ÿWPCP3 'ÿˆ|°á^bŠ·ƒH ½Õ°62Þ4[AÙ î¶_& „ˆð-Þê#‰‰¨ý“´‹4ÄÇIʸl.(µè¿6".nlÎ8òA)ú›36„>–…m–¬% Sõ÷;Ío¬ïÇ.Å®$Gª'´È­ãê÷»,x¬›ü“øŽª—à"ìœ`Â+ªÇG&4ÌZžcQxÀôï+»¢ñÀ­ îD®ôðMY‰Ã<ÍÒ?á¦ÄF'ö}RQé[ 5krG¡,ûð¢Ò}Ds÷A(ØFknÆd’6Vy%2ñdµ30  Dã(/^t0¨+j i ”cõà…. o{5½¾”,~Áƒ;Ì}6¦·ìO逸WUïƒúFØ‹0-¿´ÍÆà`ú|®‚×ÖgîÑC7ºÀ8õÚóÕ«ôõ*£f÷qò=é”­"'³|Z4ŒÛá(bäAûͧ— Í×·@gaë…ε‡Ä}ÔF'¨FVïÅD¥çZ{¸u·=MÀc}/~UtŠ²¬VÊÞãJözò6¶ÐøѼZ³‰ˆ{s†ý* §] ´²–-³jG”>¼ÉÜèaüÏGïFu9Ôy˜FšcoËV‡{Mn?´ÇòÜö1` 6ô©ÚHáW#ÁÂUNƒ %Ñ 0F×U N UNk UN¹ ^  w 4 + : m< ÌS  o; 0 ª-l 0 D™˜Ý£ uV!>n"E¬$ &®$ bÔ$ ^6%”%”%t–&¼ ,€Æ-Æ-Æ-Æ- F0  N0N0N0N0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0Ó`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0`0 B33˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(iñ$¡¡Ó  ÓÔUSUS.,Ô(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular=˜L+s j5+ð 3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ÂÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôÛ´òòôÛ´ÔExhibit€1€was€a€survey€David€Garrett€had€made€which€split€off€the€seven€acres€on€which€his€house€was€locatedÐ tÄ Ðfrom€the€rest€of€the€Wayne€Davis€tract.€€The€survey€was€made€in€1996€by€Andrew€Potter.Ô#†ôÛ´òòôÛ´©#Ô Ý ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€original€response€filed€by€the€five€siblings€alleged€their€father€had€given€the€house€and€seven€acres€to€DavidÐ tÄ Ðin€1988€€It€could€be€argued€that€this€theory€was€abandoned€at€trial,€as€the€court€stated,€ð ðThe€only€issue€[is]€interpretationÐ 8ˆ Ðof€this€size€of€land€awarded€to€Keith€Garrett,€is€that€the€only€issue?ðð€to€which€appellee€counsel€responded,€ð ðThatððs€allÐ üL Ðwe€see.ðð€€Nonetheless,€the€trial€court€granted€seven€acres€and€a€house€to€David,€and€appellees€seek€to€uphold€that€rulingÐ À Ðon€the€basis€of€an€earlier€parol€gift. eÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€interpret€the€testatorððs€precatory€language€to€refer€to€the€residuary€estate€and€not€to€give€authority€to€theÐ tÄ Ðchildren€to€decide€how€to€divide€his€entire€estate.€(r(2"$¤¤Ý ƒiñ!ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó #Ñ#€Cÿÿd#Ñ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ŽÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔParol€is€defined€as€ð ða€word;€speech;€hence,€oral€or€verbal;€expressed€or€evidenced€by€speech€only;€as€opposedÐ tÄ Ðto€by€writing€or€by€sealed€instrument.ðð€€òòBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóó€1116€(6th€ed.€1990). ™ Ý ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôÛ´òòôÛ´ÔOne€of€the€witnesses€was€Andrew€Potter,€the€surveyor€whom€David€said€had€created€the€survey€referred€toÐ tÄ Ðin€the€will.€€Mr.€Potter€denied€that€he€had€surveyed€the€testatorððs€property€by€dividing€it€into€seven€acre€tracts.€€He€alsoÐ 8ˆ Ðstated€his€office€had€burned€and€his€records€had€been€destroyed.€€Most€of€the€proposed€testimony€dealt€with€statementsÐ üL Ðmade€by€the€testator,€not€at€the€time€of€the€execution€of€the€will,€but€much€closer€to€his€death.€€Kathy€Gernt,€who€hadÐ À Ðworked€with€the€testator€at€a€chicken€plant,€testified€that€she€and€her€husband€visited€the€testator€during€his€illness.€€AfterÐ „Ô Ðher€husband€commented€about€how€much€he€liked€the€testatorððs€house,€the€testator€purportedly€stated:€ð ðà8 @ àit€was€KeithððsÐ H ˜ Ðhouse,€that€Keith€had€built€it€.€.€.€He€said€his€house€needed€to€be€painted€and€I€told€him€maybe€we€would€get€someÐ  \ Ðcommercial€grade€wallpaper€and€put€it€up€.€.€.€He€said€that€he€didnððt€know€if€Keith€would€like€that.ðð€€Mrs.€GerntððsÐ Ð  Ðhusband€substantiated€much€of€this€testimony.€€The€testimony€of€Billy€Allen€South,€a€neighbor,€was€also€proffered€inÐ ” ä  Ðsupport€of€Keithððs€claim.€€Mr.€South€made€a€personal€statement€concerning€the€testatorððs€last€wishes:Ð X ¨  ÐÌà8  àGaston€wished€me€to€say€to€the€Court€that€he€wished€that€this€matter€of€this€Will€be€settled€behindÐ à 0  Ðclosed€doors,€the€members€that€were€all€to€be€involved,€and€that€he€had€written€the€Will€and€that€theÐ ¤ô  Ðsame€lawyer€that€helped€him€word€and€prepare€them€and€explain€the€Will€and€they€had€went€over€itÐ h¸  Ðword€for€word€and€that€the€Will€would€stand€good€for€itself€and€that€the€records€of€properties€orÐ ,|  Ðanything€that€was€on€record,€everything€was€on€record€and€that€he€felt€between€our€discussions€thatÐ ð@  Ðthe€Will€would€stand€good€for€itself€and€would€not€be€problem€of€the€Court€to€decide€.€.€.€I€will€haveÐ ´  Ðto€state€that€Gastonððs€intentions€of€me€as€far€as€knowing€of€the€Will€which€I€stated€he€had€named€KeithÐ xÈ  Ðand€Pam.€€He€intended€for€Keith€to€have€that€property.€€He€intended€it€to€be€under€control€of€KeithÐ <Œ ÐGarrett.ÐPÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àWhen€asked€what€specific€property€he€was€referring€to,€Mr.€South€stated,€ð ðthe€property€that€he€lived€on.€€HeÐ ˆØ Ðconsidered€it€ð!ð€he€named€it€as€this€property€ð!ð€the€house€that€he€lived€in,€he€considered€it€to€be€all€ð!ð€all€of€the€land€thatÐ Lœ Ðwas€there€where€he€lived€that€was€joining€that€tract€that€he€lived€on€was€one€property.ððÐ ` ÐÌà  àKeith€also€proffered€the€affidavits€of€two€additional€witnesses.€€Ben€King€attested€that€the€testator€had€told€himÐ ˜è Ðthat€ð ðKeith€was€the€only€child€that€had€ever€done€anything€for€meðð€and€ð ðthe€other€children€are€only€interested€in€whatÐ \¬ Ðthey€can€get€from€me.ðð€€Pete€Taylor€attested€that€the€testator€said€that€his€house€would€one€day€belong€to€Keith.€Ô#†ôÛ´òòôÛ´ª#Ô LÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔKeith€Garrettððs€brief€acknowledges€that€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause€would€only€be€triggered€if€the€trial€courtððsÐ tÄ Ðrulings€were€reversed. 4Ý ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€holding€should€not€be€interpreted€as€implying€that€Keith€has€any€right€to€a€specific€parcel€in€the€residuaryÐ tÄ Ðestate€or€a€portion€of€the€land€surrounding€Davidððs€house.€€He€is€simply€entitled€to€one„sixth€of€the€residuary€estate€whichÐ 8ˆ Ðis€to€be€divided€in€equal€and€fair€shares,€with€the€will€directing€process€for€resolving€disputes€as€to€fairness.\Opinion Summary?\Appellants Attorney Name & Appellant's Name.?\Appellees Attorney Name & Appellee's Name. øÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOn€appeal,€the€appellant€argues€the€issue€only€on€the€basis€of€Rule€59€grounds. jÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€contrast,€Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  à[a]€patent€ambiguity€stems€from€uncertainty€in€the€language€of€the€will€itself,€òòIn€re€Will€of€Ô_ÔBybeeÔ_ÔÐ üL Ð(Ô_ÔBybeeÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔWestrickÔ_Ô)óó,€896€S.W.2d€792,€793€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994);€€òòÔ_ÔCobleÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔSysÔ_Ô.,€Inc.€v.€Ô_ÔGiffordÔ_Ô€Co.óó,€627Ð À ÐS.W.2d€at€362,€and€is€apparent€on€the€face€of€the€will.€€òòSee€óó4€William€J.€Ô_ÔBoweÔ_Ô€&€Douglas€H.€Parker,Ð „Ô ÐòòPage€on€the€Law€of€Willsóó€ðð€32.7€(rev.€3d€ed.€1961).€€It€involves€an€ambiguous€term,€òòsee€€UnionÐ H ˜ ÐPlanters€Corp.€v.€Ô_ÔHarwellÔ_Ô,óó€578€S.W.2d€87,€92€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1978),€that€cannot€be€clarified€byÐ  \ Ðconsidering€extraneous€facts.ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòÔ_ÔJacobsenÔ_Ô€v.€Flatheóó,€No.€01A01„9511„CH„00510,€1997€WL€576339€at€*2,€n.3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€17,€1997)€(no€Tenn.Ð X ¨  ÐR.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).Ð  l  Ѐ€ ²Ý ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôÛ´òòôÛ´ÔThe€total€amount€of€cash€he€distributed€to€each€childÔ#†ôÛ´òòôÛ´©#ÔÔ‡ôÛ´òòôÛ´Ô€in€the€months€prior€to€his€death€was€approximatelyÐ tÄ Ð$15,000.