ÿWPC(1 Ñ©à*©ŽkíÑ`AÙj½QÄÈÕ”©ÚûÀJjOô>*ûØr·:ix)ŠzùȯÊ(ŠlÞÙâXjutÐv8¶ÓègCIø]û8ü ÌY¥kœoÏõZÐ_œ@Õz¨ó¢hï3DJ{Sœ£˜ý½ 4 »wWòå‘…M ØIyÏêûD:·k]Óµ'Yš¹lâU}z,Š&†ˆ¤w]CàØe[ДÛ{~Â[§=Œß0q‰5"tl[=À&ù¼q@©ˆú­®‘,G"À9V~¤:¤Gp:\lÜŽ}DöµÄ%l¨7mÎˆÒ ª*·.@2ÇLŒ‹’.A ¿×—OŒ<<§»K‰XM´š|¶ž¥T¼ýÔU‹sê,o8q­ðt[¬uhÞ,ÎÊÇ­þ9ÿœÏB¶tm Å;à`)óÆ×¡@„¥0 í;zó$4¡2}ú=SÙ4ÓÌoGù;%»½!#}[BMŸ•{yíDKyr@)–ôíªuU5KЙð…5ÉLF’Ê:a5•2šÛ‚>ªÊh­Pª/'=zŠR ”´kÉûX-%]n“œGÚâ(ËSIKðÔÊb¡Ôe6yaGIz¢•ˆWn‰DÐ*¿+%ëŒ{-üb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ '‘ Ƹ Æ~ ÆDÆ  0DÐN 1 72£EÕ 1u× 72L 0c~RáUN3 0wø 0Š 1‡Š 72 1‡C 72ÊÊ 1‡ü݃ 72`` 1‡’ 72 1‡K 72ÒÒÒb                           0ë%,%,%,%, B-- 0¤-- D3Ñ- D-. 0K1.1. AS|.ÆÏ. 0¤•/ 0D90 A«}0»z-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular9‚±,¢Ø+00 3|x ˜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.wpt ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 Ý ƒRé $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€Petition€for€Condemnation€also€named€Williamson€County€as€a€defendant€to€determine€what€interest€theÐ ° Ðcounty€may€have€in€the€Property.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó0ÖCEMU[cks{AutoList1(1)(1)1.(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à HÝ ƒRé $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€We€refer€to€the€attorney€who€represented€National€in€the€condemnation€proceeding,€Larry€W.€Johnson,€andÐ ° Ðhis€law€firm,€Morris,€Schneider€&€Prior,€L.L.C.,€as€Nationalððs€attorneys.(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(Oé;$µµà0  àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0` (#(#à (b·¤$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2#ÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(EhCEKQW]cioAutoList21.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(UhCEKQW]cioAutoList31.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.!1.(ehCEKQW]cioAutoList41.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. ÓÝ ƒRé $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€For€simplicityððs€sake,€we€use€round€numbers€in€this€opinion€as€much€as€possible.$1.(uhCEKQW]cioAutoList51.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(1.(…hCEKQW]cioAutoList61.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.*1.- ù- Ý ƒRé $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€€Courts€also€use€the€following€analysis€to€determine€whether€an€attorneyððs€conduct€is€sanctionable€conductÐ ° Ðunder€Rule€11:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àð ð1.à0¸ ` x` xàAn€attorney€must€READ€every€paper€before€signing€it.Ð#üL¸ x¸ x ” #ЇØ! !ØÝ"‚·¤"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚·¤ÙÝà0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ÖÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#àÝ  ÝHe€must€make€a€reasonable€pre„filing€investigation€of€the€FACTS.݃·¤Ù݌а¸ (#¸ (# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚·¤"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚·¤ Ýà0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ÖÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#àÝ  ÝHe€must€research€the€LAW,€unless€he€is€certain€he€knows€it.݃·¤ 8ÝŒÐ8ˆ¸ (#¸ (# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÓ€ *(…h80ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ÚÝÔ2…hÔÚ  Ú4Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThe€law€as€applied€to€the€facts€must€REASONABLY€WARRANT€theÐ À Ðlegal€positions€and€steps€he€takes.