WPCMP M荳HE.3D"+Ņ\av־|Up4Z+bwެuń :+bm$^l퓍~4w?IJ6SSpqSGT #YI>By!7*sVa%yܮ|ܸa36*)8 !h 7G2@f\R!D6C“fuaX@Mp '6k$L=^gT Q?˔u<[%# kF$w&ŤsbPTVn\w|t?Qqafi *lN^2Qu`++Ֆjk?1AIJWRc`3"U_w8o('$"Cav?5@-SJB؎)ҙS\]W ':$Áv;ےegi6yp>Ty %UN 0UNz 0D 0 0 z 1 1u Nx 72z U6  n4U>N8U*: 0UdE 0 0 0 0d 0A 0 0 0C 0  0 0 0 0S 0 0 0 0@k 0 0 0P 0! 0! 0"bv# 0~# 00;$ 0<k$ 0$ 0>e% 0v% 0`& 0`y& 0`& 0`9' 0`' 08' 01( 02) 05) 0:1* 0Yk* 0_* 0 #+ 0j-, 0- B*/ D/E/t/ 0/ D/1 0=1 06 2 0A2 0:I3 0^3 0<3 1e4 0N44 0n8 Y9sf<^ @ B@AA 0CD D3D D-E 0KGEwE ASEE 0F 0DSG AG9BH4{IcIKKL mL#LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLrM(@ Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(#$  0  *G+M (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5   C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i)<6X9`(Courier NewLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial*+ (_2623  ..*D+M (_24   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *A+M (_23  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *>+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_1723  Ԁ*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  - -&2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK <6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K <6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/K <6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7E(X7  ?%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7&  d dD)1dxd  <:zTop of For7H(X7  ?%2A`Arial?  S\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7D)2dxd0KS.SampleK <6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK <6X9`(Courier NewKS\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB   !"#$% 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(O$  Rr$      1    _ԀInhisMotiontoRehear,AlterorAmendSummaryJudgment,orintheAlternative,MotionforNewTrial,  GoodwinstatedthatheerredinlistingWinCor,Inc.asapartytothelawsuitbecause itwasonlyintendedthatDaniel x GoodwinbethesolePlaintiffinthecase,butthatWinCor,Inc.belistedwithinthebodyofthecomplaintnotasa @ party.    InresponsetoGoodwinsmotiontodismissWinCorasapartyappellant,thiscourtfiledanorderdismissing @ WinCorsappealandconfirmingthepartiessharedpositionthatWinCorhasneverbeenanappellantinthiscase.For X thepurposesofthisopinion,Goodwinistheloneappellant.(|G2r$ !.8 dd8         0    Rr$      2    _ԀGoodwinstatedinanamendmenttohisoriginalcomplaintthatDunlapwasspecificallyretainedtostop  foreclosureproceedingsagainsttwentyacresinShelbyCountyownedbyWinCor,Inc.,therebyprotectingtheinterests x oftheshareholdersofWinCor,Inc.andthebeneficiariesoftheGoodwinFamilyTrust.Inamemorandumopposing @ Dunlapsmotionforsummaryjudgment,Goodwinnotedthatthe solepurposeforretainingMr.Dunlapwastoprotect X propertiesfromforeclosurebyInSouthBankuntilanothersalecouldbeconsummated.    i Rr$      3    _ԀInamemorandumopposingDunlapsMotionforSummaryJudgment,Goodwinassertsthatdefendants  absenceresultedinirreparableharmtoplaintiffandWinCor. x 8  8`   TheConsentOrderwasproposedanddraftedbyInSouthBanksattorneywithout X anyrepresentationorconsentbyPlaintiffs.Plaintiffswereabandonedby   DefendantDunlapasCounselforPlaintiffsintheCourtroomwithapending  MotionfromopposingCounselwithoutRepresentationbyDefendantDunlap. `  Consequently,theConsentOrderwasindeeddraftedandsubmitted,wordedinthe ( x