ÿWPC " <UBX %š®  0tN 0Å 0\‡ 0ã 0rp 1mâ 0O D+Ü Æ 0Í 0=Z 0— AQ$ 0¶u 0D+ 0coÒnâ 0råU:Ww@‘4ÑLå1 0J9ƒ B‹ 0T¨ 0^ü 0hZ D3 0rõ 0|g 0†ã 0i 1uù 0dnU *ÒB)üDC% AKh ³v~¼vÓ:ô\  `*Times New RomanTTô' Í The Plaintiffs appeal the trial courts final judgment which up (Authorized User(0Authorized User .   h††ÿÿ:Default ParaDefault Paragraph FontÔ€XXXÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔ<5Tÿÿ.footerfooterÓ  ÓÓ ÜÜü!ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ>4°X°` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ (#>ÓP††ÿÿ8page numberpage numberÔ€XXXÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔV!ÿÿ:footnote texfootnote textÓ  ÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  Ô`‰‰ÿÿ:footnote reffootnote referenceÔ€XXXÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔòòóóÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ€ôôôÔÔW€ô\  `*Times New RomanTTWÔ#3e37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(e2bñ$©©Ý ƒä!ÝÔ€ô\ôôôÔÔ€ô\ôôô\ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý'ÈÈÈÈdxdƒ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(e2bñ$££Ý ƒä!ÝÔ€ô\ôôôÔÔ€ô\ôôô\ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý(ÿÿ$””Ú  ÚÚ  Ú(e2bñ$¢¢Ý ƒä!ÝÔ€ô\ôôôÔÔ€ô\ôôô\ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý   Cþÿ<< cÿÿ(f(3+$¤¤Ý ƒä!ÝÔ€ô\ôôôÔÔ€ô\ôôô\ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(;3¾$´´Ô23eÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à3|xú«ô\  `*Times New RomanTTôôCô\  PŽ6QôPô\  `*Times New RomanTTXXPô\  PŽ6QXP%ä2¼A`ArialTTomanTTXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP(Jä$¡¡Ô€ô~4ôôôÔÔ€ô~4ôôô~4ÔÓ  Ó+ÄâK AZ"Arial Regular äDåUægçèéêëÓ€÷ún~<$VC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô d2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$$$$'ÿÿdxd2@ 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< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d66667Border 1dd 7Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ÿÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€5ÔÔ€5ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€5XÔÌÌò òJune€17,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€5ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{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  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÓ ` Ü›XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€5ÔÔ€5XÔÑ7€NHôôdÈXXdð7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌÌPAMELA€A.€GORDON€andà àà à)ÌSAMMY€D.€GORDON,à àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àò ò)€€€Madison€Circuit€No.€59360„4€T.D.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌÙ€ ÙœßR€897A1-j|Éú¤` Å `€€@ÿRß›VS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Appeal€No.€02A01„9611„CV„00282Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌDR.€DONALD€WILSON,€M.D.,à àà à)Ìand€THE€JACKSON€CLINICà àà à)ÌPROFESSIONAL€ASSOCIATION,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óDefendants/Appellees.à àò ò)ó óÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€MADISON€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€JACKSON,€TENNESSEEÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€WHIT€LAFON,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌò òAL€H.€THOMASó óÌò òIRA€M.€THOMASÌTHOMAS€&€THOMASó óÌMemphis,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€AppellantsÌÌÌÌò òMARTY€R.