€€If€existing€law€does€not€warrant€theseÐ „Ô Ðpositions,€a€plausible€argument€for€the€extension€of€the€law€to€the€facts€ofÐ H ˜ Ðthe€case€is€required.݃3£Ú'݌Р\¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÓ€ ((uh88*ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£”ÝÔ2uhÔÚ  Ú5Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝIt€must€be€demonstrated,€as€the€basis€of€pre„filing€investigation€andÐ ” ä  Ðresearch,€that€there€is€a€REASONABLE€BASIS€to€name€each€DefendantÐ X ¨  Ðnamed,€and€to€support€each€claim€asserted.€€The€shotgun€complaint€orÐ  l  Ðanswer,€filed€in€the€hope€that€discovery€will€produce€the€justification€forÐ à 0  Ðit,€is€improper.݃3£”á݌Фô ¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÓ€ $(eh88(ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£¡ ÝÔ2ehÔÚ  Ú6Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThe€adequacy€of€an€attorneyððs€investigation,€research€and€legal€analysisÐ ,|  Ðwill€be€evaluated€by€the€court€under€an€OBJECTIVE€STANDARD,Ð ð@  Ðnamely,€whether€the€attorney€acted€as€a€reasonably€competent€attorneyÐ ´  Ðadmitted€to€.€.€.€practice.€€Except€as€to€improper€purpose,€subjective€goodÐ xÈ  Ðfaith€is€not€a€defense€to€Rule€11€sanctions.€€A€pure€heart€but€an€empty€headÐ <Œ Ðis€no€avail.€€Ýƒ3£¡ î ÝŒÐP¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà@~~$ìà*€*€*€*€*€*€ˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌÓ€ !(Uh88$ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£CÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú8Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝAn€attorney€must€not€have€an€IMPROPER€PURPOSE,€such€as€harassmentÐ ` Ðor€intimidation,€in€naming€any€defendant,€asserting€any€legal€position€orÐ Ô$ Ðtaking€any€legal€step.݃3£CÝŒÐ˜è¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ÿÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú9Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝIf€an€attorney€violates€Rule€11,€the€imposition€of€some€sanction€isÐ  p ÐMANDATORY,€although€the€nature€and€extent€of€the€sanction€isÐ ä4 Ðdiscretionary€with€the€[trial]€court.ðð݃3£ÿL݌Шø¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x ÐòòWhite€v.€Myersóó,€E1999„02642„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€814,€at€*€20„21€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€31,€2001),Ð 0€  Ðòòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó,€(quoting€òòAndrews€v.€Bibleóó,€812€S.W.2d€at€288)€(alterations€in€original).(|G2é $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¬ ò»»Ô d(|3E$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3E$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼U»»»ÔÑ8€H©XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î ôUÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼U»îî ô #ԈРÖ& Ðà@&& ìàJuly€8,€2002€SessionˆÐ üL ÐÔ‡XH©X»¼UÔÌÌÌÌò òÔ#†¼U»XXH©ø#Ôà@––ìàSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,€òòet€al.óó€v.€ROGER€D.€Ô_ÔHAYWOODÔ_Ô,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XH©X»¼UÔó óˆÐ ¾  ÐÌò òà@Þ Þ ìàAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Williamson€CountyˆÐ ¾   Ðà@  ìàNo.€II„2K082€€€€€€J.€Russ€Ô_ÔHeldmanÔ_Ô,€JudgeˆÐ ªú  ÐÌÌÌßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Y` AßÐ Zª  ÐÌà@Ç Ç ìàNo.