benefitofInSouthBankasitwaspreparedbytheircounsel.Plaintiffscontendthis  @ absenceofCounselcausedirreparableharmtoPlaintiffs.Plaintiffswerenot    affordedtheiropportunitytoarguethemotionorrequestadditionaltime.k-s  d 7 Rr$      4    _ԀGoodwinfiledtheAffidavitofChrisSmith( Smith)insupportofplaintiffsargumentthatDunlap  personallyreceivedtherealestatepurchasecontractonMay21,1999.Smith,anemployeeofGoodwinsbusiness,was x presentatthetimeofdelivery.Inhisaffidavit,SmithtestifiedtotheeventsofMay21,1999. @ 8  8`   IrodewithMr.GoodwintodeliverthecontracttoattorneyJohnDunlapsoffice   at1433PoplarAve.andwentinsidetheofficebuildingwithDanGoodwinwhile  wewaitedforawomanthatworkedtheretomakecopiesofthecontract.(|39$ !.8 dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|39$ !.8 dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK / Rr$      5    _ԀThetrialcourtdidnotaddressorexplainwhyGoodwinwasnotpermittedadditionaltimetosecurethe  discoverydepositionsofattorneysAustinandHaynes.[-:i+00 Y Rr$      6    _ԀMeachamsaffidavitwasfiledseventeendaysafterthetrialcourtsOrdergrantingsummaryjudgmentto  Dunlap.Consequently,thetrialcourtdidnotaddressorconsiderthisaffidavitinitsOctober2,2001Order.Goodwin x hasprovidednoexplanationorjustificationforhisfailuretosubmitorobtainMeachamsaffidavitpriortothe @ September28,2001summaryjudgmenthearing. X 3|x UHP LaserJet 4 Plus,,,,,,0 D'Army COAnonlawyer P.J. W.S.HighersLillardDeSotoInSouthdetainerAuthementt]hereDArmyMalendaMeachamAffiantT.R.C.P.movant BainCarvellT.R.A.P.fail[sDamronT.C.A.SammonsRotroffStarksFurman I]n Yer JurC.J.S.WinCorDunlap !.8 dd8     _   8XXdd8  @  INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#  #Ԉ ,   September20,2002Session X XX  # XX#DANIELP.GOODWIN,etal.v.JOHNE.DUNLAPXX    ` @@ ADirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforShelbyCounty  h @@No.CT00276800TheHonorableD'ArmyBailey,Judge  X @@*AV) ` dE<` A (  @@TTNo.W200200014COAR3CVFiledDecember10,_2002_ '  AV) ` dE<` A      XXXX  Thisisalegalmalpracticeactionoriginallyfiledbyindividualplaintiffandacorporation.  Theindividualplaintiffwasactingproseforhimselfandalsoforthecorporation.Thetrialcourt  grantedsummaryjudgmenttodefendantbaseduponhisaffidavitthathecompliedwiththestandard  ofcarerepresentingthecorporateplaintiff,thathehadnoattorney/clientrelationshipwiththe z individualplaintiff.Nocountervailingaffidavitconcerningthestandardofcarewasfiledbythe f plaintiffsandthedismissalofthecorporationscasewasalsopremisedontherulethatacorporation R cannotactprosebyanonlawyeragent.Individualplaintiffsaffidavitdoesnotspecificallyrefute > defendantsaffidavitconcerningnoattorneyclientrelationshipbetweentheindividualplaintiffand *z defendant.Plaintiffsappeal.Weaffirm. f #XXXXڷ## XXr#XX  Tenn.R.App.P.3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmedand 2 Remanded  "   # XA #XX. W.FrankCrawford,P.J.,W.S.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichAlanE.Highers,  J.andHollyKirbyLillard,J.,joined.   DanielP.Goodwin,ProSe "! JamesL.Kirby,MichelleM.Drake,Memphis,ForAppellee,JohnE.Dunlap b$#   OPINION # XX/ #XX  B&!% # XX #XX   8XXdXXd8FOY  Thisisalegalmalpracticecase.PlaintiffDanielP.Goodwin( Goodwin),acting prose  "(r#' andonbehalfofWinCor,Inc.