€PHILLIPSÌKEVIN€J.€YOUNGBERGÌRAINEY,€KIZER,€BUTLER,€REVIERE€&€BELL,€P.L.C.Ìó óJackson,€TennesseeÌAttorneys€for€AppelleesÌÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óœ›à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ó óà àœÌÑ7€nsXXdðôôdÈ7ÑÓÓà àPlaintiffs›€PamelaA.€and€SammyD.€Gordon€appeal€the€trial€courtððs€judgmentÏdismissing€their€medical€malpractice€action€against€Defendants/Appellees€DonaldÏWilson,€M.D.,€and€the€Jackson€Clinic€Professional€Association.€€The€trial€courtÏdismissed€the€Gordonsðð€action€based€on€their€failure€to€comply€with€the€trial€courtððsÏprevious€discovery€order.€€We€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretionÏwhen€it€dismissed€the€Gordonsðð€action€and,€thus,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.ÌÌà@ àÔ&  ÔòòI.€€Procedural€HistoryóóÌÌà àIn€October€1994,€the€Gordons€filed€a€medical€malpractice€complaint€against€theÔ'  ÔÏDefendants€and€Jackson„Madison€County€General€Hospital€District.€€The€Hospital€wasÏdismissed€from€the€action€in€April€1996€and€is€not€a€party€to€this€appeal.€ÌÌà àThe€Defendants€filed€their€answer€on€November17,€1994.€€On€the€same€dayÏthey€filed€their€answer,€the€Defendants€served€interrogatories€and€a€request€forÏproduction€of€documents€on€the€Gordons.€€œThe›€Defendants€later€filed€a€motion€forÍsummary€judgment€based€on€the€affidavit€of€Dr.€Wilson,€who€averred€that€his€treatmentÏof€Mrs.€Gordon€conformed€to€the€recognized€standard€of€acceptable€professionalÏpractice€in€the€medical€community€of€Jackson,€Madison€County,€Tennessee.€ÌÌà àBy€March€1996,€the€Gordons€had€not€answered€the€interrogatories€or€producedÏthe€documents€as€requested€by€the€Defendants€in€November€1994.€œAccordingly,›€theÏDefendants€filed€a€motion€to€compel€in€which€they€asked€the€trial€court€to€compel€theÏGordons€to€respond€to€the€Defendantsðð€discovery€request.€€œThe›€trial€court€granted€theÏDefendantsðð€motion€and,€on€April24,€1996,€entered€an€order€compelling€the€GordonsÏð ðto€fully€answer€the€interrogatories€and€the€request€for€production€of€documentsðð€withinÏthirty(30)€days€of€the€courtððs€order.€ÌÌà àOn€April24,€1996,€the€trial€court€also€conducted€a€hearing€on€the€DefendantsððÏmotion€for€summary€judgment.€€œThereafter,›€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€deferringÏjudgment€on€the€Defendantsðð€summary€judgment€motion.€€Specifically,€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€stated€that:ÌÓÓœ›à8 àà8 à[T]he€court€was€of€the€opinion€that€the€affidavit€of€[theÏGordonsðð]€sole€expert,€Dr.€David€Swan,€was€not€sufficient€toÏcreate€a€genuine€issue€as€to€material€fact€with€regard€toÏwhether€Dr.€Wilson€complied€with€the€recognized€standardÏof€acceptable€professional€practice€in€Jackson,€TennesseeÏin€his€care€and€treatment€of€Mrs.€Gordon.€€Upon€[theÏGordonsðð]€counselsðð€representation€that€Dr.€Swanððs€affidavitÏcontained€a€ð ðclerical€errorðð,€the€court€agreed€to€grant€[theÏGordonsðð]€counsel€two€weeks€so€that€[the€Gordonsðð]€counselÏmay€have€an€opportunity€to€cure€the€defect€in€Dr.€SwanððsÏaffidavit.€€Therefore,€[the€Gordonsðð]€counsel€has€until€May8,Ï1996€to€file€with€the€court€a€corrected€affidavit€of€Dr.€Swan.€ÏIf€[the€Gordonsðð]€counsel€fails€by€May€8,€1996€to€file€anÍaffidavit€of€Dr.€Swan€which€creates€a€genuine€issue€as€to€aÏmaterial€fact€regarding€whether€Dr.€Wilson€complied€withÏthe€recognized€standard€of€acceptable€professional€practiceÏin€Jackson,€Tennessee,€the€court€will€grant€the€DefendantsððÏMotion€for€Summary€Judgment.