Ô#†ôÛ´òòôÛ´ #Ô vÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔKeith€testified€David€began€his€house€in€1990€or€1991;€Keith€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ôððs€counsel€represented€in€openingÐ tÄ Ðstatements€that€David€began€building€the€house€in€1987;€David€testified€he€started€it€prior€to€1982,€but€also€statedÐ 8ˆ Ðelsewhere€he€started€construction€in€1989;€and€the€appellees€in€one€filing€say€he€built€it€in€1988,€but€on€appeal€merelyÐ üL Ðclaim€it€was€in€the€1980s.910  ÉÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,Ôà  àÔ€ôÛ´òXXÔ¹Ó  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27-1-122€provides:€€Ð tÄ ЀÌà8  àWhen€it€appears€to€any€reviewing€court€that€the€appeal€from€any€court€of€record€was€frivolous€or€takenÐ üL Ðsolely€for€delay,€the€court€may,€either€upon€motion€of€a€party€or€of€its€own€motion,€award€just€damagesÐ À Ðagainst€the€appellant,€which€may€include€but€need€not€be€limited€to,€costs,€interest€on€the€judgment,Ð „Ô Ðand€expenses€incurred€by€the€appellee€as€a€result€of€the€appeal.€€€ÐH ˜Ð Ð  Ð dÝ ƒiñ!ÝÓ  ÓÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXXÔÔ‡¼G5»XX%ˆÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ€êÝÑà@ü ü ìàÔ#†X%ˆX»¼G5h#ÔÔ‡î[4îXX%ˆÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†X%ˆXîî[4å#ÔÔ‡¼G5»XX%ˆÔˆÐ Ö& Ðà@CCìàFebruary€2,€2000€SessionˆÐ üL ÐÔ#†X%ˆX»¼G5#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼G5»XX%ˆÔÓ  ÓIN€RE:€THE€ESTATE€OF€LUTHER€GASTON€GARRETTÔ#†X%ˆX»¼G5#Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÓ:ÓÌà@ñ ñ ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Fentress€CountyˆÐ ú J Ðà@ã ã ìàNo.€P„96„15€€€€€Billy€Joe€White,€ChancellorˆÐ æ 6 ÐÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½ ` A߈Ð ¾   ÐÌà@œ œ ìàNo.€M1999„01282„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€12,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ԈР¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÔ% ‡ ÔThe€testator,€a€father€of€six,€left€a€will€which€devised€to€one€of€his€children€a€specific€tract€of€landÐ ŒÜ  Ðwhich,€according€to€the€will,€was€described€in€an€attached€€survey€map.€€No€survey€map€was€attachedÐ xÈ  Ðto€the€will.€€Appellant,€the€recipient€of€that€Ô%†ÌÔbequest,€disagreed€with€his€siblings€about€the€size€of€theÐ d´ Ðtract€to€which€he€was€entitled.€€After€hearing€both€partiesðð€evidence,€the€trial€court€found€that€theÐ P  Ðtestatorððs€intent€was€to€devise€separate€seven€acre€tracts€to€both€Appellant€and€one€of€his€brothersÐ <Œ Ðwith€the€remainder€of€the€estateððs€property€to€be€divided€equally€among€the€six€children.€AppellantÐ (x Ðthen€commenced€this€appeal.€€We€affirm€in€part€and€reverse€in€part.Ð d ÐÌò òÔ% ‡$ ÔÓ  ÓTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€RightÔ%†$-Ô;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Ô% ‡% ÔisÐ ì< ÐAffirmed€in€Part,€Reversed€in€Part€and€RemandedÔ%†%Ôó óÐ Ø( ÐÓ:ÓÌòòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.,óóÐ ° Ðand€òòWilliam€B.€Cain,€J.òòóóóó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌÔ% ‡ ÔPhillips€Smalling,€Byrdstown,€Tennessee,€for€appellant€Keith€Edward€Garrett.Ô%†ð ÔÐ tÄ ÐÌÔ% ‡ ÔÔ%†p ÔJames€P.€Romer,€Jamestown,€Tennessee€for€appellees€Priscilla€Louise€Wright,€Susan€YvonneÐ L œ ÐWright,€Christopher€Ross€Garrett,€Patrick€Kent€Garrett,€and€David€Denver€Garrett.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ‡¼G5»XX%ˆÔˆÐ #`" ÐÌÔ#†X%ˆX»¼G5 #ÔÔ#†X%ˆXXX%ˆI#ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔà  àThe€testator,€Luther€Gaston€Garrett,€the€father€of€six€children,€left€a€holographic€will€whichÐ %^ $ Ðcontained€only€Ô#†X%ˆXXX%ˆý #ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔone€specific€bequest,€with€the€remainder€of€his€estate€to€be€divided€equally€amongÐ ú%J!% Ðhis€six€children.€€The€specific€bequest€was€a€tract€of€land€to€his€son,€Keith€Garrett,€Appellant,€andÐ æ&6"& Ðthe€sonððs€wife,€Pamela€Garrett.€€This€dispute,€between€Keith€Garrett€and€his€five€siblings,€arises€overÐ Ò'"#' Ðhow€many€acres€are€to€be€included€in€that€bequest.€Ð ¾($( ÐÔ#†X%ˆXXX%ˆÍ #ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔÌà  àAt€the€time€of€his€death€in€January€of€1996,€the€testator€owned€approximately€one€hundredÐ –*æ%* Ðfifty€acres€of€land.€€The€five€siblings€of€Keith€Garrett€describe€the€land€as€consisting€of€three€separateÐ ‚+Ò&+ Ðtracts,€as€follows:Ð n,¾', ÐÐ Z-ª(- ÐÑêÝÑâ âÑ8€%ˆXdìdÈ8Ñâ âÑ  Ñà8  àthe€Falls€tract,€and€Lot€19A€of€City€Lake€Estates,€known€as€the€Gaston€Garrett€homeÐ ° Ðtract€consisting€of€approximately€19€acres;€the€Wayne€Davis€tract€of€100€acres,€outÐ œì Ðof€which€the€7€acre€tract€willed€to€Keith€and€Pam€Garrett€and€on€which€they€haveÐ ˆØ Ðtheir€house€is€located,€the€7€acre€tract€on€which€David€Garrett€has€built€his€house€isÐ tÄ Ðlocated,€and€upon€which€the€cemetery€exists€where€Gaston€Garrett€is€buried;€and€theÐ `° Ðthird€tract€is€the€Allardt€farm€on€the€Taylor€Place€Road.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Falls€tract€and€the€Wayne€Davis€tract€were€contiguous.€€On€that€basis,€€Keith€GarrettÐ $ t Ðconsidered€them€a€single€tract€and€referred€to€them€as€€the€ð ðhomestead,ðð€a€tract€of€approximately€120Ð  ` Ðacres.€€Thus,€Keith€Garrett€takes€the€position€his€father€owned€only€two€tracts€of€land:€the€homesteadÐ ü L  Ðand€the€Allardt€farm€property,€which€consisted€of€approximately€thirty„eight€acres.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrett€moved€onto€the€Wayne€Davis€tract€in€1974€or€1975.€€Since€1975,€Keith€GarrettÐ À  Ðhelped€his€father€maintain€the€land.€€Sometime€after€executing€the€will€in€question€in€1984,€theÐ ¬ü  Ðtestator€completed€a€house€on€the€Falls€tract.€€David€Ô_ÔGarrettÔ_Ô€began€building€a€house€on€the€WayneÐ ˜è  ÐDavis€tract,€sometime€in€the€1980s€or€1990s.Ô_Ô׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô_ÔÔ#†X%ˆXXX%ˆ·#ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àShortly€before€his€death,€the€testator€called€all€his€children€to€his€bed€side.€€At€that€time,€heÐ \¬ Ðread€them€his€will€and€gave€each€a€check.׃d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Ô#†X%ˆXXX%ˆ#ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔ€The€will€he€read€to€the€children€was€the€holographic€willÐ H˜ Ðthe€testator€had€prepared€in€1984.€€It€contained€only€one€specific€bequest€which€stated:€Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àI€give,€devise€and€bequeath€to€my€son,€Keith€Edward,€and€present€wife,€Pamela€JoÐ  \ ÐHurley€Garrett,€a€certain€tract€of€land€more€particularly€described€in€a€survey€mapÐ øH Ðattached€to€this€document.€€The€deed€to€this€tract€of€land€is€to€be€processed€by€myÐ ä4 Ðexecutors,€provided€I€precede€the€above€mentioned€in€death;€however,€in€case€eitherÐ Ð  Ðor€both€of€the€above€mentioned€precede€me€in€death,€I€will€make€adjustment€orÐ ¼  Ðcodicil€concerning€property€mentioned€and€attached.€€When€the€above€mentionedÐ ¨ø Ðdeed€is€processed,€it€is€not€to€be€taken€as€any€future€part€of€Keith€Edward€GarrettððsÐ ”ä Ðfurther€share€in€my€estate,€based€on€past€understanding€between€us€and€otherÐ €Ð Ðconsiderations.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌWhen€the€will€was€found€after€the€testatorððs€death,€no€survey€map€was€attached€thereto.€€Ô#†X%ˆXXX%ˆf#ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔThe€willÐ D!” Ðnamed€as€executors€all€four€of€Gaston€Garrettððs€sons.€€It€contained€the€following€òòin€terrorem€óóclause:Ð 0"€  ÐÐ #l! Ðà8  àI€would€hope€that€I€have€reared€and€raised€six€children€that€are€reasonable,€fair,€andÐ ° Ðunselfish;€therefore,€any€of€my€heirs€that€should€bring€legal€process€in€a€Court€of€lawÐ œì Ðagainst€another€heir€or€heirs€of€my€estate€and€object€to€the€probate€shall€be€cut€offÐ ˆØ Ðfrom€any€share€whatsoever€in€my€estate€and€I€further€direct€that€the€bequests€to€suchÐ tÄ Ðpersons€shall€be€considered€as€part€of€my€residuary€estate.Ô#†X%ˆXXX%ˆ,#ÔÐ`°Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€will€was€amended€once€during€its€existence€as€evidenced€by€a€handwritten€notation€datedÐ 8 ˆ ÐJanuary€17,€1995€changing€the€name€of€a€person€to€contact€regarding€legal€advice€or€in€the€event€anyÐ $ t Ðconflict€or€difference€should€arise€as€to€equity€or€fairness.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àAfter€his€fatherððs€death,€Keith€Garrett€filed€a€petition€to€admit€will€for€probate€andÐ è 8  Ðappointment€of€executor.€€The€petition€named€his€siblings€as€respondents.€€Keith€Garrett€soughtÐ Ô$  Ðappointment€as€executor€of€his€fatherððs€estate€and,€requested,€òòinter€alia,óó€that€the€will€be€admitted€intoÐ À  Ðprobate.