€M2000„01400„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€28,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ԈРU¥ ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<,` AßÐ -} ÐÌó óÌÌÌÓÓÓÓThe€Trial€Court€held€that€National€City€Mortgage€Company€(ð ðNationalðð),€which€services€theÐ ì< Ðmortgage€on€the€property€at€issue,€and€its€attorneys€violated€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02€and€imposedÐ Ø( Ðsanctions€against€them€in€this€condemnation€proceeding.€€National€and€its€attorneys€appeal€the€TrialÐ Ä ÐCourtððs€Rule€11.02€sanctions.€€We€reverse€and€remand.Ð ° ÐÌÌò òà@ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Reversed;ˆÐ tÄ Ðà@!!#ìàCase€Remanded.ó óˆÐ `° ÐÌÌòòÔ#†¼U»àXH©µ#ÔÔ€XH©X.¼UÔD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHouston€M.€Ô_ÔGoddardÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óóÐ $"t! Ðand€òòHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.óó,€joined.Ð #`" ÐÌClifton€E.€Ô_ÔDarnellÔ_Ô€and€Larry€W.€Johnson,€Atlanta,€Georgia,€for€the€Appellants,€National€CityÐ è$8 $ ÐMortgage€Co.,€Morris,€Schneider€&€Prior,€Ô_ÔL.L.C.Ô_Ô,€and€Larry€W.€Johnson.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌRobert€H.€Jennings,€Jr.,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€and€Roger€Horner,€Brentwood,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ ¬'ü"' ÐAppellees,€State€of€Tennessee,€on€relation€of€The€Commissioner€of€the€Department€ofÐ ˜(è#( ÐTransportation,€for€and€on€behalf€of€Said€Department,€and€The€City€of€Brentwood.Ð „)Ô$) ÐÓÓÌÐ H,˜',ý ÐÔ_Ô‡à@66'ìàò òOPINIONˆÐ ° Ðà@ÛÛ%ìàòòBackgroundóóó óˆÐ ˆØ ÐÓÓà  àà ` àOn€February€11,€2000,€the€City€of€Brentwood€and€the€State€Department€ofÐ `° ÐTransportation€(ð ðPetitionersðð)€filed€a€Petition€for€Condemnation€(ð ðPetitionðð),€seeking€to€take,€byÐ L œ Ðeminent€domain,€a€portion€of€a€tract€of€land€(ð ðPropertyðð)€located€on€Concord€Road€in€Brentwood,Ð 8 ˆ ÐTennessee.€€The€Property€is€owned€by€Roger€D.€Haywood€and€Sonya€M.€Haywood.€€The€PetitionÐ $ t Ðalso€named€National€as€a€Defendant.€€National€services€the€Haywoodsðð€mortgage€for€their€mortgageÐ  ` Ðholder.׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Petition€cited€the€following€eminent€domain€statutes€as€authority€for€the€taking,€Tenn.Ð ü L  ÐCode€Ann.€ðððð€29„17„201,€òòet€seq.,€óó29„17„801,€òòet€seq.,óó€and€54„5„104,€òòet€seqóó.€€The€Petition€also€statedÐ è 8  Ðthe€condemnation€was€for€a€public€purpose,€specifically€road€work€to€widen€Concord€Road€and€aÐ Ô$  Ðrelocation€of€public€utilities€along€that€road.Ð À  ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€the€same€day€the€Petition€was€filed,€Petitioners€tendered€$12,500€to€the€TrialÐ ˜è  ÐCourt.€€This€$12,500€was€the€amount€Petitioners€determined€to€be€just€compensation€for€the€takingÐ „Ô  Ðof€the€Property.€€Petitioners€also€filed€Notices,€served€upon€each€defendant,€which€informed€theÐ pÀ Ðdefendants,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803,€that€if€they€objected€to€Petitionersðð€right€toÐ \¬ Ðcondemn€and€take€the€Property,€they€should€file€a€written€objection€within€5€days€of€the€date€Ð H˜ ÐPetitioners€gave€the€Notice.€€The€Notice€also€informed€the€defendants€that€a€hearing€was€set€forÐ 4„ ÐMarch€27,€2000,€at€which€Petitioners€would€seek€immediate€possession€of€the€Property.