€ÌÌœ›ÌÓÓà àOn€May2,€1996,€the€Gordons€filed€the€amended€affidavit€of€Dr.€Swan.€€œDr.›ÏSwanððs€previous€affidavit€had€stated€that€he€was€familiar€with€the€recognized€standardÏof€acceptable€professional€medical€practice€in€the€Memphis,€Tennessee,€area.€€œDr.›ÏSwanððs€new€affidavit€indicated€that€the€geographic€area€with€which€he€was€familiarÏwas€Jackson,€Tennessee,€rather€than€Memphis.€ÌÌà àAlthough€they€timely€filed€Dr.€Swanððs€amended€affidavit,€the€Gordons€failed€toÏrespond€to€the€Defendantsðð€interrogatories€or€request€for€production€of€documents€asÏdirected€in€the€trial€courtððs€April€1996€order.€€œOn›€June13,€1996,€therefore,€theÏDefendantsðð€attorney€wrote€a€letter€to€the€Gordonsðð€counsel€reminding€him€of€the€needÏto€produce€the€discovery€materials.€€œSpecifically,›€the€letter€stated€that:ÌÓÓœ›à8 àà8 àI€still€have€not€received€your€clientsðð€answers€to€ourÏinterrogatories€or€your€clientsðð€response€to€our€request€forÏproduction€of€documents....€€If€I€do€not€immediately€receiveÏyour€clientsðð€answers€to€our€interrogatories€and€request€forÏproduction€of€documents,€I€will€have€no€choice€but€to€moveÏthe€court€to€dismiss€the€action€pursuant€to€Rule37.02(C).ÌÌà8 àà8 àI€am€writing€this€letter€as€a€courtesy€to€you,€but€I€will€takeÏaction€quickly€if€your€clients€do€not€immediately€respond.€ÌÌÓÓÌà àOn€June24,€1996,€still€having€received€no€response€to€their€discovery€request,Ïthe€Defendants€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€pursuant€to€rule37.02(C)€of€the€TennesseeÍRules€of€Civil€œProcedure.›€The€Defendants€also€served€a€notice€of€hearing€on€theÏGordonsðð€counsel€which€indicated€that€a€hearing€on€the€motion€to€dismiss€would€beÏheld€on€July19,€1996.€€Ìà àAfter€conducting€the€scheduled€hearing,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€grantingÏthe€Defendantsðð€motion€and€dismissing€the€Gordonsðð€action€with€prejudice.€€œIn›€additionÏto€reciting€the€foregoing€procedural€history,€the€trial€courtððs€order€indicated€theÏfollowing€bases€for€its€dismissal:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à6.à0 àThe€[Gordons]€did€not€respond€to€the€motion€toÏdismiss€until€they€submitted€(to€defense€counsel)€anÏunsigned€response€to€the€interrogatories€and€requestÏfor€production€of€documents€on€July18,€1996.€ÏShortly€before€the€hearing€on€the€morning€of€July19,Ï1996,€the€[Gordons]€submitted€a€signed€copy€of€theirÏAnswers€to€the€interrogatories€and€their€response€toÏthe€request€for€production€of€documents€to€defenseÏcounsel.€€Even€then,€the€interrogatories€and€requestsÏfor€production€of€documents€were€not€fully€answeredÏas€previously€ordered.ÌÌà8 àà8 à7.à0 àThe€[Gordons]€failed€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€order,Ïand€the€[Gordons]€provided€no€explanation€for€theirÏfailure€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€order.ÌÌà8 àà8 à8.à0 àIn€this€case,€the€court€had€previously€ordered€theÏ[Gordons]€to€pay€the€Defendantsðð€attorneyððs€fees€andÏcosts€attendant€to€the€Defendantsðð€Motion€forÏSummary€Judgment€because€the€[Gordons]€waitedÏuntil€shortly€before€the€hearing€to€submit€an€opposingÏexpert€affidavit.€€At€the€hearing,€the€court€determinedÏthat€the€affidavit€of€the€[Gordonsðð]€sole€expert,€Dr.ÏDavid€Swan,€was€not€sufficient€to€create€a€genuineÏissue€as€to€any€material€fact€with€regard€to€whetherÏDr.