€€He€asserted€that€under€the€will,€he€was€to€ð ðreceive€one€tract€and€childððs€portion€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðsecond€tract.ððÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àAppellantððs€siblings€filed€a€response€requesting€that€all€four€co„executors€named€in€the€willÐ pÀ Ðbe€appointed€executors.€€The€filing€also€asserted€that€Keith€Garrettððs€claim€of€entitlement€to€a€tractÐ \¬ Ðwas€ð ðmisleadingðð€because€he€ð ðwas€to€receive€a€7€acre€tract€where€his€home€is€located€and€a€1/6Ð H˜ Ðinterest€in€the€other€parcels€of€real€property€excluding€a€7€acre€tract€on€which€the€decedent€permittedÐ 4„ ÐDavid€Garrett€to€construct€his€home,€which€gift€to€David€Garrett€was€given€in€about€1988€afterÐ  p ÐGaston€Garrett€authored€his€will€in€1984.ðð€€The€siblings€requested,€among€other€things,€that€the€courtÐ  \ Ðhear€proof€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€32„3„101,€òòet€seq.,óó€if€the€heirs€could€not€agree€to€a€fair€andÐ øH Ðequitable€distribution€at€the€appropriate€time.€€The€siblings€submitted€a€tentative€plan€for€distributionÐ ä4 Ðof€the€estate€with€their€filing.€€This€plan€proposed€in€part€that€Keith€and€Pam€GarrettÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àwill€get€seven€(7)€acres€where€their€house€is€located€in€accordance€with€a€survey€byÐ ¨ø ÐAndy€Potter€done€in€about€1979€which€is€in€the€possession€of€Keith€Garrett.€€ThisÐ ”ä Ðtract€is€not€to€be€taken€as€any€future€part€of€KEITH€EDWARD€GARRETTððS€furtherÐ €Ð Ðshare€in€the€estate,€as€stated€in€the€will.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àDavid€Garrett€will€receive€the€house€he€has€built€on€the€Wayne€Davis€Tract€and€sevenÐ D!” Ð(7)€acres€surrounding€the€house€in€accordance€with€a€gift€made€by€our€father€prior€toÐ 0"€  Ðthe€time€of€his€death.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€entered€an€agreed€order€admitting€the€testatorððs€will€for€probate€andÐ ô$D # Ðadministration.€€All€four€male€siblings€were€appointed€co„executors.€€Hand€written€in€the€lowerÐ à%0!$ Ðmargin€of€this€order€was€the€following:Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà8  àBy€approval€of€this€order€counsel€for€Keith€Garrett€does€not€acknowledge€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexistence€of€the€seven€(7)€acre€survey€and€it€is€recognized€that€an€issue€exists€on€thisÐ )à$( Ðmatter.Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àThe€trial€court€heard€evidence€on€this€matter.€€At€the€hearing,€Appellant€testified€that€he€wasÐ ° Ðclaiming€121€acres€under€the€will.€€This€included€the€land€on€which€his€brother€Davidððs€house,€theÐ œì Ðfamily€cemetery,€his€fatherððs€house,€and€his€own€house€were€located.€€Appellant€stated€that€in€1984,Ð ˆØ Ðwhen€the€will€was€written,€he€was€the€only€child€living€on€the€land,€and€it€was€meant€to€be€his.€€HeÐ tÄ Ðtestified:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àIn€ðð84,€thatððs€what€Daddy€meant.€€I€was€the€only€one€interested.€€They€were€all€goingÐ 8 ˆ Ðon€with€their€lives.€€I€have€done€a€whole€lot€to€improve€that€place,€and€I€donððt€haveÐ $ t Ðany€guilt€about€wanting€the€whole€place.€€I€believe€thatððs€exactly€what€it€states.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àPam€Garrett,€Appellantððs€wife,€€testified€that€some€time€around€1984,€the€testator€came€to€herÐ è 8  Ðhouse€and€told€her,€ð ðI€fixed€that€place€over€here€so€that€nobody€could€ever€bother€you.ðð€€She€admittedÐ Ô$  Ðthat€he€did€not€explain€the€means€he€used€to€effectuate€these€arrangements.Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€eldest€son,€Chris€Garrett,€testified€that€the€family€was€at€an€impasse€about€the€distributionÐ ˜è  Ðof€the€estate,€and€he€requested€that€the€court€construe€the€will€and€decide€on€the€distribution.€€HeÐ „Ô  Ðtestified€that€when€his€father€came€to€him€shortly€after€writing€the€will:Ð pÀ ЀÌà8  àone€of€the€major€things€that€he€was€interested€in€is€protecting€Keithððs€homeplace,Ð H˜ ÐPamððs€homeplace,€and€at€that€time€he€told€me€seven€acres€was€the€amount€of€landÐ 4„ Ðthat€he€intended€to€be€cut€off,€but€he€couldnððt€give€them€a€deed€right€now€becauseÐ  p ÐKeith€had€a€previous€marriage€that€might€jeopardize€the€land,€so€he€wouldnððt€cut€aÐ  \ Ðdeed€at€that€time.ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àChris€Garrett€denied€that€his€father€had€ever€expressed€an€intention€that€Appellant€receiveÐ Ð  Ðthe€entire€121€acre€tract.€€He€recalled€that€his€father€intended€to€give€David€seven€acres€as€well.€Ð ¼  ÐChris€Garrett€testified€that€when€his€father€called€all€the€children€to€his€sick€bed€to€read€the€will,€thereÐ ¨ø Ðwas€no€survey€present.€€He€asserted€that€except€for€the€seven€acres€to€Appellant€and€seven€acres€toÐ ”ä ÐDavid,€the€property€was€to€be€divided€evenly€into€sixths.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€second€eldest€son,€Patrick€Garrett,€testified€that€his€father€had€intended€for€Keith€to€haveÐ X ¨ Ðseven€acres.€€Patrick€Garrett€recalled€seeing€a€survey€map.€€He€stated:Ð D!” ÐÌà8  àJust€before€Dad€died.€€When€he€gave€up€the€checks€out,€approximately€the€10òòthóó€ofÐ #l! ÐJanuary,€I€was€sitting€with€him,€and€he€reached€in€his€lock€box,€and€picked€the€surveyÐ $X" Ðup€and€said,€ð ðKeith,€here,€you€will€need€this€survey€of€your€tract.ðð€€He€didnððt€attachÐ ô$D # Ðit,€but€he€had€it€separate€and€he€handed€it€to€Keith.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌPatrick€Garrett€testified€that€he€had€not€seen€the€survey€since.€€When€asked€if€he€had€seen€the€surveyÐ ¸'#& Ðpreviously,€he€testified:Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà8  àI€knew€it€was€there,€and€paper,€and€yes€it€was€there.€€And,€in€fact,€when€he€called€usÐ |*Ì%) Ðall€together€in€our€last€meeting€with€him,€he€said,€hereððs€Keith,€your€survey,€and€putÐ h+¸&* Ðit€in€the€box,€and€went€on€with€his€will,€and€that€was€part€of€his€reading€and€part€ofÐ ° Ðthe€day,€and€he€also€indicated€Davidððs€seven€acres€to€be€put€to€David€.€.€.€he€gave€outÐ œì Ðthe€survey€along€with€his€monies.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌHe€further€testified€that€both€his€father€and€Keith€acknowledged€that€the€tract€was€seven€acres.Ð `° ÐÌà  àPriscilla€Wright,€the€fifth€eldest€child,€testified,€ð ðDaddy€always€talked€about€seven€acres.ðð€Ð 8 ˆ ÐShe€also€stated,€ð ðWhen€Daddy€read€the€will€to€us,€when€he€gathered€us€up€altogether,€he€held€upÐ $ t Ðsomething,€and€said,€ððKeith€will€need€this,€this€is€his€thing.ðð€€It€was€about€the€seven€acres,€and€thenÐ  ` Ðhe€just€stuck€it€back€in€there.ððÐ ü L  ÐÌà  àThe€youngest€child,€Susan€White,€recalled€that€her€father€had€mentioned€the€tract€heÐ Ô$  Ðbequeathed€to€Keith.€€She€testified:Ð À  ÐÌà8  àWell,€itððs€been€so€long€ago,€and€he€wrote€the€will,€I€remember€him€telling€me€that€heÐ ˜è  Ðwrote€a€will.€€I€donððt€remember€if€thatððs€when€he€told€me€about€the€acreage€Keith€andÐ „Ô  ÐPam€should€get€first,€but€he€did€tell€me€that€Keith€and€Pam€would€get€seven€acresÐ pÀ Ðbefore€anything€else€was€separated.€€And€then,€you€know,€when€he€called€us€all€in,Ð \¬ Ðthatððs€when€he€said€about€David€getting€seven€acres€as€well.ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌShe€confirmed€her€sisterððs€testimony€that€their€father€had€held€up€the€survey€when€he€was€readingÐ  p Ðthe€will€to€all€the€children,€but€she€admitted€that€she€had€never€looked€at€the€survey€to€see€if€sevenÐ  \ Ðacres€were€plotted€out€on€it.€€She€also€agreed€that€her€father€wanted€Keith€and€David€Garrett€to€haveÐ øH Ðseven€acres€each,€stating:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àDaddy€stressed€that€for€years.€€He€stressed€that€about€Keith€getting€seven€acres€andÐ ¼  Ðthe€last€years€he€stressed€it€for€David.€€That€was€the€main€thing€he€wanted€us€to€doÐ ¨ø Ðwas€to€make€sure€they€got€their€seven€acres€each€before€we€did€anything€else.€€If€weÐ ”ä Ðwanted€to€own€it€altogether,€or€separate€it€or€sell€it€or€whatever€we€wanted€to€do€withÐ €Ð Ðit,€he€wanted€that€done€first,€so€they€had€their€homeplaces.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌShe€stated€that€shortly€after€her€father€died,€she€found€the€will€and€the€survey€was€not€with€it.