( WinCor)Q #  1      ,filedacomplaintagainstdefendantattorneyJohnE. )b$(. _Dunlap( Dunlap)fordamagescausedbyDunlapsalleged failuretoperformandrepresentthe  basicneedstobenefithisclients.GoodwinisabeneficiaryofWinCorstockandapartialowner  ofanirrevocabletrusthereinafterreferredtoasTheGoodwinFamilyTrust.Atthetimethis  controversyarose,GoodwinwasalsoaholderinduecourseofmortgagenotesontwoWinCor  ownedproperties.ThesepropertieswerelocatedinShelbyCounty,Tennessee,andDeSotoCounty, p Mississippirespectively.GoodwinassertsthatDunlapwasawareofhispositionasathirdparty `  beneficiaryandcreditorofWinCor. P    DunlapisanattorneydulylicensedtopracticelawintheStateofTennessee,andMemphis, 0  ShelbyCounty,Tennessee.  p    Therecordinthiscaseislitteredwithmultipleamendedcomplaintsandrevisedstatements P  offactsfiledbyplaintiff.BecausethepleadingsandbrieffiledbyGoodwinpresentachaoticand @  oftendifficulttodecipheraccountoftheunderlyingfacts,weareforcedtopiecemealtogetherthe 0  factualbasisofthecaseatbar.Fromourreadingoftherecordandthebriefssubmittedbythe   parties,wefindtherelevantfacts,viewedinthelightmostfavorabletoplaintiff,asfollows.    OnDecember1,1998,DunlapwasretainedbyC.EugeneGoodwin( President),President  ofWinCor,fortheexpresspurposeofrepresentingWinCorinabankruptcyaction.S@ #  2      ׀Accordingto  Dunlapsaffidavit,filedinsupportofhismotionforsummaryjudgment,PresidentdirectedDunlap  toprepareaChapter11BankruptcyPetition,adisclosurestatement,andaChapter11planonbehalf p ofWinCor.Inhisaffidavit,Dunlapfurthertestifiedthatnoattorneyclientrelationshipexisted ` betweenplaintiffanddefendant,althoughhisretainerfeewasallegedlyfinancedthroughfunds P providedbyGoodwin.PlaintiffGoodwindisputesDunlapslimitedviewofhisrepresentation,and @ notedinhisStatementofFacts,filed after thetrialcourtsrulingonDunlapssummaryjudgment 0 motion,that  p 8  8`   Defendantslegalrepresentationwasalwaystoincludethecollective P interestsofthebeneficiariesofWinCor,Inc.,whoareoneandthe @ sameasthefamilymembersoftheGoodwinFamilyTrust,andthe 0 individualpersonalinterestsofPlaintiffDanielGoodwinwithrespect  totheDefendantsprotectionofthepropertiesthatwereownedby  WinCor,Inc.Specifically,DefendantwasmadeawarethatPlaintiff  DanielGoodwinheldmortgagesontwopropertiesthatwereowned  byWinCor,Inc.,andinvolvedinforeclosureproceedings.Defendant p knewthatPlaintiffsinterest,andtheinterestofWinCor,Inc.were `  thesamewithreferencetostoppingtheforeclosureproceedings P  againstthepropertiesandDefendantencouragedPlaintifftoemploy @  himbasedonthatrelationship.0 ` x` x +  DunlappreparedandfiledthebankruptcypetitiononbehalfofWinCoronDecember7,1998 P  intheUnitedStatesBankruptcyCourtfortheWesternDistrictofTennessee.Inresponseto @  Dunlapsfiling,InSouthBank( InSouth),acreditorofWinCor,filedaMotiontoTerminate 0  AutomaticStay,orintheAlternative,forAdequateProtection.InSouthsmotionwasenteredto   protectorassertitsforeclosureinterestsinWinCorsShelbyCountyandDeSotoCountyproperties.  