€Wilson€complied€with€the€recognized€standard€ofÏacceptable€professional€practice€in€Jackson,ÏTennessee€in€his€care€and€treatment€of€Mrs.€Gordon.€ÏThe€[Gordonsðð]€counsel€represented€to€the€court€thatÏDr.€Swanððs€affidavit€contained€a€ð ðclerical€errorðð€andÍurged€the€court€to€allow€the€[Gordons]€time€to€correctÏthe€affidavit.€€Rather€than€dismissing€the€action€at€thatÏjuncture,€the€court€afforded€[the€Gordonsðð]€counselÏtwo€weeks€in€which€to€file€a€corrected€affidavit€withÏthe€court.ÌÌà8 àà8 à9.à0 àTennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€37.02(C)Ïspecifically€allows€the€court€to€dismiss€an€actionÏwhen€a€party€has€failed€to€comply€with€a€court€order.€Ï(T.R.€vol.€III,€pp.€402„03).ÌÓÓœÌWe›€quote€this€portion€of€the€trial€courtððs€order€because€the€record€on€appeal€fails€toÏcontain€(1)a€transcript€of€the€July19,€1996,€hearing,€(2)the€Gordonsðð€answers€to€theÏDefendantsðð€interrogatories,€or€(3)the€Gordonsðð€response€to€the€Defendantsðð€requestÏfor€production€of€documents.ÌÌà@ àÔ&  ÔòòII.€€LawóóÌÌà àAs€pertinent,€rule37€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€authorizes€theÔ'  ÔÏfollowing€procedures€and€sanctions€for€dealing€with€a€partyððs€failure€to€make€orÏcooperate€in€discovery:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àIf...€a€party€fails€to€answer€an€interrogatoryÏsubmitted€under€Rule33,€or€if€a€party,€in€response€to€aÏrequest€for€inspection€submitted€under€Rule34,€fails€toÏrespond€that€inspection€will€be€permitted€as€requested€orÏfails€to€permit€inspection€as€requested,€the€discovering€partyÏmay€move€for€an€order€compelling€an€answer,...€or€anÏorder€compelling€inspection€in€Ô&  Ôaccordance€with€theÏrequest....ÌÌÓÓœT.R.C.P.›37.01(2).Ô'  Ô€€Moreover,ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àIf...€a€party;€[or]€an€officer,€director,€or€managingÏagent€of€a€party;...€fails€to€obey€an€order€to€provide€orÏpermit€discovery,€including€an€order€made€underÏRule37.01€or€Rule35,€or€if€a€party€fails€to€obey€an€orderÏentered€under€Rule26.06,€the€court€in€which€the€action€isÏpending€may€make€such€orders€in€regard€to€the€failure€asÏare€just,€and€among€others€the€following:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à(A)à àAn€order€that€the€matters€regarding€which€theÏorder€was€made€or€any€other€designated€facts€shall€beÏtaken€to€be€established€for€the€purposes€of€the€action€inÏaccordance€with€the€claim€of€the€party€obtaining€the€order;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à(B)à àAn€order€refusing€to€allow€the€disobedientÏparty€to€support€or€oppose€designated€claims€or€defenses,Ïor€prohibiting€that€party€from€introducing€designated€mattersÏin€evidence;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à(C)à àAn€order€striking€out€pleadings€or€partsÏthereof,€or€staying€further€proceedings€until€the€order€isÏobeyed,€or€dismissing€the€action€or€proceeding€or€any€partÏthereof,€or€rendering€a€judgment€by€default€against€theÏdisobedient€party;ÌÌà8 àà8 àà à....ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àIn€lieu€of€any€of€the€foregoing€orders€or€in€additionÏthereto,€the€court€shall€require€the€party€failing€to€obey€theÏorder€or€the€attorney€advising€the€party€or€both€to€pay€theÏreasonable€expenses,€including€attorneyððs€fees,€caused€byÏthe€failure,€unless€the€court€finds€that€the€failure€wasÏsubstantially€justified€or€that€other€circumstances€make€anÏaward€of€expenses€unjust.