€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€Notice€addressed€to€National€listed€a€Miamisburg,€Ohio€address,€which€was€theÐ øH Ðaddress€listed€on€the€Propertyððs€Deed€of€Trust.€€The€Notice€was€not€sent€to€Nationalððs€registeredÐ ä4 Ðagent€for€service€of€process€in€Tennessee.€€The€Statement€of€the€Evidence€provides€that€bothÐ Ð  ÐNational€and€the€Haywoods€were€served€with€the€Petition€and€the€Notice€on€February€17,€2000.€€TheÐ ¼  Ðrecord€shows€the€Notice€and€Petition€were€served€upon€National€by€certified€mail,€return€receiptÐ ¨ø Ðrequested.€€The€Statement€of€the€Evidence€also€provides€that€Nationalððs€return€receipt€was€signedÐ ”ä Ðon€behalf€of€National€by€an€unidentified€person€and€returned€to€the€Circuit€Court€Clerk.€€SometimeÐ €Ð Ðthereafter,€the€Notice€and€Petition€were€forwarded€to€Nationalððs€counsel.€€The€record€shows€NationalÐ l¼ Ðfiled€no€objection€to€the€Petition€within€5€days€of€the€date€the€Notice€was€served.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€March€7,€2000,€National€filed€an€Answer€and€Claim€(ð ðAnswerðð)€in€whichÐ 0"€  ÐNational€raised€several€defenses,€including:€€(1)€the€Petition€failed€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€reliefÐ #l! Ðcan€be€granted€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(6);€(2)€lack€of€òòin€personamóó€and€subject€matterÐ $X" Ðjurisdiction;€(3)€the€Petition€was€invalid€since€the€Petitioners€failed€to€comply€with€the€condemnationÐ ô$D # Ðstatutes;€and€(4)€the€condemnation€action€violated€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€ConstitutionsÐ à%0!$ Ðsince€it€constituted€a€taking€by€a€governmental€entity€without€just€compensation.€€Ð Ì&"% Ðâ âÐ ¸'#& Ðà  àà ` àOn€the€same€day€it€filed€the€Answer,€National€also€filed€a€Motion€for€Payment€ofÐ ° Ðâ âProceeds€from€Court€Registry€(ð ðMotion€for€Payment€of€Proceedsðð)€in€which€it€asked€the€Trial€CourtÐ œì Ðto€disburse€to€National€ð ðall€funds€paid€into€the€registry€.€.€.€as€just€and€adequate€compensation€for€theÐ ˆØ Ð[P]roperty.€.€.€.ðð€€In€support€of€this€motion,€National€filed€a€brief€in€which€it€cited€language€in€theÐ tÄ ÐPropertyððs€Deed€of€Trust€as€the€basis€of€its€interest€in€the€proceeds.€€The€brief€also€stated€that€ð ð[t]oÐ `° Ðthe€best€of€Defendant€Nationalððs€knowledge,€no€party„in„interest€disputes€that€this€sum€representsÐ L œ Ðjust€and€adequate€compensation€for€the€property€and€easements€taken€by€[the€Petitioners].ððÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àSoon€thereafter,€Petitioners€filed€a€Motion€to€Strike€Nationalððs€Answer.€€PetitionersÐ  ` Ðargued€the€Trial€Court€should€strike€all€of€Nationalððs€defenses€because€they€were€ð ðunsupported€byÐ ü L  Ðany€factual€statementðð€and€because€the€defenses€were€ð ðconclusory,€repugnant,€contradictory€andÐ è 8  Ðwithout€merit€and€should€be€stricken€to€permit€this€public€improvement€project€to€proceed€withoutÐ Ô$  Ðfurther€delay.ðð€€Petitioners€further€stated,€in€their€Motion€to€Strike,€that€the€issue€of€damages€was€notÐ À  Ðbefore€the€Trial€Court€and€that€the€only€pending€issue€was€ð ðwhether€the€project€to€widen€ConcordÐ ¬ü  ÐRoad€and€to€relocate€public€utilities€is€for€a€public€use€and€purpose€and€should€a€Writ€of€PossessionÐ ˜è  Ðbe€granted.ððÐ „Ô  ÐÌà  àà ` àNational€filed€a€Motion€for€Continuance€of€the€March€27,€2000,€hearing€statingÐ \¬ ÐNationalððs€counsel€had€a€conflict€with€the€hearing€date.