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àDavid€Garrett,€the€youngest€son,€testified€that€he€started€his€house€while€he€was€in€college,Ð #l! Ðprior€to€1982.€€He€stated€that€his€father€had€never€spoken€to€him€about€deeding€him€seven€acres,Ð $X" Ðstating:Ð ô$D # ÐÌà8  àthe€only€time€Dad€ever€made€a€reference€to€me€about€my€place,€when€he€was€realÐ Ì&"% Ðsick,€almost€to€die,€he€said,€there€was€somebody€to€visit€him€and€asked€if€I€would€beÐ ¸'#& Ðthere€and€I€sat€over€on€the€edge€of€the€property.€€I€just€homesteaded€and€I€hope€I€getÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmy€place€and€Dad€raised€up€his€head€and€he€said,€ð ðyou€got€itðð€like€that.€€He€never€didÐ )à$( Ðtell€me,€I€never€did€worry€about€the€acreage€up€until€he€got€sick€and€we€knew€he€wasÐ |*Ì%) Ðdying.Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  ЇDavid€Garrett€offered€the€following€testimony€regarding€his€fatherððs€preference€for€seven€acres:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àWhere€Dad€got€the€number€of€seven€acres€was,€he€heard€the€Japanese€nation€hadÐ ˆØ Ðsome€Imperial€monarch€or€somebody€from€World€War€II€had€divided€the€wholeÐ tÄ Ðnation€into€seven€acre€plots€to€give€each€family€and€that€was€what€made€it€take€offÐ `° Ðas€a€nation,€what€made€them€so€productive.ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌDavid€related€that€he€had€seen€the€survey,€which€Andy€Potter€had€created.€€He€testified€that€after€theirÐ $ t Ðfatherððs€death€Keith€told€him€that€their€father€had€given€him€the€survey.€€David€Garrett€also€€testifiedÐ  ` Ðthat€he€heard€Keith€acknowledge€that€his€tract€was€limited€to€the€seven€acres€surrounding€his€house.€Ð ü L  ÐHe€recalled€that€Keith€had€shown€him€the€plat€and€had€fenced€the€seven€acres.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àWilliam€Campbell,€a€general€sessions€court€judge€who€was€referred€to€in€the€will€as€a€sourceÐ À  Ðfor€advice,€testified€that€Gaston€Garrett€had€mentioned€that€he€intended€for€ð ðboth€of€the€boysðð€toÐ ¬ü  Ðhave€their€own€piece€of€property€and€that€he€had€a€survey.€€Mr.€Campbell€recalled€that€the€boysðð€plotsÐ ˜è  Ðwere€ð ðabout€five€acres.ððÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àThe€mother€of€the€six€children,€Gaston€Garrettððs€former€wife,€testified€that€Keith€hadÐ \¬ Ðmentioned€seven€acres€to€her€several€times.€€She€recalled€that€afterÐ H˜ ÐÌà8  àall€the€discussions€and€the€children€come€and€told€me€what€they€talked€about,€andÐ  p Ðnever€did€Keith€mention€that€he€was€supposed€to€get€all€of€that€over€there,€and€neverÐ  \ Ðdid€they€mention€that€Gaston€said€anything€about€a€ð!ð€and€I€would€like€to€say,€GastonÐ øH Ðhas€his€faults,€but€he€would€never€give€more€to€one€than€another,€and€to€talk€to€themÐ ä4 Ðlike€he€was€trying€to€give€them€equal€shares€and€then€give€all€that€piece€to€Keith.ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àKeith€was€then€called€as€a€rebuttal€witness.€€He€denied€receiving€a€plat€from€his€father€andÐ ¨ø Ðtestified€that€he€never€heard€his€father€speak€in€terms€of€seven€acre€plots.€€He€testified€that€he€hadÐ ”ä Ðonly€fenced€a€portion€of€his€property€where€he€had€kept€a€cow.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àAfter€hearing€the€evidence,€the€trial€court€found€that€ð ðMr.€Garrett€in€no€way€intended€to€giveÐ X ¨ ÐKeith€Garrett€the€entire€121€acre€tract.ðð€€The€court€found€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€theÐ D!” Ðð ðsurveyed€tractðð€referred€to€in€the€will€was€a€seven€acre€plot€and€that€Mr.€Garrett€intended€to€giveÐ 0"€  ÐDavid€Garrett€a€seven€acre€tract€as€well.€€The€court€stated€that€it€accepted€Keithððs€offer€to€markÐ #l! Ðhimself€a€plot€of€not€more€than€seven€acres€and€tender€a€plat€thereof€within€fifteen€days€to€the€courtÐ $X" Ðand€to€the€other€siblings.€€The€court€reserved€the€right€to€appoint€a€surveyor€to€mark€the€boundariesÐ ô$D # Ðif€the€parties€could€not€agree.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àKeith€moved€for€an€interlocutory€appeal€which€was€granted€by€the€trial€court€and€denied€byÐ ¸'#& Ðthis€court.€€Then,€fourteen€months€after€the€trial€courtððs€ruling,€Keith€filed€a€motion€for€new€trial€or,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðin€the€alternative,€relief€from€order€under€Rule€59€and€60.€€This€motion€asserted€that€several€otherÐ )à$( Ðwitnesses€who€had€discussions€about€the€testatorððs€intent€shortly€before€his€death€substantiatedÐ |*Ì%) ÐKeithððs€claim€to€the€entire€121€acres.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àThe€trial€court€denied€Keithððs€motion,€holding€that€it€lacked€the€authority€to€reopen€the€case.€Ð ° ÐHowever,€he€was€permitted,€for€the€record,€to€make€an€offer€of€proof€of€evidence€he€claimed€wasÐ œì Ðnewly€discovered.€€The€offer€consisted€of€testimony€from€friends€of€the€testator€which€purportedlyÐ ˆØ Ðcorroborated€Keithððs€testimony.à h àÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€entered€a€final€order,€finding€that€substantially€all€the€cash€of€the€estate€wasÐ L œ Ðeither€distributed€prior€to€the€date€of€the€testatorððs€death€or€used€for€the€administration€of€the€estate,Ð 8 ˆ Ðnothing€further€needed€to€be€done€for€the€administration€of€the€estate,€and€a€final€order€was€necessaryÐ $ t Ðfor€the€appeal€of€the€courtððs€prior€findings.€€€This€appeal€ensued.Ð  ` ÐÌà@‚‚ ìàI.€Standard€of€ReviewˆÐ è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€construction€of€a€will€is€a€question€of€law€for€the€court.€€òòPresley€v.€Hanksóó,€782€S.W.2dÐ À  Ð482,€487€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€The€standard€of€review€for€the€appellate€court€is€òòde€novoóó€with€noÐ ¬ü  Ðpresumption€of€correctness.€€òòEstate€of€Burchfiel€v.€First€United€Methodist€Church€of€Sevierville,Ð ˜è  ÐTennesseeóó,€933€S.W.2d€481,€483€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€When,€however,Ð „Ô  Ðthe€testatorððs€intent€is€determined€by€extrinsic€evidence,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€regardingÐ pÀ Ðthat€evidence€are€reviewed€òòde€novoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.€òòThrailkill€v.€Pattersonóó,€879Ð \¬ ÐS.W.2d€836,€841€(Tenn.€1994);€òòHanafee€v.€Jackson€Natððl€Bankóó,€No.€02A01„9201„CH„00004,€1992Ð H˜ ÐWL€137476€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jun.€22,€1992)€(no€Ten.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).Ð 4„ ÐÌà@ìàII.€€Keith€Garrettððs€TractˆÐ  \ ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrett€argues€that€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€that€he€and€his€wife€were€entitled€to€a€sevenÐ ä4 Ðacre€tract€was€clearly€contrary€to€the€language€of€his€fatherððs€will€and€to€his€fatherððs€intent.€€WeÐ Ð  Ðdisagree.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àð ðThe€basic€rule€in€construing€a€will€is€that€the€court€shall€seek€to€discover€the€intention€of€theÐ ”ä Ðtestator,€and€will€give€effect€to€it€unless€it€contravenes€some€rule€of€law€or€public€policy.€€ThatÐ €Ð Ðintention€is€to€be€ascertained€from€the€particular€words€used,€from€the€context€and€from€the€generalÐ l¼ Ðscope€and€purpose€of€the€instrument.ðð€€òòDaugherty€v.€Daugherty,óó€784€S.W.2d€650,€653€(Tenn.€1990).€Ð X ¨ ÐA€will€must€be€interpreted€in€light€of€the€circumstances€existing€at€the€time€of€its€execution€and€inÐ D!” Ðlight€of€its€general€purpose.€€òòIdóó.€€Every€word€used€by€the€testator€is€presumed€to€have€some€meaning.€Ð 0"€  ÐòòIdóó.€Ð #l! ÐÌà8  àWhere€the€language€of€a€will€is€plain€and€unambiguous,€extrinsic€evidence€is€notÐ ô$D # Ðadmissible€to€vary,€alter€or€contradict€the€terms€of€the€will.€€òòFrazier€v.€Frazieróó,€430Ð à%0!$ ÐS.W.2d€655,€659€(Tenn.€1968);€€òòEslick€v.€Friedmanóó,€235€S.W.2d€808€(Tenn.€1951);Ð Ì&"% ÐòòGreen€v.€Lanier,€óó456€S.W.2d€345€(Tenn.€App.€1970).€Extrinsic€evidence€of€theÐ ¸'#& Ðtestator's€intent€is€admissible,€however,€to€resolve€latent€ambiguities.€€òòSadow€v.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐSolomon,óó€319€S.W.2d€83,€85€(Tenn.€1958);òò€Holmes€v.€Roddy,óó€144€S.W.2d€788€(Tenn.Ð )à$( Ð1940).