ÌÌÓÓœT.R.C.P.›37.02.€€Even€in€the€absence€of€an€order€compelling€discovery,€the€trial€courtÏmay€take€any€of€the€above€authorized€actions€if€a€party€fails€ð ðto€serve€answers€orÏobjections€to€interrogatories€submitted€under€Rule33,€after€proper€service€of€theÏinterrogatoriesðð€or€if€a€party€fails€ð ðto€serve€a€written€response€to€a€request€for€inspectionÏsubmitted€under€Rule34,€after€proper€service€of€the€request.ðð€€T.R.C.P.37.04.ÌÌà àRule37€expressly€authorizes€the€trial€court€to€dismiss€a€plaintiffððs€action€as€aÏsanction€for€the€plaintiffððs€violation€of€the€courtððs€discovery€order.€€òòSeeóóÏT.R.C.P.37.02(C)€(providing€that€sanctions€may€include,€òòinter€aliaóó,€an€orderÏð ðdismissing€the€action€or€proceeding€or€any€part€thereofðð).€€Accordingly,€this€courtÏrepeatedly€has€upheld€dismissal€of€a€plaintiffððs€action€where€the€plaintiff€has€failed€toÏcomply€with€the€trial€courtððs€order€compelling€discovery.€€òòHoltv.€Websteróó,€638€S.W.2dÏ391€(Tenn.€App.€1982);€òòNokesv.€Hooperóó,€1989€WL€115186€(Tenn.€App.€Oct.4,€1989);ÏòòRatliff€Dev.€Corp.v.€Brooksóó,€1988€WL€116455€(Tenn.€App.€Nov.2,€1988),€òòperm.€app.Ïdeniedóó€(Tenn.€Mar.27,€1989).€€When€the€trial€court€imposes€the€sanction€of€dismissal,Ïthe€trial€courtððs€decision€will€not€be€disturbed€by€this€court€in€the€absence€of€anÏaffirmative€showing€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion.€€òòHoltóó,€638€S.W.2d€at€394;ÏòòNokesóó,€1989€WL€115186,€at€*3;€òòRatliff€Dev.€Corp.óó,€1988€WL€116455,€at€*4.ÌÌà àOn€appeal,€the€Gordons€contend€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€inÏdismissing€this€action€as€a€sanction€for€the€Gordonsðð€failure€to€comply€with€the€courtððsÏorder€compelling€discovery.€€The€Gordons€concede€that€no€justification€exists€for€theirÏcounselððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€trial€courtððs€discovery€order.€€œThey›€argue,€however,Ïthat€the€dismissal€of€this€action€constituted€an€abuse€of€discretion€because,€under€ruleÏ37,€the€trial€court€could€have€imposed€less€severe€sanctions€for€the€discovery€violationÏand€because,€as€a€policy€matter,€the€Gordons€should€not€be€penalized€for€theirÏattorneyððs€neglect.€€œÌ›Ìà àThis€court€previously€has€recognized€that€dismissal€of€a€plaintiffððs€action€for€hisÏviolation€of€the€trial€courtððs€orders€is€ordinarily€inappropriate€and€that€ð ðlesser€sanctionsÏare€generally€favored€where€the€neglect€and€defalcations€are€more€attributable€to€theÏattorney€than€to€his€client.ðð€€òòMillsv.€Bank€of€Roane€Countyóó,€1991€WL€126553,€at€*2Ï(Tenn.€App.€July15,€1991).€€This€rule€is€not€absolute,€however,€and€we€have€affirmedÏdismissals€under€circumstances€similar€to€this€case,€even€where€the€plaintiffððs€failure€toÏcomply€with€the€trial€courtððs€discovery€order€appears€to€be€more€attributable€to€theÏplaintiffððs€attorney€than€to€the€plaintiff.€€In€òòNokesv.€Hooperóó,€1989€WL€115186€(Tenn.ÏApp.€Oct.4,€1989),€for€example,€the€trial€court€dismissed€the€plaintiffððs€action€based€onÏthe€plaintiffððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€discovery€order.€€On€appeal,€the€plaintiffÏacknowledged€that€the€trial€courtððs€order€required€him€to€answer€the€interrogatoriesÏwithin€thirty€days,€that€at€the€time€of€the€hearing€on€the€defendantððs€motion€to€dismissÏhe€still€had€not€filed€the€answers€to€interrogatories,€and€that€he€was€subject€toÏsanctions€for€failing€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€order.