ThebankruptcycourtheldahearingonthismotiononFebruary18,1999,atwhichtimeDunlap  disclosedtothecourtthatGoodwin,withoutthepriorconsentofthecourtorDunlap,signeda  contractwithDiamondRealtytolistWinCorsShelbyCountyandDeSotoCountyproperties.In  hispleadings,Goodwinadmitstosigningalistingcontractwithadifferentrealtor,butmaintainsthat  WinCorshandwasforcedduetoDunlapsrepeatedfailurestorespondtophoneinquiriesfromboth p plaintiffandWinCor. `   Thecourtnotedconcernwiththe deterioratingstateoftheproceedings,anddirectedthe @ partiestotakeabriefrecesstodiscussthespecificsofthepropertylistingandsale.Whentheparties 0 totheproceedingreturnedfromrecess,Dunlapinexplicablyfailedtoaccompanyplaintiffand  p Presidentbackintothecourtroom.InDunlapsabsence,InSouthsattorneyadvisedthecourtasto ` thepartiesagreementtoallowWinCor90days fromthedateoftheentryoftheordertocloseand P pay[InSouth]off.FailureofWinCortocomplywiththisorderwouldgrantInSouthrelieffrom @ theautomaticstaythusallowingthebanktoproceedtoforeclosure.AConsentOrderGranting 0 RelieffromAutomaticStayastoInSouthwasenteredonFebruary24,1999.T #  3      ׀Sincethisorderwas   notmadepartoftherecord,wequotetherelevantlanguagefromDunlapsaffidavit. ! Ї8  8`   [WinCor,Inc.]shallhave(90)daysfromentryofthisorderwithin  whichtosellthepropertyandcompleteaclosingandpayoffInSouth  Bank.` x` x 8  8`   ******************************************************p` x` x 8  8`   ThatuponthefailuretocompleteandpayoffInSouthBankonor P  beforetheexpirationof(90)days,InSouthBankshallbeGranted @  RelieffromtheAutomaticStaytoproceedwithanyandallactionto 0  recoverpossessionincludingforeclosure,forcibleentryanddetainer  p  ofproperty.` ` x` x g$E)  OnMay21,1999,WinCorenteredintoarealestatepurchasecontractwithVinceAuthement 0  ( Authement)forthesaleofonlytheShelbyCountyproperty.Pursuanttothecontract,Authement   agreedtopay$200,000.00toWinCor.Inanaddendumtothecontract,Authementagreedtopay   $36,000.00toDanielGoodwinastheholderinduecourseofasecondmortgageontheproperty  forthesameamount.    InhismemorandumopposingDunlapsMotionforSummaryJudgment,filedAugust31,  2001,GoodwinnotedthathehanddeliveredacopyofthepurchasecontracttoDunlaponMay21, p 1999.W #  4      ׀Afterreviewingthecontract,DunlapfiledaMotiontoApproveSaleofRealEstateandfor ` ExtensionofTimeinwhichtoSellRealEstateonJune16,1999.OnJuly9,1999,whilethemotion P wasstillpending,InSouthproceededwiththeforeclosureofWinCorsShelbyCountyandDeSoto @ CountypropertiesundertheauthorityofthecourtsFebruary24,1999Order. 0   GoodwininitiatedalegalmalpracticesuitagainstDunlaponMay26,2000,alleging ` negligenceforDunlaps failuretoperformandrepresentthebasicneedstobenefitshisclients. P GoodwinsallegationsofnegligencearepremisedonDunlapsperceived abandonmentofWinCor @ andplaintiffattheFebruary18,1999hearingbeforetheBankruptcyCourt,andDunlapsasserted 0 failuretosubmittherealestatepurchasecontracttothecourtduringthetimeperiodspecifiedinthe   February24,1999Order. !   DunlapfiledhisanswertoGoodwinscomplaintonAugust18,2001.Inhisanswer,Dunlap #! assertedthatGoodwindidnothavestanding,capacity,or theauthorityorthepermissionofthe $" BankruptcyCourttotakeanyactiononbehalfofWincor,Inc.Additionally,Dunlapnotedthathe  compliedwiththeacceptablestandardofpracticeforattorneyspracticinglawinShelbyCounty,  Tennessee,inhisrepresentationofWinCor,andmaintainedthat [t]herewasneveranattorney  clientrelationshipbetweentheplaintiffDanielP.GoodwinandthedefendantJohnE.Dunlap.    