€€The€Trial€Court,€on€March€27,€2000,€heldÐ H˜ Ðthe€hearing€as€scheduled.€€The€record€shows€that€neither€a€representative€of€National€nor€its€attorneyÐ 4„ Ðappeared€at€the€hearing.€€The€record€shows€that€at€the€hearing,€on€behalf€of€the€Petitioners,€engineersÐ  p Ðtestified€about€the€public€purpose€of€the€Concord€Road€project.€€One€of€the€owners€of€the€Property,Ð  \ ÐRoger€Haywood,€testified€about€the€current€dangerous€condition€of€Concord€Road€and€that€he€wasÐ øH Ðin€favor€of€the€project.€€The€record€shows€the€Haywoods€did€not€file€an€objection€to€the€taking.€Ð ä4 ÐFurthermore,€the€record€shows€that€Roger€Haywood€testified€he€had€received€correspondence,€datedÐ Ð  ÐFebruary€22,€2000,€from€National€notifying€him€National€had€employed€an€attorney€for€theÐ ¼  Ðcondemnation€proceedings€and€that€the€attorneyððs€fees€would€be€added€to€the€balance€of€theÐ ¨ø ÐHaywoodsðð€mortgage.€€This€correspondence€is€not€contained€in€the€record€on€appeal.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àThereafter,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€Order€granting€Petitionersðð€Motion€to€StrikeÐ l¼ Ðand€denying€Nationalððs€Motion€for€Payment€of€Proceeds.€€The€Order€also€granted€Petitioners€a€writÐ X ¨ Ðof€possession€of€the€Property.€€Furthermore,€and€of€most€importance€to€this€appeal,€the€Trial€Court,Ð D!” Ðòòsua€sponteóó,€set€a€show„cause€hearing€for€April€24,€2002,€for€National€and€its€attorney€to€show€causeÐ 0"€  Ðwhy€they€were€not€in€violation€of€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02.€€The€Trial€Court,€in€the€Order€(ð ðShow„Ð #l! ÐCause€Orderðð),€stated€the€grounds€as€follows:Ð $X" ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1.)à0¸ ` x` xàFiling€an€Answer€to€dismiss€the€Petition€for€CondemnationÐ à%0!$ Ðasserting€a€defense€that€the€Circuit€Court€lacked€jurisdictionÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€subject€matter€involving€an€Eminent€DomainÐ ¸'#& Ðproceeding.€€Further,€said€pleading€stated€the€Court€lackedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðjurisdiction€of€the€person,€National,€notwithstanding€saidÐ )à$( ÐDefendant€was€served€with€Notice€and€the€Petition€forÐ |*Ì%) ÐCondemnation,€by€certified€mail/return€receipt€requested,Ð h+¸&* Ðthrough€the€.€.€.€Circuit€Court€Clerk€of€Williamson€County.€.Ð ° Ð.€.Ðœì¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà8¸ ` x` xàà  àThe€certificate€of€service€was€returned€onÐ tÄ ÐFebruary€17,€2000€to€the€Circuit€Court€Clerk.€€TheÐ `° ÐAnswer€of€the€Defendant,€National,€to€the€Petition€forÐ L œ ÐCondemnation€was€not€filed€until€March€7,€2000.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐSuch€defenses€and€other€regal€contentions€made€byÐ $ t ÐNational€has€caused€unnecessary€delay€and€a€needlessÐ  ` Ðincrease€in€the€cost€of€litigation€and€are€frivolous€andÐ ü L  Ðwithout€merit.Ðè 8 ¸ ¸  ÐÌÓ€ (Ö03ÓØ! !Øà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2.)à8¸ ` x` xàFiling€an€Answer€to€dismiss€the€Petition€forÐ À  ÐCondemnation€alleging€only€that€the€Petition€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðinvalid€and€unconstitutional€is€without€merit.€€TheÐ ˜è  ÐPetition€specifically€sets€out€the€public€purpose€i.e.€theÐ „Ô  Ðwidening€of€Concord€Road€and€the€relocation€of€theÐ pÀ Ðpublic€utility€facilities.