€€òòNokesóó,€1989€WL€115186,€at€*3.€ÏThe€plaintiffððs€only€stated€justification€for€his€failure€to€comply€with€the€courtððs€order€wasÏthat€his€attorney€had€been€ð ðbusy.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Nevertheless,€the€plaintiff€argued€that€theÏsanction€of€dismissal€was€too€harsh€and€that€the€trial€court€should€have€imposed€someÏlesser€sanction.€€òòIdóó.ÌÌà àIn€affirming€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€plaintiffððs€action,€this€court€quotedÏextensively€from€òòHoltv.€Websteróó,€638€S.W.2d€391€(Tenn.€App.€1982).€€In€òòHoltóó,€the€trialÏcourt€dismissed€the€plaintiffsðð€action€after€the€plaintiffs€failed€to€answer€the€defendantððsÏinterrogatories€and€to€comply€with€the€trial€courtððs€subsequent€order€compellingÍdiscovery.€€òòHoltóó,€638€S.W.2d€at€392„93.€€Although€the€plaintiffs€ultimately€answered€theÏinterrogatories,€their€answers€were€not€filed€within€the€time€required€by€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€and€their€answers€were€incomplete.€€òòIdóó.€at€392.€€In€affirming€the€trial€courtððsÏdismissal€of€the€plaintiffsðð€action,€this€court€reasoned:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àThat€the€trial€court€is€expressly€authorized€to€imposeÏthe€sanction€of€dismissal€is€without€question.€€When€the€trialÏcourt€exercises€its€discretion€in€imposing€the€sanction€ofÏdismissal,€the€exercise€of€its€discretion€will€not€be€disturbedÏby€this€Court€in€the€absence€of€an€affirmative€showing€thatÏthe€trial€judge€abused€his€discretion.€€òòHemmerv.ÏTennessee€Electric€Power€Co.óó,€24€Tenn.€App.€42,€139ÏS.W.2d€698€(1940).€€Our€review€of€this€record€fails€toÏdisclose€that€the€Trial€Judge€abused€his€discretion.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àDismissal€is€a€harsh€sanction.€€However,€it€isÏspecifically€authorized€by€the€Rules,€and€cogent€reasonsÏexist€for€its€imposition.€€The€Supreme€Court€of€the€UnitedÏStates€stated,€in€òòNational€Hockey€Leaguev.€MetropolitanÏHockey€Club,€Inc.óó,€427€U.S.€639,€642„43,€96€S.€Ct.€2778,Ï2780„81,€49€L.€Ed.€2d€747€(1976),€in€reinstating€a€DistrictÏCourtððs€order€of€dismissal€for€failure€to€comply€withÏdiscovery:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àà àThere€is€a€natural€tendency€on€the€partÏof€reviewing€courts,€properly€employing€theÏbenefit€of€hindsight,€to€be€heavily€influencedÏby€the€severity€of€outright€dismissal€as€aÏsanction€for€failure€to€comply€with€a€discoveryÏorder.€€It€is€quite€reasonable€to€conclude€that€aÏparty€who€has€been€subjected€to€such€anÏorder€will€feel€duly€chastened,€so€that€evenÏthough€he€succeeds€in€having€the€orderÏreversed€on€appeal€he€will€nonethelessÏcomply€promptly€with€future€discovery€ordersÏof€the€district€court.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àà àBut€here,€as€in€other€areas€of€the€law,Ïthe€most€severe€in€the€spectrum€of€sanctionsÍprovided€by€statute€or€rule€must€be€availableÏto€the€district€court€in€appropriate€cases,€notÏmerely€to€penalize€those€whose€conduct€mayÏbe€deemed€to€warrant€such€a€sanction,€but€toÏdeter€those€who€might€be€tempted€to€suchÏconduct€in€the€absence€of€such€a€deterrent.€€IfÏa€decision€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€remainedÏundisturbed€in€this€case,€it€might€well€be€thatÏthese€respondents€would€faithfully€comply€withÏall€future€discovery€orders€entered€by€theÏDistrict€Court€in€this€case.