€€A€latent€ambiguity€is€defined€as€one€€where€the€equivocality€of€expression,Ð |*Ì%) Ðor€obscurity€of€intention€does€not€arise€from€the€words€themselves,€but€from€theÐ h+¸&* Ðambiguous€state€of€extrinsic€circumstances€to€which€the€words€of€the€instrumentÐ ° Ðrefer,€and€which€is€susceptible€of€explanation€by€the€mere€development€of€extraneousÐ œì Ðfacts,€without€altering€or€adding€to€the€written€language,€or€requiring€more€to€beÐ ˆØ Ðunderstood€thereby€than€will€fairly€comport€with€the€ordinary€or€legal€sense€of€theÐ tÄ Ðwords€and€phrases€made€use€of.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòIdóó.€at€789€Ð`°Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIn€re€Will€of€Leitsingeróó,€No.€01A01„9209„PB„00361,€1993€WL€190916€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€JuneÐ 8 ˆ Ð4,€1993)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed);€òòGreer€v.€Andersonóó,€36€Tenn.€App.€507,€509-16,Ð $ t Ð259€S.W.2d€550,€551-€53€(1953).€€Extrinsic€evidence,€to€be€admissible,€must€show€surroundingÐ  ` Ðcircumstances€at€the€time€of€the€execution€of€the€will,€rather€than€at€some€later€date.€€òòLocke€v.€Davisóó,Ð ü L  Ð526€S.W.2d€455,€457€(Tenn.€1975).Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€language€of€Mr.€Garrettððs€will€itself€is€not€unclear€or€uncertain.€€€The€clear€language€ofÐ À  Ðthe€will€referred€to€a€ð ðcertain€tract€of€land€more€particularly€described€in€a€survey€mapðð€which€theÐ ¬ü  Ðwill€said€was€attached.€€When€the€will€was€discovered,€the€survey€was€not€attached.€€Therefore,€theÐ ˜è  Ðambiguity€arose€due€to€the€ð ðextrinsic€circumstances€to€which€the€words€of€the€instrument€refer,ðð€i.e.,Ð „Ô  Ðthe€fact€that€no€survey€was€attached€to€the€will.€€This€created€a€latent€ambiguity.€€We€find€no€errorÐ pÀ Ðin€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€hear€evidence€to€determine€the€testatorððs€intent€regarding€the€extentÐ \¬ Ðof€the€testatorððs€bequest€to€Keith.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àKeith€contends€that€the€testator€only€owned€two€tracts€of€land,€the€121€acre€tract€on€whichÐ  p Ðhis€home,€Davidððs€home€and€the€testatorððs€home€were€all€located,€and€a€separate€38€acre€tract.€Ð  \ ÐPointing€to€his€and€his€wifeððs€testimony€that€the€testator€wanted€to€ensure€that€they€kept€theirÐ øH Ðhomeplace,€Keith€maintains€that€the€willððs€devise€of€a€€ð ðcertain€tractðð€could€only€mean€the€121€acresÐ ä4 Ðon€which€his€house€was€situated.€€We€find€this€argument€unpersuasive.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àObviously,€the€testator€meant€to€give€Keith€and€Pamela€Garrett€something€above€and€beyondÐ ¨ø Ðan€equal€share€of€his€total€estate,€as€evidenced€by€the€fact€that€the€bequest€to€them€is€the€onlyÐ ”ä Ðindividual€bequest€in€the€will.€€However,€we€do€not€find€that€the€testator€intended€to€give€them€theÐ €Ð Ðentire€one€hundred€twenty€one€(121)€acres,€leaving€only€a€38€acre€tract€for€division€among€all€hisÐ l¼ Ðchildren.Ð X ¨ Їà  àFirst,€the€record€shows€that€the€testator€owned€three€tracts€of€land,€not€two.€€Janet€GarrettÐ ° Ðconveyed€two€separate€tracts€of€land€to€the€testator€on€April€1,€1972.€€These€tracts€included€propertyÐ œì Ðð ðon€the€north€side€of€the€highway€between€the€Allardt€and€the€Taylor€Placeðð€consisting€ofÐ ˆØ Ðapproximately€thirty„eight€acres€and€a€one€hundred€acre€tract€north€of€White€Oak€Creek.€€In€addition,Ð tÄ ÐHarold€Walker€conveyed€Lot€19A€of€City€Lake€Estates,€consisting€of€approximately€19€acres,€to€theÐ `° Ðtestator€on€January€15,€1981.€€According€to€maps€in€the€record,€the€testatorððs€home€was€on€Lot€19A,Ð L œ Ðand€Keith€and€David€Garrettððs€houses€were€located€on€the€White€Oak€Creek€tract.€€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àSecond,€the€testatorððs€use€of€the€words€ð ða€certain€tract€of€land€more€particularly€described€inÐ  ` Ðthe€survey€map€attachedðð€is€inconsistent€with€an€intent€to€convey€in€its€entirety€any€parcel€owned€byÐ ü L  Ðtestator.€€Had€the€testator€intended€to€convey€an€entire€tract,€he€easily€could€have€referred€to€it€by€itsÐ è 8  Ðcommon€description€(e.g.,€City€Lakes€Estate€tract)€or€by€the€deed€which€conveyed€it€to€him.€€NoÐ Ô$  Ðsurvey€would€have€been€needed€to€describe€the€extent€of€the€bequest,€and€a€copy€of€a€deed€couldÐ À  Ðhave€served€as€the€defining€document.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThird,€the€evidence€that€the€testator€was€concerned€about€dividing€his€estate€fairly€among€Ð „Ô  Ðhis€children€is€convincing.€€The€testatorððs€former€wife€testified€that€it€would€have€beenÐ pÀ Ðuncharacteristic€of€the€testator€to€favor€one€child€over€the€others€by€bequeathing€to€Keith€Garrett€oneÐ \¬ Ðhundred€and€twenty€one€(121)€acres€and€allowing€him€to€split€the€remaining€thirty€five€(35)€with€hisÐ H˜ Ðfive€siblings.€€The€will€itself€expressed€the€testatorððs€hope€that€he€ð ðraised€six€children€that€areÐ 4„ Ðreasonable,€fair,€and€unselfishðð€and€directed€the€executors€to€provide€ð ðequal€and€fair€share[s]ðð€of€hisÐ  p Ðestate€to€the€two€daughters.€€In€addition,€the€testator€divided€his€currency€equally€among€his€sixÐ  \ Ðchildren€before€his€death.Ð øH ÐÌà  àFinally,€although€the€testimony€is€inconsistent€among€the€siblings€about€whether€they€sawÐ Ð  Ða€paper€they€thought€was€the€survey,€the€trial€court€could€have€accredited€those€witnesses€who€sayÐ ¼  Ðthe€survey€was€present€at€their€bedside€meeting€with€their€father.€€It€was€later€missing.€€A€numberÐ ¨ø Ðof€witnesses€testified€that€Keith€had€acknowledged€in€the€past€that€his€father€intended€to€leave€himÐ ”ä Ðseven€acres€and€his€house.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àWe€have€determined€that€the€testator€intended€to€give€Keith€and€Pam€Garrett€a€tract€of€landÐ X ¨ Ðin€addition€to€Keithððs€one€sixth€interest€in€the€residuary€estate.€€We€have€also€determined€that€it€wasÐ D!” Ðnot€the€testatorððs€intent€to€give€Keith€the€entire€121€acre€tract€(composed€of€two€separately„deededÐ 0"€  Ðparcels)€that€Keith€claims€was€his€fatherððs€intent.€€Absent€further€clarification€in€the€language€of€theÐ #l! Ðwill,€the€trial€court€was€correct€in€considering€other€evidence€of€the€testatorððs€intent.€€We€find€noÐ $X" Ðevidence€to€support€Keithððs€contention€that€his€father€intended€that€he€receive€121€acres€other€thanÐ ô$D # ÐKeithððs€and€Pamððs€testimony€regarding€statements€by€testator.€€Those€statements€are€less€thanÐ à%0!$ Ðconclusive€as€to€the€amount€of€land€he€intended€to€leave€to€Keith€and€Pam.€€For€example,€theÐ Ì&"% Ðtestatorððs€bare€assurance€that€he€had€ð ðtaken€care€ofðð€Keith€and€Pam€Garrett€provides€no€greaterÐ ¸'#& Ðsupport€for€Keithððs€claim€to€one€hundred€and€twenty€one€(121)€acres€than€it€does€for€the€otherÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsiblingsðð€position.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àAs€to€the€size€of€the€tract,€each€of€the€other€five€siblings€and€their€mother€testified€that€theÐ ° Ðâ âtestator€had€intended€to€bequeath€Keith€seven€acres.€€Some€witnesses€testified€that€Keith€hadÐ œì Ðacknowledged€the€seven€acre€tract€in€the€past.€€Mr.€Campbell,€the€testatorððs€legal€advisor,€recalledÐ ˆØ Ðthat€the€testator€intended€to€leave€Keith€a€tract€of€ð ðabout€five€acres.ðð€€Neither€he€nor€the€childrenððsÐ tÄ Ðmother€had€anything€to€gain€from€this€testimony.€€The€trial€court€had€the€opportunity€to€observe€eachÐ `° Ðof€the€witnesses€and€weigh€their€credibility.€€This€court€must€give€considerable€deference€to€the€trialÐ L œ Ðjudge's€findings€regarding€the€weight€and€credibility€of€any€oral€testimony€received.€€òòTownsend€v.Ð 8 ˆ ÐStateóó,€826€S.W.2d€434,€437€(Tenn.€1992);€òòJones€v.€Hartford€Accident€&€Indem.€Coóó.,€811€S.W.2dÐ $ t Ð516,€521€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€light€of€the€above€mentioned€evidence,€we€cannot€say€the€trial€court€erredÐ  ` Ðin€determining€that€the€testator€intended€to€devise€to€Keith€and€Pamela€Garrett€no€more€than€a€sevenÐ ü L  Ðacre€tract€containing€their€home.Ð è 8  ÐÌà@êêìàIII.€€David€Garrettððs€TractˆÐ À  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€ruling€granting€a€seven€acre€plot€of€land€to€David€Garrett,€however,€is€moreÐ ˜è  Ðproblematic.€€The€trial€court€found€ð ðMr.€Garrett,€by€his€acts,€showed€his€intention€to€give€David€7Ð „Ô  Ðacres€and€Keith€7€acres.ðð€€The€will€makes€no€mention€of€a€separate€bequest€to€David€Garrett.