WPCM Z)=QsFV?qHo8$m c,ҖD/w"?^Rَ引=TN{A8fἃ={(s<6-?K2쩵n>hɈ̕PJiIAk:aGHK\ċKOϒҝ{YFVtx{{NXܹ(e]0mx-F p<4@t JVr'cnpUj|&_ I%+4 6c? ؜Ќ9`/1,),yj?7=[_hS@GL+cӮE6e5%Fq_(6lC6 W [v̡iWӎʭݔs[] Z L:HInxe?- &&n    v.@*)  HON.G.RICHARDJOHNSON,   @*)0  CHANCELLOR (#(# @*)RONOSTERHOUTand@*) 6 SANDRAOSTERHOUT@*) l  @*)0  AFFIRMEDASMODIFIEDB(#(#   DefendantsAppellants)0  andREMANDED(#(# @*@*RONOSTERHOUTandTANAOSTERHOUT,APPELLANTS,ProSe  ROBINS.KUYKENDALLOFKNOXVILLEFORAPPELLEE   `    OPINION %l"    `     h      p    X٩XXX٩Goddard,P.J. ) '    ` RonOsterhoutandTanaOsterhoutappealajudgmentoftheJohnsonCityLawCourtthatorderedthereturnofa1988MazdapickuptrucktoJohnnyFox,whichMr.OsterhoutinsistshadbeensoldtohimbyMr.Fox.ThejudgmentalsotaxedcostsofthecaseagainstMr.andMrs.Osterhout.   ` TheOsterhoutsappealinsiststhattheCourtwasin errorinorderingthereturnofthevehiclebecausethesalewas 9|0: avalidone.TheyalsoinsistthatMrs.Osterhoutwasimproperlyoneratedwithcostsbelow.     ` TheorderenteredbytheTrialCourtcontainedthe d followingfindings:   ` 2.TheCourtfindsthatMr.Foxneversigned h  anydocumentsconveyinghispickuptrucktothe >  Defendants.    ` 3.TheCourtfindsthattheDefendantbyfraud, `  artifice,andschemedidtakeadvantageofaweakling, 6 namelyMr.JohnnyFox,totheextentthatitshocksthe l  conscienceoftheCourt. B    ` Astothefirstissue,notranscriptorstatementof : theevidencehasbeenfiledbytheOsterhouts.Undersuch F circumstanceswemustconclusivelypresumethatthefindingsof  thetrialcourtaresupportedbyevidenceheardinthetrial !> court.J.C.Bradford&Co.v.MartinConstructionCo.,576 J# S.W.2d586(Tenn.1979).Wearethereforeunabletoreachthe $! meritsofthisissue,butmustconclusivelypresumethatthe &B# evidencepresentedjustifiedthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. N(% SeeInre:Rockwellv.Arthur,673S.W.2d512(Tenn.App.1983). ) '    ` Astotheissueregardingadjudgingcosts,the R-#+ judgment"which,amongotherthings,ordereddeliveryofthetitle .%- tothetruck"forthemostpartspeaksof Defendantratherthan 0J'/  Defendants.Therearetwoincidentswheretheorderspeaksof V2(1 Defendants.ThefirstisinSection2,whereintheCourtfound 4*3 that Mr.Foxneversignedanydocumentsconveyinghispickup 5N,5  trucktotheDefendants,andthesecondintheconcluding Z7-7 paragraph: Thecostsofthiscausearetaxedprimarilyand `  secondarilytotheDefendantsRonandTanaOsterhout.       ` Wethinkitclearfromtheentireorder!whichaswe d havealreadynotedprincipallyspeaksofDefendantratherthan  Defendants"thattheorderintendedtheuseofthesingularform \  toapplyonlytoMr.Osterhout,asitprovides intheeventthe h  Defendantfailstodeliverthetitle,amittimusshall   immediatelyissuefortheDefendant,RonOsterhoutsarrestfor `  contempt... l     ` Weconcludeinlightoftheforegoingthatcostswere d improperlyadjudgedagainstMs.Osterhoutandthejudgmentis p accordinglymodifiedtoadjudgecostsbelowsolelytoMr.  Osterhout.  h    ` FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheTrial  $  Courtasmodifiedisaffirmedandthecauseremandedfor %l" collectionofcostsbelow.Costsofappealareadjudgedagainst x'$ Mr.Osterhout. $)& #XXX X# XXXX   `     h     ____________________________ |,#*    `     h     HoustonM.Goddard,P.J. R-#+   (.$, CONCUR:   ____________________________ d CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J. : ____________________________ 2  D.MichaelSwiney,J. h  #XXX X#