€€But€other€parties€toÏother€lawsuits€would€feel€freer€than€we€thinkÏRule37€contemplates€they€should€feel€to€floutÏother€discovery€orders€of€other€district€courts.ÌÌà8 àà8 àThis€reasoning€is€applicable€to€the€courts€of€Tennessee.€ÏThe€trial€courts€of€Tennessee€must€and€do€have€theÏdiscretion€to€impose€sanctions€such€as€dismissal€in€order€toÏpenalize€those€who€fail€to€comply€with€the€Rules€and,Ïfurther,€to€deter€others€from€flouting€or€disregardingÏdiscovery€orders.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àPlaintiffs€in€the€instant€case€were€given€considerableÏopportunity€to€comply€with€the€Trial€Courtððs€orders.€€Yet,€weÏfind€nothing€in€the€record€showing€any€reason€for€theirÏfailure€to€respond€timely€and€completely€to€the€order€ofÏdiscovery.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àFinding€no€abuse€of€discretion,€we€affirm€the€TrialÏÔ&  ÔJudgeððs€order€of€dismissal€with€costs€to€plaintiffs.ÌÓÓœÌòòHoltóó,›€638€S.W.2d€at€394.Ô'  ÔÌÌà àAs€in€òòHoltóó€and€òòNokesóó,€we€find€nothing€in€the€record€before€us€that€shows€anyÏreason€for€the€Gordonsðð€or€their€counselððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€trial€courtððs€order€ofÏdiscovery.€€The€trial€courtððs€discovery€order€compelled€the€Gordons€to€fully€answer€theÏDefendantsðð€interrogatories€and€request€for€production€of€documents€by€May24,€1996.€œÍThe›€Defendantsðð€attorneyððs€June13,€1996,€letter,€sent€as€a€courtesy,€reminded€theÏGordonsðð€counsel€of€the€need€to€respond€to€the€Defendantsðð€request€for€discovery.€ÏœStill,›€the€Gordons€did€not€respond€to€the€Defendantsðð€discovery€request€until€July19,Ï1996,€the€day€of€the€hearing€on€the€Defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss,€and,€even€then,€theÏtrial€court€found€that€the€interrogatories€and€requests€for€production€of€documents€wereÏnot€fully€answered€as€previously€required€by€the€courtððs€order.€€œUnder›€theseÏcircumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€when€itÏdismissed€the€Gordonsðð€action.ÌÌà àThe€Gordons€also€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€their€actionÏwith€prejudice€because,€at€the€hearing€on€the€Defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss,€theÏGordons€orally€requested€that€they€be€allowed€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit€whereby€theÏcase€could€have€been€dismissed€without€prejudice.€€œAs›€pertinent,€rule41.01(1)€of€theÏTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€provides€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àSubject€to€the€provisions€of€Rule23.05€or€Rule66€orÏany€statute,€and€except€when€a€motion€for€summaryÏjudgment€made€by€an€adverse€party€is€pending,€the€plaintiffÏshall€have€the€right€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit€or€to€dismissÏan€action€without€prejudice€by€filing€a€written€notice€ofÏdismissal€at€any€time€before€the€trial€of€a€cause€and€servingÏa€copy€of€the€notice€upon€all€parties,€and€if€a€party€has€notÏalready€been€served€with€a€summons€and€complaint,€theÏplaintiff€shall€also€serve€a€copy€of€the€complaint€on€thatÏparty;€or€by€an€oral€notice€of€dismissal€made€in€open€courtÏduring€the€trial€of€a€cause;€or€in€jury€trials€at€any€time€beforeÏthe€jury€retires€to€consider€its€verdict€and€prior€to€the€rulingÏof€the€court€sustaining€a€motion€Ô&  Ôfor€a€directed€verdict.ÌÓÓœÌT.R.C.P.›41.01(1).