ÿWPCç 6# UN %] 0šcw@ý4=Q 1m` 0ÞÍ 0D« 0cï AQR £ 0J« 0Tõ 0^I 0h§ 0r 0| 0†ý 0ƒ 1u 0dˆ Bì Æ  0DÏ 0@ 0DS D/— BÆ D3ãU>B)TDC} AMÀU* z70±µáv~–vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(r7$¡¡ÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÓ  Ó ¯D°±E²³D´µ¶Ó€ÂÅn~<$3|xÅ #,e37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(Ž(3°$¤¤Ý ƒ7!ÝÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(;³º$´´Ô2,eÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ2 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 dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d----7Border 1dd ".Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial pÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€,ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€0ÔÔ€0ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€0XÔÌÌò òAugust€17,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€0ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó &Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓÓ€For€a€discussion€of€the€relationship€between€a€clearing€broker€and€an€introducing€broker,Ïò òòòseeó óóó€ò òòòShaffer€v.€Stratton€Oakmont,€Inc.ó óóó,€756€F.€Supp.€365€(N.D.€Ill.€1991);€òòò òAhn€v.ÏRooney,€Pace,€Inc.ó óóó,€624€F.€Supp.€368€(S.D.N.Y.€1985).€Ì «Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓÓ€€Chase€Manhattan€responded€by€filing€a€Counter„Claim€against€the€Administrators€and€aÏCross„Claim€of€Interpleader€against€Widow,€who€was€not€yet€a€party.€€Widow€then€asserted€herÏclaim€to€the€Vista€account€shares.€€Ultimately€the€trial€court€entered€an€Agreed€Order€ofÏInterpleader,€granting€the€court€clerk€control€over€the€Vista€account€shares.€€Therefore,€ChaseÏManhattan€is€not€a€party€to€this€appeal.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€,ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÓÓò òÑ7€,‹XXdðdÈ7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌà@ àò òAT€JACKSONÌà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÙ€ ÙóóœßR€/1.A1-j|Àû)` 7 `€€@ÿRß›IN€RE:à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌESTATE€OF€GEORGE€BRECKENRIDGEà à)à àÌWYATT,€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌMARGARET€WYATT€ENGMAN,€GEORGEà à)ÌBRECKENRIDGE€WYATT,€JR.,€andà àà à)ÌTHOMAS€E.€WYATT,€Co„Personal€à àà à)ÌRepresentatives€of€the€Estate€of€Georgeà àà à)ÌBreckenridge€Wyatt,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiffs/Appellees,ò òà àà àà à)à àó óMadison€Chancery€No.€94„10452Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌVISTA€FAMILY€OF€MUTUAL€FUNDS€€€€€€€€€€€à à)à àó óAppeal€No.€€02A01„9706„PB„00132Ìò òby€and€through€its€plan€administratorà àà à)ÌCHASE€MANHATTAN€BANK,€N.A.,à àà à)ÌINVESTMENT€MANAGEMENT€&€à àà à)ÌRESEARCH,€INC.,€and€GARY€WEBSTER,à à)Ìó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)ó óÌà àà àDefendants/Appellants.à àò òà à)à àÌó óòòÌóóò òÌ€€€ÌÌÌà@ àó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€PROBATE€COURT€OF€MADISON€COUNTY€Ìà@ àAT€JACKSON,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€WALTER€BAKER€HARRIS,€JUDGE€€€€€ÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiffs/Appelleesóó:òòà àà àà àFor€the€Defendants/Appellants:ÌóóÌNancy€L.€Choate€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àChristopher€G.€LazariniÌJackson,€Tennessee€€à àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€Memphis,€TennesseeÌÌò òà àà àà àà àà àà àAFFIRMEDÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SP.J.ÌÇØØÙ  ÙÓÓÑ7€,‹XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñà@ àò òOpinionÌó óà àThis€case€involves€the€interpretation€of€the€arbitration€clause€in€the€customer€agreement€forÏan€investment€account.€€The€personal€representatives€of€an€estate€sought€damages€for€allegedÏwrongdoing€with€regard€to€assets€of€the€estate.€€Certain€defendants€filed€a€motion€to€stay€theÏproceedings€and€compel€arbitration.