OnAugust6,2001,DunlapfiledaMotionforSummaryJudgmentintheCircuitCourtof p ShelbyCounty,Tennessee.Insupportofthismotion,Dunlapfiledanaffidavitstatinghis `  knowledgeoftheapplicablestandardofpracticeandthefactualbasisfordefendantsconclusionthat P  inbehalfofhisclient,Wincor,hefullycompliedwiththisstandard.Shortlythereafter,Goodwin @  submittedamemorandumopposingDunlapsmotion.Goodwindidnotattachacountervailing 0  affidavitfromanexpertrefutingDunlapsaffidavit.Priortothescheduledhearing,Goodwinfiled  p  amotiontohaveDunlapssummaryjudgmentmotionheldinabeyancependingthecompletionof `  thescheduleddiscoverydepositionsofattorneysLarryD.Austin( Austin)andSeanHaynes P  ( Haynes). @    AhearingonDunlapssummaryjudgmentmotionwasheldonSeptember28,2001.After   carefulconsiderationofDunlapsmotion,supportingaffidavit,statementofundisputedfacts,and  theentirerecord,thetrialcourtenteredanorderonOctober2,2001grantingsummaryjudgmentto  Dunlap.b #  5      ׀Thecourtprovidedthefollowingrationaleforitsdecision.  8  8`   TheCourtfindsthatwhetheralawyercompliedwiththerecognized  standardofacceptablepracticeapplicabletolawyersinthis p jurisdictionisaquestionofexpertopinionandisbeyondthecommon ` knowledgeoflaymen,thatthedefendantDunlapestablishedbyhis P affidavitthathepossessedandexercisedthatdegreeofcare,skilland @ diligenceordinarilypossessedandexercisedbylawyerspracticing 0 lawinthisjurisdictionandthathecompliedwiththatrecognized  p standard,andthattherewasnocountervailingaffidavitofanexpert ` torefutethedefendantsaffidavit.P` x` x 8  8`   Thecourtfurtherfindsthatthedefendant,Dunlap,asestablishedby 0 hisAffidavit,wasretainedbyWincor,Inc.tofileabankruptcy   petitionforWincor,Inc.andtorepresentWincor,Inc.inconnection ! withthebankruptcycase,andthatthedefendantwasnotretainedto "  represent,anddidnotrepresent,theplaintiffGoodwin....[Thecourt #! finds]thattheplaintiffasabeneficiaryofTheGoodwinFamilyTrust $" andacreditorofthedebtorinbankruptcy,didnotcreateanattorney % # clientrelationshipwiththedefendantDunlap,asarguedbythe p&!$ plaintiffGoodwin;andthattheplaintiffGoodwinhasnoclaimor `'"% causeofactionforlegalmalpracticeagainstthedefendant.P(#&` x` x Ї  OnOctober19,2001,GoodwinfiledtheaffidavitofMalendaMeacham.d #  6      ׀Meachamtestified  toheropinionthatitisa grossdeviationoftheacceptablestandardofpracticeforapracticing  attorneyintheStateofTennesseetoleaveaclientduringahearingormotion.Affiantfurther  affirmedthatDunlapsallegedfailuretodelivertherealestatepurchasecontracttothecourtprior  toexpirationoftheOrderdeadlineconstituted morethanmerepalpablenegligence,butCulpable p conduct. `    GoodwinfiledaMotiontoRehear,AlterorAmendSummaryJudgmentorintheAlternative, @  MotionforNewTrial,onOctober17,2001.Inhismotion,Goodwinpointedtonumerous 0   disputedissuesoffactprecludingsummaryjudgment,andfurtherassertedthatDunlaps  p   palpablenegligenceshouldnotrequireexperttestimony.OnNovember2,2001,Goodwinfiled `  aStatementofFacts,followedbyanamendedversionameresevendayslater.Dunlapfileda P  MotiontoStrikePlaintiffsStatementofFactsonthebasisthatGoodwinspleadingsdidnotcomply @  withTennesseeRuleofCivilProcedure56.03.Thetrialcourt,inahearingonNovember16,2001, 0  deniedGoodwinsmotion,butneverruleduponDunlapsmotiontostrike.     Goodwinappealed,presentingthefollowingeightissuesforreview,asquotedfromhisbrief:  8  8`   1.WasiterrorwhentheTrialCourtdeniedPlaintiffs Motionof  PlaintiffsforNinetyDayStay?` x` x 8  8`   2.WasiterrorwhentheTrialCourtdeniedPlaintiffs Motionto ` HoldinAbeyance?P` x` x 8  8`   3.DidtheTrialCourterrwhentheCourtgrantedtheDefendants 0  MotionforSummaryJudgment? p` x` x 8  8`   4.DidtheTrialCourterrwhenitdismissedPlaintiffGoodwins P individualcasebasedonT.R.C.P.56?