€€UnlikeÐ pÀ ÐKeith€Garrett,€David€is€only€one€of€the€residuary€beneficiaries€along€with€his€siblings.€€With€regardÐ \¬ Ðto€the€size€of€the€ð ðcertain€tractðð€of€land€bequeathed€to€Keith€Garrett,€the€courtððs€role€was€to€interpretÐ H˜ Ðthe€intent€of€the€testator,€with€the€starting€point€being€the€language€of€the€specific€bequest€in€the€will.€Ð 4„ ÐòòDaughertyóó,€784€S.W.2d€at€653.€€There€is€simply€no€such€starting€point€for€any€bequest€to€David.Ð  p ÐÌà  àThe€intent€of€the€testator€must€be€ascertained€ð ðfrom€the€particular€words€used,€from€theÐ øH Ðcontext€and€from€the€general€scope€and€purposeðð€of€the€will.€€òòDaughertyóó,€784€S.W.2d€at€653.€€AÐ ä4 Ðcourt€must€determine€the€testatorððs€intent€ð ðfrom€what€he€has€written€and€not€from€what€it€is€supposedÐ Ð  Ðhe€intended.ðð€€òòMartin€v.€Tayloróó,€521€S.W.2d€581,€584€(Tenn.€1975).€€Consequently,€a€court€cannotÐ ¼  Ðð ðmake€a€new€will€or€bequest€for€a€testator€but€must€construe€what€the€testator€has€written€andÐ ¨ø Ðpublished.ðð€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Jacksonóó,€793€S.W.2d€259,€261€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àWe€find€nothing€in€the€will€which€justifies€a€finding€that€the€testator€intended€for€DavidÐ l¼ ÐGarrett€to€take€the€seven€acre€plot€on€which€his€house€was€located.€€None€of€the€evidence€in€supportÐ X ¨ Ðof€David€Garrett€receiving€the€seven€(7)€acre€tract€showed€that€the€testator€intended€to€bequeathÐ D!” ÐDavid€a€separate€tract€of€land€at€the€time€the€will€was€executed.€€òòLockeóó,€òòóó526€S.W.2d€at€457.€€ð ðIt€isÐ 0"€  Ðnot€our€role€to€guess€at€a€testator's€intentions€based€on€what€the€parties€suppose€the€testator€mightÐ #l! Ðhave€intended€but€never€put€in€writing.ðð€€òòMartin€v.€Haleóó,€167€Tenn€438,€442,€71€S.W.2d€211,€212Ð $X" Ð(1934);€òòÔ_ÔJacobsenÔ_Ôóó,€1997€WL€576339€at€*6€(citingòò€In€re€Walkeróó,€849€S.W.2d€766,€768€(Tenn.€Ô_Ô1993)).Ô_ԀРô$D # ÐThe€testator€wrote€his€will€in€1984€and€made€no€specific€bequest€to€David.€€He€had€every€opportunityÐ à%0!$ Ðto€revise€his€will€to€provide€a€specific€bequest€to€David€like€he€made€for€Keith,€but€he€did€not.€€InÐ Ì&"% Ðfact,€the€testator€made€revisions€in€1995,€many€years€after€David€began€€construction€of€the€home,Ð ¸'#& Ðand€still€failed€to€make€a€provision€regarding€a€grant€to€him€of€that€property.€€Even€at€the€time€heÐ ¤(ô#' Ðread€his€will€to€his€children,€he€did€not€amend€the€will.€€The€court€cannot€read€something€into€a€willÐ )à$( Ðwhich€is€left€out.€€Because€the€will€makes€no€specific€bequest€of€land€to€David€Garrett,€there€was€noÐ |*Ì%) Ðbasis€in€the€language€of€the€will€for€deciding€that€Gaston€Garrett€intended€such€a€separate€bequest.€Ð h+¸&* ÐAccordingly,€we€find€no€basis€for€a€determination€that€the€testator€bequeathed€seven€acres€and€aÐ ° Ðhouse€to€David€Garrett€via€the€will.Ð œì ÐÌà  àHowever,€David€and€the€other€appellee€siblings€do€not€argue€that€their€father€made€aÐ tÄ Ðtestamentary€gift€of€the€land€to€David,€but,€instead,€make€several€alternative€arguments€to€uphold€theÐ `° Ðgrant€to€David.€€First,€they€assert€that€the€trial€courtððs€order€dividing€the€real€property€constituted€aÐ L œ Ðrecognition€or€finding€that€Gaston€Garrett€had€given€David€his€house€and€seven€acres€earlier.€€Thus,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthey€characterize€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€as€ð ðupholding€a€parol€gift€of€a€tract€with€his€house€on€it€toÐ $ t ÐDavid€as€reflective€of€the€condition€of€the€Gastonððs€estate€at€the€time€of€his€death.ðð€€Second,€DavidÐ  ` Ðbases€his€claim€on€several€Tennessee€cases€dealing€with€a€parol׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€gift€of€land€followed€by€adverseÐ ü L  Ðpossession€ð ðprovides€at€least€a€defensive€title€to€real€property.ðð€€He€cites€òòMercy€v.€Milleróó,€25€Tenn.Ð è 8  ÐApp.€621,€166€S.W.2d€628€(1942)€and€òòChoate€v.€Sewellóó,€142€Tenn.€487,€221€S.W.€190€(1919)€inÐ Ô$  Ðsupport€of€this€argument.€€The€third€theory€argued€for€upholding€the€award€to€David€is€the€agreementÐ À  Ðamong€David€and€the€other€appellee€siblings€that€this€would€be€a€fair€and€equitable€distribution.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€did€not€specify€the€legal€basis€for€its€ruling,€but€simply€stated:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àIn€keeping€with€Exhibit€1׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€filed€in€the€cause€and€in€keeping€with€the€evidentiary€proofÐ \¬ Ðof€the€intention€and€actions€of€the€Testator,€Luther€Gaston€Garrett,€and€alsoÐ H˜ Ðconsistent€with€statements€of€the€brothers€and€sisters€of€David€Garrett,€the€courtÐ 4„ Ðhereby€divests€the€heirs€of€Luther€Gaston€Garrett€.€.€.€of€title€and€vests€title€consistentÐ  p Ðwith€Exhibit€1€in€this€cause€in€David€Denver€Garrett€and€his€wife€Paula€.€.€.Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWe€first€turn€to€the€argument€under€the€first€two€theories,€that€the€courtððs€order€should€beÐ ä4 Ðupheld€because€the€grant€to€David€was€a€valid€parol€gift€or€a€parol€gift€accompanied€by€seven€yearsÐ Ð  Ðof€adverse€possession.€€Under€either€theory,€the€party€claiming€the€gift€was€required€to€show€thereÐ ¼  Ðwas€a€valid€gift.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àA€promise€to€make€a€gift€is€not€a€gift.€€òòMcAdoo€v.€Dicksonóó,€23€Tenn.€App.€74,€126€S.W.2dÐ €Ð Ð393,€402€(1938).€€In€fact,€an€oral€contract€to€devise€lands€is€within€the€Statute€of€Frauds€andÐ l¼ Ðunenforceable.€€òòGoodloe€v.€Goodloeóó,€116€Tenn.€252,€92€S.W.€767€(1905);€òòWilliams€v.€Buntinóó,€4Ð X ¨ ÐTenn.€App.€340€(1927);€òòQuirk€v.€Bank€of€Commerce€&€Trust€Coóó.,€244€F.€682€(6th€Cir.€1917).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àThere€are€two€essential€elements€to€a€gift:€donative€intent€and€delivery.€€òòIn€Re€Estate€of€Blighóó,Ð #l! Ð30€S.W.3d€319,€321€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).€€To€accomplish€delivery,€the€donor€must€relinquish€allÐ $X" Ðrights€of€control€over€the€gifted€property.€€òòYale€Univ.€v.€Fisk€Univ.óó,€660€F.€Supp.€16€(M.D.€Tenn.Ð ô$D # Ð1985).€€The€party€claiming€the€gift€has€the€burden€to€establish€those€elements€by€clear,€cogent€andÐ ° Ðconvincing€evidence.€€òòBlighóó,€30€S.W.2d€at€321.€€Any€doubt€must€be€resolved€against€the€gift.€€òòStateÐ œì Ðex€rel€Teague€v.€Home€Indem.€Coóó.,€59€Tenn.€App.€518,€442€S.W.2d€276€(1967).€€In€particular,€everyÐ ˆØ Ðfact€necessary€to€show€a€parol€gift€of€land€must€be€ample,€clear€and€convincing€to€sustain€such€gift.€Ð tÄ ÐòòMercy€v.€Milleróó,€25€Tenn.€App.€621,€166€S.W.2d€628€(1942).Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€delivery€requirement€is€met,€in€the€context€of€real€property,€by€delivery€of€a€deed.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐòòLeadford€v.€Leadfordóó,€3€Tenn.€Civ.€App.€502€(1912);€also€òòThompson€on€Real€Property,€ThomasÐ $ t ÐEditionóó€ðð€88.15(b)(1)€(David€A.€Thomas,€ed.€1994)€(ð ðA€gift€of€real€property€is€delivered€by€deliveryÐ  ` Ðof€the€deed.ðð).€€The€effect€of€valid€delivery€is€to€place€the€gifted€property€under€the€control€andÐ ü L  Ðdominion€of€the€donee.€€Until€such€delivery€is€validly€accomplished,€a€gift€may€be€revoked€by€theÐ è 8  Ðdonor;€once€it€is€accomplished,€the€doneeððs€title€and€right€to€possession€become€irrevocable.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àThe€appelleesðð€reliance€on€the€theory€of€parol€gift€coupled€with€adverse€possession€does€notÐ ¬ü  Ðobviate€the€need€to€prove€that€a€gift€actually€occurred.€€In€òòWalker€v.€Mooreóó,€745€S.W.2d€292,€294Ð ˜è  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987),€this€court€recognized€the€rule€set€out€in€òòChoate€v.€Sewellóó,€142€Tenn.€487,€221Ð „Ô  ÐS.W.€190€(1919),€that€ð ða€parol€gift€of€land€coupled€with€an€entry€by€the€donee€and€adverse€possessionÐ pÀ Ðby€him€for€more€than€seven€years€will€vest€with€him€a€possessory€or€defensive€right€to€the€land.ðð€€InÐ \¬ ÐòòWalkeróó,€we€found€the€evidence€to€be€inconsistent€with€either€an€absolute€gift€or€an€adverse€holding,Ð H˜ Ðand€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€holding€there€was€no€enforceable€gift.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€òòWalkeróó€opinion€quoted€extensively€from€òòMercy€v.