€€The€trial€court€held€that€the€arbitration€clause€did€not€apply€inÏthis€case€and€denied€the€motion.€€We€affirm.Ìà àThis€matter€arose€out€of€the€administration€of€the€Estate€of€George€Breckenridge€WyattÏ(ð ðDecedentðð).€Defendant/Appellant€Gary€Webster€(ð ðWebsterðð)€is€an€employee€ofÏDefendant/Appellant€Investment€Management€&€Research,€Inc.€(ð ðIMRðð),€a€securitiesÏbroker/dealer.€€Webster€served€as€Decedentððs€financial€advisor€before€Decedentððs€death.€€In€JulyÏ1990,€Decedent€opened€an€IRA€account€with€Webster€and€IMR€serving€as€introducing€broker.€ÏIMR€negotiated€with€Raymond€James€&€Associates€(ð ðRJAðð),€so€that€RJA€administered€theÏaccount,€and€served€as€clearing€broker€for€the€transaction.€€An€introducing€broker€typically€doesÏnot€retain€a€seat€on€the€requisite€stock€exchange€and,€thus,€maintains€a€contractual€relationship€withÏa€clearing€broker,€who€retains€a€seat€on€the€exchange.× ƒ2 ××  ×Ìà à€€€€€€€€€€€As€part€of€this€IRA€transaction,€Decedent€executed€a€ð ðCustomer€Agreement.ðð€€ThisÏagreement€contained€an€arbitration€clause.€€In€pertinent€part,€the€arbitration€clause€states:ÌÓÓà8 àThe€undersigned€client€agrees,€and€by€carrying€an€account€for€the€undersignedÏclient€you€agree,€that€all€controversies€which€may€arise€between€us€concerning€anyÏtransaction€or€the€construction,€performance€of€[sic]€breach€of€this€or€any€otherÏagreement€between€us€pertaining€to€securities€or€other€property,€whether€enteredÏinto€prior,€on,€or€subsequent€to€the€date€hereof,€shall€be€determined€by€arbitration.€ÏAny€arbitration€shall€be€in€accordance€with€the€rules,€then€applying,€of€either€theÏNational€Association€of€Securities€Dealers,€Inc.,€New€York€Stock€Exchange,€Inc.,ÏAmerican€Stock€Exchange,€Inc.,€or€where€appropriate,€the€Chicago€Board€OptionsÏExchange,€Inc.,€as€I€may€elect.€€If€I€fail€to€make€this€election€within€five€days€ofÏreceipt€of€a€written€request€from€Raymond€James€&€Associates,€Inc.€to€make€suchÏelection,€then€I€authorize€Raymond€James€&€Associates,€Inc.€to€make€this€election.Ï.€.€.€I€specifically€agree€that€at€least€one€of€the€arbitrators€must€be€knowledgeable€toÏthe€type€of€securities€transactions€in€my€account€at€Raymond€James€&€Associates,ÏInc.,€or€knowledgeable€as€to€any€investment€made€through,€or€effected€on,€myÏbehalf€by€Raymond€James€&€Associates,€Inc.ÌÌÓÓThe€names€of€both€IMR€and€RJA€are€stamped€on€the€top€of€the€agreement.€€Signatories€to€theÏagreement€included€Decedent,€Webster,€another€representative€of€IMR,€and€a€representative€ofÏRJA.€€Çà àIn€March€1993,€Decedent€and€his€wife,€Intervening€Defendant€Sue€B.€Wyatt€(ð ðWidowðð),Ïopened€a€ð ðVistaðð€mutual€fund€account.€€Webster€processed€the€account,€but€Chase€Manhattan€BankÏ(ð ðChase€Manhattanðð)€administered€the€account.€€The€account€was€opened€as€a€joint€tenancy€account€Ïand€makes€no€reference€to€survivorship.€€The€Vista€transaction€did€not€include€an€arbitrationÏagreement.€€RJA€had€no€involvement€with€this€transaction.Ìà àThe€Plaintiffs/Appellees€(ð ðthe€Administratorsðð)€are€co„personal€representatives€ofÏDecedentððs€estate.€€After€Decedentððs€death,€the€Administrators€sought€to€include€Decedentððs€one„half€interest€in€the€Vista€account€as€part€of€the€estate.€€The€Administrators€alleged€that€becauseÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€66„1„107€(1993)€abolishes€the€right€of€survivorship€for€estates€heldÏas€joint€tenants,€the€Decedentððs€estate€was€entitled€to€the€Decedentððs€one„half€interest€in€theÏaccount.€€Widow,€however,€claimed€that€she€was€entitled€to€the€full€amount€of€the€shares,€asÏsurviving€joint€tenant.€€The€Administrators€then€filed€this€suit,€alleging€that€Webster,€IMR,€andÏChase€Manhattan€negligently€allowed€the€Vista€account€to€be€established€as€a€survivorship€account,Ïthat€Chase€improperly€denied€the€Administratorsðð€request€for€redemption€of€the€Vista€shares,€andÏthat€Webster€intentionally€interfered€with€the€Administratorsðð€rights€to€the€Vista€shares.