@` x` x 8  8`   5.WastheTrialCourtinerrorwhenitdismissedPlaintiffscase   withoutallowingPlaintifftoAmendhiscomplaint?!` x` x 8  8`   6.WasiterrorbytheTrialCourttoDismisswithprejudice,by #!  grantingan OrderforSummaryJudgmentagainstWinCor,Inc.as $" FOY F F  WinCor,Inc.wasnotrepresentedbycounselandnoonehadsigned  thecomplaintonbehalfofWinCor,Inc.?` x` x  8  8`   7.DidtheTrialCourterrwhenitdeniedPlaintiffs Motionto  Rehear,AlterorAmendSummaryJudgment,orinthealternative, p MotionforNewTrial?` ` x` x 8  8`   8.WasiterrorforthecourttograntSummaryJudgmentanddismiss @  PlaintiffscasebasedonthedoctrineofResIpsaLoquitur?0 ` x` x   WebeginwithanexaminationofGoodwinsfirstandsecondissuesconcerningmotionsfor `  a90daystayandtoholdthecaseinabeyance.OnAugust31,2001,plaintiffsfileda Motionof P  PlaintiffsforNinetyDayStayseekingadditionaltimetohireanattorney.OnSeptember21,2001, @  sevendaysbeforeDunlapssummaryjudgmentmotionwasscheduledforhearing,Goodwinfiled 0  amotiontoholddefendantsmotioninabeyancependingthecompletionoftwodiscovery   depositions.Insupportofoneofhismotions,GoodwinfiledaNoticetoTakeDepositionofLarry  D.AustinonOctober17,2001andanoticetotakethedepositionofSeanM.HaynesonOctober22,  2001.    DespiteGoodwinsargumentthatthetrialcourtdeniedhismotions,thereisnoevidencein  therecordtoindicatethatthecourtenteredsucharulingorevenconsideredthemotionsatall.In p fact,thereisnoevidenceintherecordtosuggestthatGoodwincompliedwithLocalRule5(b)of ` theCircuitCourtofShelbyCounty,whichprovides: P 8  8`   Allmotionsexceptthoseduringtheactualtrialofthecaseshallbe 0 enteredonthemotiondocket.Onlythosemotionsplacedonthe  p motiondocketbythecloseofbusinessontheprecedingFridayshall ` beheard.P` x` x BecausetherecorddoesnotprovideevidenceofwhetherGoodwinsmotionswereenteredonthe 0 docket,wecannotfindthatthecourtwasinerrorforfailingtograntorconsidersuchmotions.   DunlapassertsinhisbriefthatGoodwinsmotionswereneversetforhearing,anaccusationthathas ! neverbeenrefutedoraddressedbyplaintiff.Wefindnoerroronthepartofthetrialcourt "  concerningthesemotions. #!   Aspreviouslynoted,WinCorisnotappealingthetrialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgment % # toDunlap.Accordingly,thedeterminativeissueiswhetherthetrialcourterredingrantingDunlap p&!$ summaryjudgmentinGoodwinsaction.   `'"% # XX= #XX   Amotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbegrantedwhenthemovantdemonstratesthatthere @)$' arenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthatthemovingpartyisentitledtoajudgmentasamatter 0*%( oflaw.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.03.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmentbearstheburdenof  +p&) demonstratingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactexists. Bainv.Wells ,936S.W.2d618,622 ,`'* (Tenn.1997).Onamotionforsummaryjudgment,thecourtmusttakethestrongestlegitimateview  oftheevidenceinfavorofthenonmovingparty,allowallreasonableinferencesinfavorofthat  party,anddiscardallcountervailingevidence. Id .In Byrdv.Hall ,847S.W.2d208(Tenn.1993),  ourSupremeCourtstated:  8  8`   Onceitisshownbythemovingpartythatthereisnogenuineissue `  ofmaterialfact,thenonmovingpartymustthendemonstrate,by P  affidavitsordiscoverymaterials,thatthereisagenuine,materialfact @  disputetowarrantatrial.Inthisregard,Rule56.05providesthatthe 0  nonmovingpartycannotsimplyrelyuponhispleadingsbutmustset  p  forth specificfacts showingthatthereisagenuineissueofmaterial `  factfortrial.P ` x` x  Id .at21011(citationsomitted)(emphasisinoriginal). 