€Milleróó,€25€Tenn.€App.€621,€166Ð  \ ÐS.W.2d€628€(1942),€another€case€wherein€this€court€found€there€was€insufficient€evidence€toÐ øH Ðestablish€a€gift€under€the€òòChoate€v.€Sewellóó€rule.€€In€€òòMercy€v.€Milleróó€this€court€observed:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àThe€opportunity€and€facility€for€fraud€in€setting€up€parol€gifts,€after€the€death€of€theÐ ¼  Ðalleged€donor,€make€it€the€duty€of€a€court€to€give€close€scrutiny€to€evidence€offeredÐ ¨ø Ðto€prove€such€a€gift.€.€.€.€€To€sustain€such€a€gift,€the€proof€must€be€ð ðample,€clear€andÐ ”ä Ðconvincingðð€as€to€every€fact€necessary€to€make€out€the€gift.ЀÐÐ Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€at€631€(citations€omitted).€€The€opinion€also€cited€with€approval€òòAtchley€v.€Rimmeróó,€148€Tenn.Ð X ¨ Ð303,€255€S.W.€266€for€the€rule€that€ð ðthe€unsupported€testimony€of€the€alleged€donee€ought€not€to€beÐ D!” Ðaccepted€as€sufficient€proof€of€a€giftðð€and€ð ða€gift€cannot€be€established€by€proof€of€declarations€ofÐ 0"€  Ðthe€alleged€donor€alone.ððÐ #l! ÐÌà  àIn€òòChoate€v.€Sewellóó,€the€seminal€case€for€the€rule€relied€on€by€appellees,€€a€parol€donee€wasÐ ô$D # Ðdetermined€to€be€comparable€to€a€parol€vendee.€€The€courtððs€holding€is€based€upon€the€rule€that€aÐ à%0!$ Ðparol€vendor,€or€donor,€has€the€right€to€repudiate€the€sale€or€gift,€and€that€right€accrues€immediatelyÐ Ì&"% Ðupon€the€making€of€the€sale€or€gift.€€Where€the€vendee€or€donee€enters€into€possession€with€theÐ ¸'#& Ðknowledge€of€the€parol€vendor€or€donor,€ð ðclaiming€adversely€to€him€and€all€the€world,ðð€the€vendorÐ ¤(ô#' Ðor€donor€is€precluded,€after€seven€years€of€such€adverse€possession,€from€repudiating€the€oral€saleÐ )à$( Ðâ âor€gift.òòóó€221€S.W.€at€192„93.€€ð ðSuch€adverse€possession€for€seven€years€extinguishes€the€right€of€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðparol€vendor€to€have€an€action,€either€at€law€or€in€equity€to€repudiate€his€conveyance€of€the€lands.ðð€Ð ° ÐòòIdóó.€at€193.€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àIt€is€clear€that€Davidððs€claim€under€theòò€Choate€v.€Sewellóó€holding€must€rest€upon€clear€andÐ tÄ Ðconvincing€proof€of€a€gift.€€Additionally,€for€purposes€of€determining€whether€seven€years€of€adverseÐ `° Ðpossession€has€occurred,€the€specific€date€or€time€frame€of€the€gift€must€be€shown.€€Further,€thereÐ L œ Ðmust€be€proof€that€Davidððs€possession€was€adverse€to€his€fatherððs€title€or€interest.€€A€review€of€DavidÐ 8 ˆ ÐGarrettððs€own€testimony€and€the€other€evidence€presented€at€trial€demonstrates€that€he€has€not€metÐ $ t Ðhis€burden€as€to€any€of€these€requirements.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àIn€fact,€it€is€Davidððs€own€testimony€which€defeats€the€claim€that€he€was€given€the€house€andÐ è 8  Ðland€in€the€1980s€by€way€of€any€sort€of€gift;€it€also€defeats€any€claim€that€he€possessed€the€propertyÐ Ô$  Ðadversely€to€his€fatherððs€interest.€€€€David€concedes€that€his€father€did€not€give€him€a€deed€to€any€landÐ À  Ðand€that€when€he€constructed€the€house€and€occupied€it,€he€did€so€only€with€his€fatherððs€permission.Ð ¬ü  ÐHe€testified€as€follows:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àQ:€How€did€you€come€to€build€your€house€on€this€121„acre€tract?ÐpÀÐ Ð  Ðà8  àA:€Well,€to€start€with,€I€was€just€looking€for€a€little€cabin€in€the€woods,€a€little€hut€orÐ \¬ Ðsomething€to€build,€and€I€started€mine€like€that.€€I€didnððt€have€anything€else.ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ðà8  àQ:€Did€you€talk€to€your€dad€about€this?Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà8  àA:€Well,€I€just€said,€if€he€didnððt€care,€I€would€sort€of€squat,€I€guess.Ð pÐ Ð  Ðà8  àQ:€Did€you€have€his€consent?Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà8  àA:€Yes.ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àLater€in€his€testimony,€he€stated€his€father€had€never€spoken€to€him€about€deeding€him€sevenÐ Ð  Ðacres,€but€testified:Ð ¼  ÐÌà8  àDad€never€did€tell€me€exactly€seven€acres,€no.€He€never€did€mention€that€to€me.€.€.€.Ð ”ä Ðthe€only€time€Dad€ever€made€a€reference€to€me€about€my€place,€[was]€when€he€wasÐ €Ð Ðreal€sick,€almost€to€die€.€.€.€[I€told€dad]€I€just€homesteaded€and€hope€I€get€my€placeÐ l¼ Ðand€dad€raised€up€his€head€and€he€said,€ð ðYou€got€it,ðð€like€that.€€He€never€did€tell€me,Ð X ¨ ÐI€never€did€worry€about€the€acreage€up€until€he€got€sick€and€we€knew€he€was€dying.ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€it€is€not€entirely€clear€when€the€gift€was€supposed€to€have€been€made,€butÐ #l! Ðappellees€seem€to€have€settled€on€sometime€in€the€1980s,€on€the€basis€that€that€is€when€David€wentÐ $X" Ðinto€possession€of€the€house.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Davidððs€testimony,€however,€contradicts€any€assertion€that€his€fatherÐ ô$D # Ðgave€him€the€house€in€the€1980s€since€he€stated€that€his€father€never€made€any€reference€to€the€houseÐ à%0!$ Ðuntil€shortly€before€his€death.€€In€addition,€there€is€absolutely€no€proof€that€the€testator€surrenderedÐ ° Ðcontrol€over€any€real€property€surrounding€Davidððs€house€or€that€the€testator€intended€to€give€DavidÐ œì Ðthe€house€and€any€acreage€at€the€time€David€moved€into€the€house.€€For€the€reasons€stated€herein,Ð ˆØ Ðwe€€find€the€donee€has€failed€by€prove€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€€the€testator€made€a€giftÐ tÄ Ðof€land€to€him€in€the€1980s.Ð `° ÐÌà  àFinally,€David€argues€that€because€the€will€contained€a€clause€stating€that€the€testator€hopedÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€he€raised€his€children€to€be€fair€and€equitable,€and€because€all€of€the€appellee€siblings€had€agreedÐ $ t Ðthat€David€would€be€entitled€to€the€house€and€seven€acres€before€the€rest€of€the€estate€was€divided,Ð  ` Ðthe€courtððs€order€should€be€upheld€because€it€is€fair€and€equitable€and€what€the€testator€would€haveÐ ü L  Ðwanted.€€We€have€no€doubt€that€the€siblings€are€convinced€that€their€father€wanted€David€to€have€hisÐ è 8  Ðhouse€and€seven€acres€around€it€and€that€they€are€taking€actions€consistent€with€that€belief.€€The€roleÐ Ô$  Ðof€the€courts,€however,€is€limited.€€As€stated,€above,€a€court€may€not€read€into€a€will€that€which€isÐ À  Ðnot€there.€€The€testatorððs€hope€that€his€children€would€agree€on€a€fair€and€equitable€distribution€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðhis€estate€does€not€constitute€a€separate€devise€or€bequest€and€does€not€authorize€the€children€or€theÐ ˜è  Ðcourts€to€re„write€his€will.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àTherefore,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€order€granting€to€David€and€Paula€Garrett€a€separateÐ \¬ Ðseven€acres€and€house€in€addition€to€Davidððs€interest€in€the€residuary€estate.€Thus,€the€house€builtÐ H˜ Ðby€David€and€any€land€around€it€are€to€be€considered€part€of€the€residuary€estate€which€is€to€beÐ 4„ Ðdivided€equally€among€the€children€according€to€the€provisions€of€the€will.€€€This€is€not€to€say€thatÐ  p ÐDavid€has€no€recourse€to€obtain€the€house€he€built;€he€may€always€request€that€part€of€his€one„sixthÐ  \ Ðportion€of€the€residual€estate€include€the€home€and€land€on€which€the€home€is€located.Ô‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔ€Additionally,Ð øH Ðwhile€the€siblings€are€free,€of€course,€to€give€their€one„sixth€interest€in€the€house€built€by€David€andÐ ä4 Ðacreage€surrounding€it€to€David,€the€agreement€of€five€of€them€cannot€divest€Keith€of€his€one„sixthÐ Ð  Ðinterest€in€the€residuary€estate.׃Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†X%ˆXXX%ˆÌ#ÔÔ‡X%ˆXXX%ˆÔÐ ¼  ÐÔ#†X%ˆXXX%ˆÜÍ#ÔÌà@ÖÖìàIV.€€Motion€for€New€TrialˆÐ ”ä ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrett€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€his€motion€for€new€trial€or,Ð l¼ Ðalternatively,€for€relief€from€the€order.€€That€motion€was€made€under€Tennessee€Rules€of€CivilÐ X ¨ ÐProcedure€59€and€60׃´×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€over€fourteen€months€after€entry€of€the€order€construing€the€will.