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€Ìà àIMR€and€Webster€then€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€or,€in€the€alternative,€to€compel€arbitration.€ÏIMR€and€Webster€argued€that€the€arbitration€clause€in€the€IRA€customer€agreement€is€broad€enoughÏto€include€the€Vista€transaction.€€The€Administrators€responded€that€the€arbitration€clause€onlyÏapplied€to€transactions€involving€the€Decedent€and€RJA.€€They€note€that€RJA€was€not€a€party€to€theÏVista€transaction€and€contend€that€the€Vista€transaction€was€therefore€outside€the€purview€of€theÏarbitration€clause.€€In€a€cursory€opinion,€the€trial€court€denied€the€motion€by€IMR€and€Webster.€ÏFrom€this€order,€IMR€and€Webster€now€appeal.Ìà àOn€appeal,€IMR€and€Webster€claim€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€determining€that€theÏarbitration€clause€in€the€IRA€transaction€did€not€cover€the€Vista€transaction.€€Appellants€IMR€andÏWebster€maintain€that€the€Decedent€and€the€Appellants€were€parties€to€the€IRA€transaction€and€thatÏthe€broad€language€of€the€arbitration€clause€encompasses€the€Vista€transaction€because€the€DecedentÏand€the€Appellants€were€parties€to€this€transaction€as€well.€€IMR€and€Webster€note€that€IMR€was€aÏparty€to€the€IRA€transaction,€and€argue€that€it€may€therefore€enforce€the€arbitration€clause.€€In€theÏalternative,€IMR€and€Webster€argue€that€they€may€enforce€the€arbitration€clause€as€a€third€partyÏbeneficiary€to€the€agreement€or€as€the€agent€of€the€clearing€broker.Ìà àThere€are€no€factual€disputes€on€appeal;€the€interpretation€of€the€arbitration€clause€of€theÏcontract€is€a€question€of€law.€€ò òòòRapp€Constr.€Co.€v.€Jay€Realty€Co.ó óóó,€809€S.W.2d€490,€491Ï(Tenn.€App.€1991).€€Therefore€our€review€of€the€judgment€below€is€ò òòòde€novoó óóó€upon€the€recordÏwith€€no€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€of€law.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï13(d);€ò òòòCarvell€v.€Bottomsó óóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€26€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àThis€case€centers€on€the€customer€agreement€for€the€IRA€transaction.€€Webster€and€IMRÏemphasize€the€language€in€the€arbitration€clause€stating€that€ð ðòòallóó€controversies€which€may€ariseÏbetween€us€concerning€any€transaction€.€.€.€whether€entered€into€prior,€on,€or€subsequent€to€theÏdate€hereof,€shall€be€determined€by€arbitrationðð€(emphasis€added).€€They€stress€that€the€customerÏagreement€was€signed€by€Webster€and€other€IMR€employees€as€well€as€Decedent€and€an€RJAÏemployee.€€Because€IMR€and€Webster€were€parties€to€this€transaction,€they€assert€that€they€mayÏenforce€the€contract€and€compel€arbitration€with€regard€to€the€Vista€transaction.Ìà àThere€is€no€duty€imposed€upon€a€party€to€submit€to€arbitration€in€the€absence€of€anÏagreement€€requiring€such€submission.€€ò òòòUnited€Steelworkers€of€America€v.€Warrior€&ÏGulf€Navigation€Co.ó óóó,€363€U.S.€574,€582,€80€S.Ct.€1347,€1353€(1960).€€Thus,€ð ðthe€first€taskÏof€a€court€asked€to€compel€arbitration€of€a€dispute€is€to€determine€whether€the€parties€agreed€toÏarbitrate€that€dispute.ðð€€ò òòòMitsubishi€Motors€Corp.€v.€Soler€Chrysler„Plymouth,€Inc.ó óóó,Ï473€U.S.€614,€626,€105€S.Ct.€3346,€3353€(1985).€€To€determine€whether€the€parties€intended€toÍarbitrate,€the€court€€must€examine€ð ðtheir€entire€agreement.ðð€€ò òòòPerceptics€Corp.€v.€SocieteÏElectronique€et€Systemes€Trindeló óóó,€907€F.€Supp.€1139,€1142€(E.D.€Tenn.€1992).€€InÏò òòòWilson€v.€Mooreó óóó,€929€S.W.2d€367,€373€(Tenn.€App.€1996),€we€held:ÌÓÓà8 àContracting€partiesðð€intent€is€embodied€in€their€written€agreements.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€courts€must€examine€the€text€of€the€contract€in€the€context€of€the€entireÏagreement.€€Contractual€terms€should€be€given€their€ordinary€meaning€.