€€The€Petition€cites€the€EminentÐ \¬ ÐDomain€statutes€which€authorize€the€PetitionersÐ H˜ ÐT.D.O.T.€and€Brentwood€to€condemn€private€propertyÐ 4„ Ðfor€these€public€purposes.€€The€claims,€defenses,€andÐ  p Ðother€legal€contentions€contained€in€said€Answer€areÐ  \ Ðnot€warranted€by€existing€law€and€violate€Rule€11:02Ð øH Ð[sic]€[of€the]€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.Ðä4¸ ¸  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(3.)à8¸ ` x` xàNational€files€an€Answer€to€dismiss€theÐ ¼  ÐCondemnation€Petition€and€the€property€owners€desireÐ ¨ø Ðand€request€that€the€public€project€proceed.€Ð ”ä ÐDefendant,€National,€has€advised€the€property€ownersÐ €Ð Ðthat€said€owners€will€be€required€to€pay€the€legal€feesÐ l¼ Ðfor€Nationalððs€attorney€and€said€fees€will€be€added€toÐ X ¨ Ðthe€mortgage€held€by€the€Defendant,€National.€.€.€.ÐD!”¸ ¸  Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àThe€record€on€appeal€shows€that€Nationalððs€attorney€appeared€for€the€show„causeÐ #l! Ðhearing.€€Thereafter,€the€Trial€Court€entered€an€Order€(ð ðRule€11€Orderðð)€holding€that€National€andÐ $X" Ðits€attorneys€had€violated€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02(1)€and€Nationalððs€attorneys€also€had€violated€RuleÐ ô$D # Ð11.02(2).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Rule€11€Order€recounted€the€argument€National€made€at€the€show„cause€hearingÐ à%0!$ Ðregarding€the€issue€of€just€compensation€as€follows:€Ð Ì&"% Ðâ âÐ ¸'#& Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAt€the€filing€of€its€Answer€and€Claim,€Defendant€National€was€notÐ ° Ðâ âsure€that€the€proper€compensation€had€been€paid€with€respect€to€theÐ œì Ðproperty€taken.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àDefendant€National€City€had€a€mere€five€days€to€respond€to€theÐ `° ÐPetition€to€contest€the€right€of€the€Petitioners€to€condemn€theÐ L œ Ðproperty.Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€undersigned€had€insufficient€time€to€obtain€an€appraisal€of€theÐ  ` Ðproperty€and€wanted€to€preserve€Defendant€National€Cityððs€rights€toÐ ü L  Ðdispute€value€at€a€later€date.€.€.€.Ðè 8 ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€holding€that€National€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1),€the€Trial€Court€madeÐ À  Ðthe€following€findings:€€(1)€the€Petition€and€Notice€were€served€on€National€on€February€17,€2000;Ð ¬ü  Ð(2)€the€Notice€stated€the€March€27,€2000,€hearing€would€not€cover€the€issues€of€the€value€of€theÐ ˜è  ÐProperty€or€just€compensation€for€the€taking€of€the€Property;€(3)€National€did€not€file€a€writtenÐ „Ô  Ðobjection€to€the€taking€within€5€days€of€service€of€the€Notice€as€required€by€statute;€(4)€National€filedÐ pÀ Ðan€Answer€on€March€7,€2000,€in€which€it€contended€that€the€condemnation€constituted€a€takingÐ \¬ Ðwithout€just€compensation€in€violation€of€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€Constitutions;€(5)Ð H˜ ÐNational€also€filed,€on€March€7,€2000,€a€Motion€for€Payment€of€Proceeds€in€which€it€stated€that€ð ðððnoÐ 4„ Ðparty„in„interest€disputes€that€this€sum€[$12,500]€represents€just€and€adequate€compensation€for€theÐ  p Ð[P]roperty€.€.€.ðððð;€(6)€National€sent€correspondence€to€the€Haywoods€on€February€22,€2000,€in€whichÐ  \ Ðit€advised€the€Haywoods€that€the€legal€expenses€incurred€by€National€in€this€matter€would€be€addedÐ øH Ðto€the€balance€of€the€Haywoodsðð€mortgage;€and€(7)€Roger€Haywood€testified€he€did€not€dispute€theÐ ä4 Ðcondemnation€proceeding.