€The€basis€forÐ D!” Ðthe€motion€€was€that€counsel€had€discovered€witnesses€to€ð ðcontradict,€rebut€and€establish€the€trueÐ 0"€  Ðintent€of€the€testator€at€or€near€the€time€of€his€deathðð€and€that,€because€the€appellees€had€presentedÐ ° Ðevidence€regarding€testatorððs€intent€at€the€time€of€his€death,€Keith€Garrett,€the€petitioner,€should€beÐ œì Ðgiven€that€opportunity.€€The€motion€contended€that€the€evidence€was€not€discovered€until€after€theÐ ˆØ Ðhearing,€when€the€proposed€witnesses€heard€of€the€courtððs€decision,€and€that€the€evidence€wasÐ tÄ Ðrelevant€to€key€issues.€€The€motion€asked€the€trial€court€to€grant€a€new€hearing,€on€the€issue€decidedÐ `° Ðover€a€year€previously,€asking€the€court€to€ð ðgrant€a€new€trial€in€this€cause€on€the€issue€of€dispositionÐ L œ Ðof€the€real€property€of€the€decedent.ðð€€The€appellees€opposed€the€motion€on€the€ground€it€wasÐ 8 ˆ Ðuntimely.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrett€was€permitted€to€make€an€offer€of€proof,€which€included€affidavits€and€liveÐ ü L  Ðtestimony.€€At€the€close€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€declined€to€change€its€ruling€on€the€basis€of€theÐ è 8  Ðoffered€testimony,€stating€it€had€already€denied€the€motion€for€new€trial.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrettððs€motion€was€entirely€designed€to€get€the€court€to€hear€evidence€from€witnessesÐ ¬ü  Ðwho€were€not€called€in€the€earlier€hearing€on€the€issue€decided€in€that€hearing.€€Essentially,€it€wasÐ ˜è  Ða€request€that€the€court€re„open€an€order,€and€the€issues€decided€in€that€order,€which€had€been€enteredÐ „Ô  Ðover€a€year€previously,€on€the€basis€of€newly„discovered€evidence.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€59.02€states€in€pertinent€part:Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àTime€for€Motions.--A€motion€for€new€trial€and€all€other€motions€permitted€under€thisÐ  p Ðrule€shall€be€filed€and€served€within€thirty€(30)€days€after€judgment€has€been€enteredÐ  \ Ðin€accordance€with€Rule€58.ÐøHÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àObviously,€the€motion€for€new€trial€was€not€filed€within€thirty€days€of€entry€of€the€orderÐ Ð  Ðconstruing€the€will.€€In€addition,€the€evidence€the€motion€sought€to€have€the€court€consider€was€notÐ ¼  Ðnewly„discovered€evidence€within€the€rule€regarding€new€trial.€€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  àAnother€principle€of€law€that€is€deeply€ingrained€in€the€holdings€of€our€courts€and€hasÐ €Ð Ðbeen€repeated€in€the€majority€of€the€some€65€cases€where€our€courts€have€addressedÐ l¼ Ðthis€issue€is€that€to€justify€a€new€trial€for€newly€discovered€evidence€it€must€be€shownÐ X ¨ Ðthat€the€new€evidence€was€not€known€to€the€moving€party€prior€to€or€during€trial€andÐ D!” Ðthat€it€could€not€have€been€known€to€him€through€exercise€of€reasonable€diligence.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòSeay€v.€City€of€Knoxvilleóó,€654€S.W.2d€397,€399€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983)€(citations€omitted).€€AnÐ $X" Ðaffidavit€in€support€of€such€a€motion€must€set€out€the€facts€constituting€due€diligence€withÐ ô$D # Ðparticularity.€€òòId.€€óóFurtheròò,óó€ð ðin€ruling€on€a€motion€for€new€trial€on€the€grounds€of€newly€discoveredÐ à%0!$ Ðevidence€the€trial€court€is€vested€with€wide€discretion,€and€its€denial€of€such€a€motion€will€not€beÐ Ì&"% Ðdisturbed€by€an€appellate€court€unless€it€has€abused€its€discretion.ðð€€òòEvans€v.€Evansóó,€558€S.W.2d€851,Ð ¸'#& Ð853€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1977).Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€acted€well€within€its€discretion€when€it€denied€the€motion€for€new€trial€whichÐ |*Ì%) Ðwas€filed€many€months€after€the€entry€of€the€order.€€In€addition,€having€reviewed€the€affidavit€andÐ h+¸&* Ðtestimony€offered€in€support€of€the€motion€for€new€trial,€we€find€that€the€evidence€Keith€GarrettÐ ° Ðpresented€was€not€newly€discovered€evidence€that€could€not€have€been€discovered€prior€to€or€duringÐ œì Ðthe€hearing€through€the€exercise€of€due€diligence.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€the€motionÐ ˆØ Ðfor€new€trial.Ð tÄ ÐÌà@‘‘ìàV.€€The€òòIn€Terrorem€óóClauseˆÐ L œ ÐÌà  àKeith€Garrett€argues€that€because€his€siblings€challenged€his€interpretation€of€the€will,€theÐ $ t Ðforfeiture€clause€was€activated.€€He€maintains€that€they€should€take€nothing€under€the€will.€€TheÐ  ` Ðsiblings€respond€that€the€òòin€terroremóó€clause€has€no€effect€because€neither€side€is€objecting€to€theÐ ü L  Ðprobate.€€They€also€contend€that€forfeiture€provisions€are€not€enforceable€when€suits€are€pursued€inÐ è 8  Ðgood€faith,€relying€on€òòWinningham€v.€Winninghamóó,€966€S.W.2d€48€(Tenn.€1998).Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àTennessee€courts€recognize€the€validity€of€forfeiture€provisions€in€wills.€€€òòTate€v.€Campóó,€147Ð ¬ü  ÐTenn.€137,€149,€245€S.W.€839,€842€(1922)€(finding€that€such€provisions€are€not€void€as€againstÐ ˜è  Ðpublic€policy).€Ð „Ô  Ðâ âÐ pÀ Ðà8  àHowever,€it€has€been€the€rule€since€òò€Tate€v.€Camp,óó€that€a€forfeiture€provision€will€notÐ ° Ðâ âbe€enforced€where€a€contest€is€pursued€ð ðin€good€faith€and€upon€probable€cause.ðð€Ð œì ÐAfter€considering€decisions€from€other€jurisdictions,€the€Court€in€òò€Tate€v.€CampóóÐ ˆØ Ðapproved€the€following€from€òòSouth€Norwalk€Trust€Co.€v.€St.€Johnóó,€92€Conn.€168,€101Ð tÄ ÐA.€961,€963€(1917),€ð ðWhere€the€contest€has€not€been€made€in€good€faith,€and€uponÐ `° Ðprobable€cause€and€reasonable€justification,€the€forfeiture€should€be€given€fullÐ L œ Ðoperative€effect.€€€Where€the€contrary€appears,€the€legatee€ought€not€to€forfeit€hisÐ 8 ˆ Ðlegacy.ððÐ$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌòòWinninghamóó,€966€SW2d€at€51.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àIt€appears€that€the€siblings€commenced€this€action€in€good€faith€and€upon€probable€cause.€Ð Ô$  ÐThe€record€shows€that€they€simply€disagreed€with€Keithððs€desire€to€take€the€vast€majority€of€hisÐ À  Ðfatherððs€estate.€€There€was€obviously€a€valid€question€as€to€what€the€survey€contained€in€light€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðfact€that€the€will€referenced€the€document€and€it€was€never€found.€€Additionally,€they€have€prevailedÐ ˜è  Ðat€trial€and€on€appeal€on€the€size€of€the€parcel€bequeathed€to€Keith.€€Thus,€the€òòin€terrorem€óóclause€wasÐ „Ô  Ðnot€triggered.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РpÀ ÐÌà@‚‚ ìàVI.€€Frivolous€AppealˆÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€siblings€argue€that€this€appeal€is€frivolous€and€they€are€entitled€to€sanctions€becauseÐ  p ÐKeithððs€position€that€he€is€entitled€to€all€one€hundred€twenty€one€(121)€acres€is€groundless.€€TheyÐ  \ Ðseek€costs€and€attorney€fees€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„1„122.׃0Ü×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€We€cannot€say€that€thisÐ øH Ðappeal€was€totally€lacking€in€merit,€or€taken€for€delay,€so€as€to€invoke€the€statutory€penalty,Ð ä4 Ðparticularly€when€we€vacated€the€trial€courtððs€disposition€giving€David€Garrett€a€separate€tract.Ð Ð  ÐÌà@™™$ìàVII.€€SummaryˆÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€decision€to€award€Keith€and€Pamela€Garrett€a€seven€acre€tract€surroundingÐ €Ð Ðtheir€homestead€is€affirmed.€€We€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€decision€regarding€the€grant€of€a€separateÐ l¼ Ðâ âbequest€of€the€home€and€seven€(7)€surrounding€acres€to€David€Garrett.€€Next,€we€find€the€trial€courtÐ X ¨ Ðdid€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€denying€Keithððs€motion€for€new€trial€and€the€trial€court€properlyÐ ° Ðrefused€to€apply€the€òòin€terrorem€óóclause.€€Finally,€we€reject€the€appelleesðð€request€for€sanctions.€€This€Ð œì Ðâ âcause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€actions€necessary€not€inconsistent€with€this€opinion.€Ð ˆØ ÐCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€equally€to€the€appellant€and€the€appellees,€for€which€execution€mayÐ tÄ Ðissue,€if€necessary.Ð `° ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à______________________________Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€Ô_ÔCOTTRELL,Ô_Ô€JUDGE