Ô'  ÔÌÌà àAlthough€no€transcript€of€the€hearing€on€the€motion€to€dismiss€appears€in€theÏrecord€on€appeal,€the€Defendants€concede€that,€at€the€hearing,€the€Gordons€orallyÏrequested€a€voluntary€nonsuit,€albeit€after€the€trial€court€had€ruled€on€the€DefendantsððÏmotion€to€dismiss.€€œThe›€Defendants€contend,€however,€that€the€Gordonsðð€oral€requestÏwas€ineffectual€because,€among€other€reasons,€the€Defendantsðð€motion€for€summaryÏjudgment€was€still€pending€at€the€time€the€Gordons€made€their€request.€ÌÌà àWe€agree.€€Rule€41.01(1)€provides€for€the€free€and€unrestricted€right€of€theÏplaintiff,€at€various€stages€of€the€proceedings,€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit€or€to€dismissÏhis€action€without€prejudice.€€òòStewartv.€University€of€Tennesseeóó,€519€S.W.2d€591,€592Ï(Tenn.€1974);€òòBaileyv.€Parkridge€Hosp.,€Inc.óó,€No.€03A01„9303„CV„00135,€1993€WLÏ310359,€at€*1€(Tenn.€App.€Aug.16,€1993).€€Under€rule41.01(1),€however,€a€plaintiffÏdoes€not€have€the€free€and€unrestricted€right€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit€in€casesÏwhere€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€is€pending.€€òòStewartóó,€519€S.W.2d€at€592„93.€ÏWhen€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€is€pending,€the€trial€court€has€the€authority€toÏpermit€a€voluntary€dismissal€under€appropriate€circumstances,€but€the€court€is€notÏrequired€to€do€so.€€òòIdóó.€at€593;€òòBaileyóó,€1993€WL€310359,€at€*2;€òòaccordóó€òòFordv.€Turleyóó,€No.Ï02A01„9108„CV„00159,€1992€WL€120237,€at€*2€(Tenn.€App.€June5,€1992).ÌÌà àOur€review€of€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€permit€or€to€disallow€a€voluntaryÏdismissal€under€such€circumstances€is€governed€by€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€ÏòòStewartóó,€519€S.W.2d€at€593;€òòBaileyóó,€1993€WL€310359,€at€*2.€€Inasmuch€as€we€alreadyÍhave€concluded€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€imposing€the€sanctionÏof€dismissal€for€the€Gordonsðð€discovery€violation,€we€hold€that€the€court€also€did€notÏabuse€its€discretion€in€refusing€to€permit€the€Gordons€to€take€a€voluntary€nonsuit.ÌÌà àThe€Gordons€insist€that€no€motion€for€summary€judgment€was€pending€at€theÏtime€they€requested€the€voluntary€dismissal€because€the€motion€had€been€disposed€ofÏby€the€filing€of€Dr.Swanððs€corrected€affidavit€on€May2,€1996.€€œWe›€must€respectfullyÏdisagree.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€entered€after€the€hearing€on€the€Defendantsðð€motionÏfor€summary€judgment€makes€clear€that,€rather€than€granting€or€denying€the€motion,Ïthe€court€was€deferring€judgment€on€the€motion€and€was€giving€the€Gordons€untilÏMay8,€1996,€to€file€a€corrected€affidavit€of€their€expert,€Dr.Swan.€€œAlthough›€theÏGordons€filed€an€affidavit€on€May2,€1996,€which€purported€to€cure€the€prior€affidavitððsÏdefect,€the€record€contains€no€subsequent€order€by€the€trial€court€either€granting€orÏdenying€the€Defendantsðð€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€œThus,›€we€conclude€that€theÏmotion€for€summary€judgment€still€was€pending€when€the€trial€court€dismissed€theÏGordonsðð€action.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€hereby€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxedÏto€the€Gordons,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€œnecessary.Ô€5ôÔÔ€ÔÌÌÓÓÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÔ€5ÔÔ€5XÔHIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌLILLARD,€J.›