€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€Rule€11€Order€also€contained€the€following€determinations€of€the€Trial€Court:Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€is€the€opinion€of€the€Court€that€the€Defendant€National€.€.€.Ð €Ð Ðand€its€attorney€received€adequate€and€sufficient€notice€and€theÐ l¼ ÐPetition€for€Condemnation€and€the€taking€of€the€property€is€for€aÐ X ¨ Ðpublic€use€and€purpose.€€The€Petition€for€Condemnation€is€valid€andÐ D!” Ðthe€Court€has€jurisdiction€of€this€condemnation€proceedings€[sic].€€Ð0"€ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€is€of€the€further€opinion€that€the€representations,Ð $X" Ðconduct€and€the€type€of€action€taken€by€the€National€.€.€.€and€itsÐ ô$D # Ðattorney€.€.€.€created€delay€and€caused€a€needless€increase€in€the€costÐ à%0!$ Ðof€litigation€and€violated€òòRule€11.02(1)€T.R.C.P.óó€€It€is€also€the€opinionÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€Court€that€the€claims,€defenses€and€legal€contentions€made€andÐ ¸'#& Ðtaken€by€[Nationalððs]€attorney€.€.€.€were€misleading,€frivolous€and€notÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwarranted.€.€.€.Ð)à$(` x` x Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àIn€addition,€the€Statement€of€the€Evidence€provides€the€basis€for€the€Trial€CourtððsÐ ° Ðâ ârationale€for€finding€a€Rule€11€violation€by€National€and€its€attorneys,€stating€in€pertinent€part,€asÐ œì Ðfollows:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[The]€legal€position€taken€and€stated€above€at€the€sanction€hearingÐ `° Ðwas€contrary€and€entirely€different€than€the€previous€position€taken€byÐ L œ ÐNational€and€its€attorney€when€they€represented€to€the€Court€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðsupport€of€their€claim€for€the€condemnation€proceeds€that€theÐ $ t Ðdeposited€funds€were€ð ðjust€and€adequateðð€compensation€for€theÐ  ` Ðproperty€and€easement€taken€by€the€Petitioners.€.€.€.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àWith€respect€to€the€sanctions€imposed€upon€National€and€its€attorneys€for€violatingÐ Ô$  ÐRule€11.02(1),€the€Rule€11€Order€held€that€National€and€its€attorneys€should€pay€a€penalty€of€$5,000Ð À  Ðand€the€Petitionersðð€attorneysðð€fees€at€a€rate€of€$150€per€hour€which€totaled€approximately€$5,360Ð ¬ü  Ðfor€the€Petitionersðð€two€attorneys.׃%×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Furthermore,€the€Trial€Court,€in€the€Rule€11€Order,€orderedÐ ˜è  ÐNationalððs€attorneys€to€pay€treble€the€amount€of€the€Petitionersðð€attorneysðð€fees€as€a€sanction€forÐ „Ô  Ðviolating€Rule€11.02(2).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àNational€and€its€attorneys€appeal.Ð H˜ ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòDiscussionÐ  p Ðóóó óÓNLÓÌà  àà ` àOn€appeal€and€although€not€exactly€stated€as€such,€National€and€its€attorneys€raise€theÐ øH Ðfollowing€issues€for€our€consideration:€(1)€whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€holding€that€National€andÐ ä4 Ðits€attorneys€violated€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02(1)€and€11.02(2);€(2)€if€National€and€its€attorneys€violatedÐ Ð  ÐRule€11.02(1),€whether€the€Trial€Court€abused€its€discretion€in€imposing€a€penalty€of€$5,000€againstÐ ¼  Ðthem€and€awarding€Petitionersðð€attorneysðð€fees;€and€(3)€if€Nationalððs€attorneys€violated€RuleÐ ¨ø Ð11.02(2),€whether€the€Trial€Court€abused€its€discretion€in€imposing€a€penalty€of€treble€attorneysðð€feesÐ ”ä Ðupon€them.