€.€.€andÏshould€be€construed€harmoniously€to€give€effect€to€all€provisions€and€to€avoidÏcreating€internal€conflicts.ÌÌ(internal€citations€omitted).ÌÌÓÓà àAlthough€this€is€an€issue€of€first€impression€in€this€state,€courts€in€other€jurisdictions€haveÏaddressed€similar€situations€in€which€an€introducing€broker€has€sought€to€enforce€an€arbitrationÏclause€signed€by€an€investor.€€These€cases,€however,€have€involved€circumstances€in€which€theÏarbitration€agreement€was€more€clearly€a€contract€solely€between€the€investor€and€the€clearingÏbroker,€since€the€introducing€broker€was€not€a€signatory€to€the€agreement.€€Thus,€in€these€cases,Ïthe€introducing€brokers€did€not€argue€that€they€were€a€party€to€the€agreement;€rather,€they€arguedÏthat€they€could€enforce€the€agreement€as€an€agent€of€the€clearing€broker€or€as€a€third€partyÏbeneficiary€to€the€agreement.€€ò òòòSee,€e.g.,€Taylor€v.€Investors€Associates,€Inc.ó óóó,€29€F.3dÏ211,€213€(5th€Cir.€1994);òòò ò€OððConnor€v.€R.F.€Lafferty€&€Co.ó óóó,€965€F.2d€893€(10th€Cir.Ï1992);òòò ò€Mowbray€v.€Moseley,€Hallgarten,€Estabrook€&€Weeden,€Inc.ó óóó,€795€F.2d€1111Ï(1st€Cir.€1986);€òòò òLenhart€v.€Westfield€Financial€Corp.ó óóó,€909€F.€Supp.€744€(D.€Haw.€1995);Ïòòò òColtrain€v.€F.N.€Wolf€&€Co.ó óóó,€818€F.€Supp.€163€(E.D.€Va.€1993);€ò òòòShaffer€v.€StrattonÏOakmont,€Inc.ó óóó,€756€F.€Supp.€365€(N.D.€Ill.€1991);.€ò òòòConway€v.€Icahn€&€Co.ó óóó,€787€F.ÏSupp.€340€€(S.D.€N.Y.€1990);òòò ò€Antinoph€v.€Laverell€Reynolds€Securities,€Inc.ó óóó,€703€F.ÏSupp.€1185,€(E.D.€Penn.€1989);òòò ò€Church€v.€Gruntal€&€Co.ó óóó,€698€F.€Supp.€465€(S.D.N.Y.Ï1988).Ìà àIn€this€case,€IMR€and€Webster€were€signatories€to€the€customer€agreement.€€In€addition,ÏIMRððs€name€was€stamped€at€the€top€of€the€agreement.€€From€this,€it€appears€that€IMR€and€WebsterÏshould€be€deemed€parties€to€the€entire€contract,€including€the€arbitration€clause.€Ìà àIMR€and€Webster€argue€that€the€first€sentence€of€the€arbitration€clause€indicates€that€theÏclause€was€to€apply€to€ð ðall€controversiesðð€œconcerning€the›€IRA€transaction€which€was€the€subject€ofÏthe€customer€agreement,€but€also€ð ðany€other€agreement€between€us€.€.€œ.›€whether€entered€into€prior,Ïon,€or€subsequent€to€the€date€hereof.€.€.€.ðð€€However,€the€remainder€of€the€arbitration€clause€refersÏrepeatedly€to€RJA,€and€specifies€that€at€least€one€of€the€arbitrators€ð ðmust€be€knowledgeable€to€œ[sic]Ïthe›€type€of€securities€transactions€in€my€account€at€Raymond€James€&€Associates,€Inc.,€orÏknowledgeable€as€to€any€investment€made€through,€or€effected€on,€my€behalf€by€Raymond€JamesÏ&€Associates,€Inc.ðð€€The€name€of€RJA€is€stamped€at€the€top€of€the€agreement,€as€well€as€the€nameÏof€IMR.€€ð ðIn€construing€a€contract,€the€entire€contract€should€be€considered€in€determining€theÏmeaning€of€any€or€all€its€œparts.ð𛀀ò òòòCocke€County€Bd.€of€Hwy.€Commððrs€v.€NewportÏUtils.€Bd.ó óóó,€690€S.W.2d€231,€237€(Tenn.€1985).€€òòò òSee€also€Gredig€v.€œTennesse›€FarmersÏMut.€Ins.€Co.ó óóó,€891€S.W.2d€909,€912€(Tenn.€App.€1994)€(ð ðThe€language€in€dispute€must€beÏexamined€in€the€context€of€the€entire€agreement.ðð).€€Considering€the€agreement€as€a€whole,€itÏappears€that€the€arbitration€clause€was€intended€to€apply€to€controversies€concerning€an€RJAÏaccount.€€Since€the€case€at€bar€does€arise€from€a€dispute€concerning€an€RJA€account,€the€arbitrationÏclause€is€not€applicable.€€In€light€of€this€holding,€the€remaining€issues€are€pretermitted€and€the€trialÏcourtððs€denial€of€the€appellantsðð€motion€to€dismiss€or€compel€arbitration€is€affirmed.€Ìà àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Appellants,€forÏwhich€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€€€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.Ìó óà àò òÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.€J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SP.J.ó óÌÌ€Ì