0    Summaryjudgmentisonlyappropriatewhenthefactsandthelegalconclusionsdrawnfrom  thefactsreasonablypermitonlyoneconclusion. Carvellv.Bottoms ,900S.W.2d23,26(Tenn.  1995).Sinceonlyquestionsoflawareinvolved,thereisnopresumptionofcorrectnessregarding  atrialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgment. Bain ,936S.W.2dat622.Therefore,ourreviewofthe  trialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgmentis denovo ontherecordbeforethisCourt. Warrenv.  EstateofKirk ,954S.W.2d722,723(Tenn.1997). p   TakingthestrongestlegitimateviewoftheevidenceinfavorofGoodwin,andallowingall P reasonableinferencesinfavorofplaintiff,wefindthatGoodwinhasfailedtosetforthspecificfacts @ showinganattorneyclientrelationship,sufficienttocreateagenuineissueofmaterialfact.The 0 recordinthecaseatbarisrepletewithamendedpleadingsandsupportingmemoranda.Goodwin  p reliesheavilyonthesepleadingsasthefactualbasisforhisargumentthatanattorneyclient ` relationshipwasformedbetweentheparties.Thefewevidentiarydocumentsintroducedby P Goodwinconstituteanunimpressiveandunpersuasiveattempttomanufactureanissueoffact @ regardingtheexistenceofanattorneyclientrelationship. 0   Therelationshipbetweenaclientandanattorneyisbasedoncontract. ! 8  8`   Initsmostbasicterms,thiscontractinvolvestheexchangeof #! competentlegalservicesinreturnforanagreementtopaya $" reasonablefee.Theattorneyisobligatedtoexercisetheutmostgood % # faithinthedischargeofhisorherdutiestorepresenttheclient.p&!$` x` x  Starksv.Browning ,20S.W.3d645,650(Tenn.Ct.App.1999)(citationsomitted). P(#&  Acontracthasbeendefinedovertheyearsasanagreement,uponsufficientconsideration,todo 0*%( ornottodoaparticularthing. Smithv.PickwickElectricCooperative ,212Tenn.62,71-72,367  +p&) S.W.2d775,780(1963)(citing Furman,Green&Co.v.Nichol ,43Tenn.432,445(1866)).A ,`'* partyattemptingtoprovetheexistenceofacontract isrequiredtoshowthattheagreementon  whichherelieswassupportedbyadequateconsideration... Pricev.MercurySupplyCo. ,  682  S.W.2d924,933(Tenn.Ct.App.1984). [I]nallsimplecontracts...whetherwrittenorverbal,the  considerationmustbeaverredandproved. Clarkv.Small ,14Tenn.(6Yer.)417,418(1834). See  also 17Am.Jur.2d Contracts 125(1965);17C.J.S. Contracts 116(1963). p  S O !"#$%(03   InPlaintiffsArgumentAgainstDefendantsOrderforSummaryJudgment,Goodwinasserts P  thatan AttorneyClientrelationshipexistedbetweenPlaintiffandDefendantasevidencedby @  correspondencedirectedtoPlaintifffromDefendant.Goodwinspecificallycitestotwolettersfiled 0  asexhibitsinthiscase.Thefirstletter,datedNovember16,1999,wasdraftedbyDunlapto  p  Goodwin.DunlapspurposeforthisletterwastoinstructGoodwinastothenecessarystepsthat `  mustbetakentocompletethesaleofWinCorsCaliforniaproperty.Goodwinmaintainsthatthis P  letterisevidenceofanattorneyclientrelationshipbecausetheletterwaspersonallyaddressedto @  plaintiff,impliedlyrecognizedGoodwinasacreditor,beneficiary,andinvolvedpartytowhom 0  Dunlapowedaknownduty,andencouragedGoodwintocontactDunlapdirectlyifhehadany   questionsorconcernsregardingthesaleoftheCaliforniaproperty.    