtobybothMr.MooreandMs.Clapp,wasdirectedtomaneuveringthemobilehomeoversoftgroundattherelocationsite.WerecognizethatanobjectionwasmadetotheevidencebycounselforthePlaintiffswhenpropoundedoncrossexaminationtoMs.Clapp,althoughnogroundfortheobjectionwasstated.  Theobviousgroundwasviolationoftheparolevidencerulewhichprecludesevidencethatcontradictsthecleartermsoftheagreementandhasbeenheldtobearuleofsubstantivelawandnoexceptionnorassignmentoferrorisnecessarytoinsureitsapplication.Maddoxv.WebbConstructionCo.,562S.W.2d198(Tenn.1978).  Webelieve,however,thatnotwithstandingtherule,theadmissionofthisevidencecomesunderthemutualmistakeexceptiontotherule.Stampv.HonestAbeLogHomes,Inc.,804S.W.2d455(Tenn.App.1990).  Inadditiontothepaperwritinghereinbeforesetout,Mr.MooreandMr.Webbsignedachecklistwhichprovidesaspertinenttotheissueraisedthefollowing:    AFTERMOVE....        YESNODOYOUWANTUSTOGETWRECKERIFNEEDED,BUTYOUARERESPONSIBLEFORTHEPAYMENTOFWRECKERBILL      X󀀀___    Ӏ  Thusitappearsthattheagreementrelativetowreckerservicewasintendedtoapplyafterthemove,notenroute.  Moreover,itwouldseemhighlyunlikelythatMr.Moorewouldbindhimselftopayforallwreckerservicesincidenttothemove,whichwouldincludenegligenceonthepartofClappMobileHomeMoversinrunningthetoterandmobilehomeofftheroadwhileintransit,nordowethinkundersuchcircumstancesClappMobileHomeMoverswouldexpectthewreckerservicestobetheresponsibilityofMr.Moore.  Finallyastothispoint,wenotethatthecaseofMcGannonv.Farrell,214S.W.432(Tenn.1919),ourSupremeCourt,whichcitesasauthorityanumberofearliercases,holdsthattheruledoesnotapply"wheretheoriginalcontractwasverbalandnotinwriting,andapartonlyofitwasreducedtowriting."̛@ ISSUEIV  Withrespecttoissuefour,counselforthePlaintiffsmadeanoralmotionforsuchanamendmentduringthedirecttestimonyofMs.Clapp.Giventhefactthatthecounterclaimforwreckerserviceshadbeenpendingforseveralmonths,wecannotfindtheTrialCourtabuseditsdiscretionindenyingamotionmadeduringthecourseofthetrial.̛@ ISSUEV  Thetrialcourtisaccordedwidediscretionintheadmissionorrejectionofexperttestimony,andinthecaseatbarwefindnoabuse.Theobjectionraised,inourview,goestotheweightandnottheadmissibilityofMs.Childs'testimony.@ ISSUEVII  Withregardtothisissue,proofwasintroducedbyMr.GoldstonthattheStateofTennesseerequiresafeeschedulebefiledwithitbeforeapartyispermittedtorenderservicesattheinstanceoftheState,thatMr.GoldstonhadpreviouslyfiledsuchaschedulewiththeState,whichwasacceptedbyitandthechargestothePlaintiffswereinaccordancewithMr.Goldston'sfilingswiththeState.WhileitistrueawitnessforthePlaintiffstestifiedinhisopinionthechargeswereexcessive,giventhefacttheywereinlinewiththosetheStatewouldhonor,wecannotfindtheevidencepreponderatesagainsttheTrialCourt'sfindinginregardthereto.@ ISSUEIX  Withregardtothisissue,thePlaintiffsarguethatMr.Goldston'sassertionofalienonthePlaintiffs'toter,whichwasultimatelyfoundtobeuntenable,coupledwithhisinsistenceonbeingpaidanamountsome$1500inexcessofthatallowedbytheTrialCourt,demonstratesaviolationoftheTennesseeConsumerProtectionActandtheTrialCourtwasinerrorindismissingthisportionofthePlaintiffs'claimatthecloseoftheirproof.  WefirstpointoutwithregardtothisissuethatthePlaintiffsareassertingtheincorrectstandardofreviewofsuchactioninnonjurycases.InajurycasethePlaintiffsarecorrectthatonmotionfordirectedverdictthecourtmusttakethestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidencefavoringthePlaintiffs'position.However,theruleisdifferentinnonjurycases,asisarticulatedinCityofColumbiav.C.F.W.Const.Co.,557S.W.2d734(Tenn.1977),whereintheCourtmakesthisdifferentiation(atpage740):    MotionsfordismissalinnonjurycasesunderRule41.02(2),TennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure,andmotionsfordirectedverdictsinjurycasesunderRule50,TennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure,aresomewhatsimilar,but,thereisafundamentaldifferencebetweenthetwomotions,inthat,inthejurycase,thejudgeisnotthetrierofthefactswhileinthenonjurycaseheisthetrierofthefacts.Inthejurycasehemustconsidertheevidencemostfavorablyfortheplaintiff,allowallreasonableinferencesinplaintiff'sfavoranddisregardallcounteractingevidence,and,soconsidered,ifthereisanymaterialevidencetosupportaverdictforplaintiff,hemustdenythemotion.Butinthenonjurycase,whenamotiontodismissismadeatthecloseofplaintiff'scaseunderRule41.02(2),thetrialjudgemustimpartiallyweighandevaluatetheevidenceinthesamemannerasthoughheweremakingfindingsoffactattheconclusionofalloftheevidenceforbothparties,determinethefactsofthecase,applythelawtothosefacts,and,iftheplaintiff'scasehasnotbeenmadeoutbyapreponderanceoftheevidence,ajudgmentmayberenderedagainsttheplaintiffonthemerits,or,thetrialjudge,inhisdiscretion,maydeclinetorenderjudgmentuntilthecloseofalltheevidence.TheactionshouldbedismissedifonthefactsfoundandtheapplicablelawtheplaintiffhasshownnorighttoϜrelief.    ӛ  TheTrialCourtinthemainallowed n   ׄandweaffirmMr.Goldstonarecoveryforthewreckerbillhesubmitted,whichwouldrefuteaclaimthatheengagedinunfairordeceptiveactsorpracticesproscribedundertheTennesseeConsumerProtectionAct.@ ISSUEX  ThefactsgivingrisetothisissuearethataproposedwitnessforthePlaintiffsadvisedtheircounselthathethoughthehadseentheTrialJudgeinthiscaseenteringalocalrestaurantatthenoonrecesswithMr.GoldstonandthecounselforMr.Moore.Afterthenoonrecess,counselforthePlaintiffsbroachedthesubjectinhiscrossexaminationofMr.GoldstonwhenheaskedMr.Goldstonwithwhomhehadlunchthatday.Thiseventuallyledtotheinformationrelayedbytheproposedwitness.  ItisclearfromtherecordthattheTrialCourtwassomewhatupsetbythemannerinwhichcounselforthePlaintiffschosetoraisetheissue,whichwasresolvedbytheTrialCourtannouncingthathehadlunchathisofficewithonlyhissecretarypresent.  WhilewewouldbedisinclinedtofindprejudicialerroronthepartoftheCourtinnotdeclaringamistrialandrecusinghimself,evenifapropermotionhadbeenmade,wecertainlywouldnotfinderrorwhere,ashere,nomotionwasmade.  FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtisaffirmedandthecauseremandedforcollectionofthejudgmentsandcostsbelow.CostsofappealareadjudgedagainstthePlaintiffsandtheirsurety.      _______________________________      HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.CONCUR:________________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.________________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.