GoodwinfurthercontendsthatDunlapsFebruary22,1999lettertoGeneGoodwin, S PresidentofWinCor,isevidencethatanattorneyclientrelationshipexistedbetweenplaintiffand C defendant,therebycreatingagenuineissueofmaterialfact.Inthisletter,draftedshortlyafterthe 3 February1999bankruptcyhearing,DunlapscoldsGeneGoodwinforfailuretocomplywithChapter # 11Bankruptcyprocedure.PlaintiffGoodwinnotesthathealsoreceivedacopyofthisletter,thereby  signifyingDunlapsknowledgeofplaintiffspersonalinvolvementinthiscase.Weareunpersuaded  byGoodwinsargumentthattheselettersareproofthatDunlaprecognizedtheexistenceofan  attorneyclientrelationshipbetweenheandplaintiff,andconcludethatthelettersofNovember16,  1999andFebruary22,1999relatesolelytoDunlapsrepresentationofWincorintheChapter11  proceedings,andarenotevidenceofanindividualattorneyclientrelationshipwithGoodwin. s   Despitetheopposingpositionsexpressedbythepartiesintheiraffidavits,thisevidencefails I tocreateagenuineissueofmaterialfactastowhetheranattorneyclientrelationshipexisted 9 betweenplaintiffanddefendant.Wetakespecificnoteoftheshortcomingsandomissionsofthe  ) affidavitsubmittedbyGoodwin,andthefailureofthisaffidavittopresentanyevidencetosuggest ! orprovetheexistenceofanattorneyclientrelationship.AfterintensescrutinyofGoodwins "  affidavit,weareunabletointerpretanyofthestatementsinthisdocumentasprooforevidencethat #  anattorneyclientrelationshipwasformedbetweenplaintiffanddefendant.AlthoughGoodwin $! affirmsthatheadvancedmoneytothePresidentforpaymentofDunlapsfeesinrepresenting % " WinCorintheChapter11proceedings,andcontendsthatDunlapwasawareofplaintiffs y&!# involvementasathirdpartybeneficiaryandindividualcreditor,hefailstosimplystatethatthe i'"$ partiesenteredintoanattorneyclientrelationshipseparateandapartfromDunlapsrepresentation Y(#% ofWinCor.Moreover,Goodwinsaffidavitsetsforthnospecificfactsregardingthetermsofthis I)$& relationship,nordoesGoodwinmakeanyreferencetothetime,place,conditions,oroccurrenceof 9*%' theoralcontractforrepresentationallegedlyenteredintobytheparties. )+y&( Ї  Further,althoughGoodwinassertsthatDunlapsretainerfeewaspaidbyWinCorthrough  fundsadvancedbyGoodwin,thereisabsolutelynoevidenceintherecordtosuggestthatthesefunds  werewhollyorpartiallyintendedaspaymentforservicesrenderedbyDunlaponGoodwins  personalinterests.Asadditionalsupportforourholding,wenotethatthetimesheetfiledbyDunlap  supplementinghisapplicationforattorneysfeesdoesnotcontainasingleentryfortimededicated p totherepresentationofGoodwinspersonalinterestsintheWinCorproperty.Infact,Dunlapstime `  sheetcontainsonlyoneentrypertainingtoplaintiffGoodwin,a0.5hourentryforFebruary22,1999. P  TheFebruary22,1999entrylikelyaccountsfortimedefendantspentauthoringhislettertoDaniel @  andGeneGoodwinscoldingthemfortheirviolationofChapter11Bankruptcyprocedure. 0    Accordingly,theorderofthetrialcourtgrantingsummaryjudgmenttodefendantisaffirmed.   Thecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessary.Costsof   theappealareassessedtoappellant,DanielGoodwin,andhissurety.      `     h   __________________________________________ _    `     h   W.FRANKCRAWFORD,PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S.