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌÌà  àà ` àThis€Court€reviews€all€aspects€of€a€Trial€Courtððs€Rule€11€determination€under€anÐ D!” Ðabuse€of€discretion€standard.€€òòMcGaugh€v.€Galbreathóó,€996€S.W.2d€186,€194€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998);Ð 0"€  ÐòòProject€Creation,€Inc.€v.€Nealóó,€M1999„01272„COA„R3„CV,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€624,€at€*€37Ð #l! Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.€21,€2001),€òòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó.€€This€standard€of€review€is€appliedÐ $X" Ðbecause€of€the€fact„intensive€inquiry€the€Trial€Court€must€make€in€Rule€11€determinations.€€òòÔ‡XH©XXXH©ÔId.óó€€WeÐ ô$D # Ðshould€not€reverse€for€ð ðððabuse€of€discretion€a€discretionary€judgment€of€a€trial€court€unless€itÐ à%0!$ Ðaffirmatively€appears€that€the€trial€courtððs€decision€was€against€logic€or€reasoning,€and€caused€anÐ Ì&"% Ðinjustice€or€injury€to€the€party€complaining.ðððð€€òòMarcus€v.€Marcus,óó€993€S.W.2d€596,€601€(Tenn.€1999)Ð ¸'#& Ð(quoting€òòBallard€v.€Herzkeóó,€924€S.W.2d€652,€661€(Tenn.€1996)).Ô#†XH©XXXH©ïQ#Ô€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÐ )à$( Ðà  àà ` àFirst,€we€address€Nationalððs€issues€on€appeal€regarding€whether€the€Trial€Court€erredÐ ° Ðin€finding€that€National€and€its€attorneys€violated€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02(1)€&€(2).€€As€discussed,€theÐ œì ÐTrial€Court€found€National€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€and€held€that€the€attorneys€alsoÐ ˆØ Ðviolated€Rule€11.02(2).€€Therefore,€applying€the€appropriate€standard€of€review,€we€must€examineÐ tÄ Ðall€of€the€conduct€at€issue€to€determine€whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€holding€the€conductÐ `° Ðsanctionable€under€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2).€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àà ` àTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.01€provides€that€ð ð[e]very€pleading,€written€motion,€and€otherÐ $ t Ðpaper€shall€be€signed€by€at€least€one€attorney€of€record€.€.€.€or,€if€the€party€is€not€represented€by€anÐ  ` Ðattorney,€shall€be€signed€by€the€party.ðð€€The€requirement€of€a€signature€ð ðððis€directed€at€the€threeÐ ü L  Ðsubstantive€prongs€of€Rule€11:€€its€factual€basis,€its€legal€basis,€and€its€legitimate€purpose.€.€.€.ðððð€Ð è 8  ÐòòMcGaugh€v.€Galbreathóó,€996€S.W.2d€at€194€(quoting€òòAndrews€v.€Bibleóó,€812€S.W.2d€284,€287€(Tenn.Ð Ô$  Ð1991)).€€ð ðððA€signature€signifies€to€the€Court€that€the€signer€has€read€the€pleading,€motion,€or€otherÐ À  Ðpaper,€has€conducted€a€reasonable€inquiry€into€the€facts€and€the€law,€and€is€satisfied€that€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdocument€is€well„grounded€in€both,€and€is€acting€without€any€improper€motive.ðððð€òòId.óóÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€11.02(1)€&€(2)€provide,€in€pertinent€part,€as€follows:Ð pÀ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àBy€presenting€to€the€court€(whether€by€signing,€filing,€submitting€orÐ H˜ Ðlater€advocating)€a€pleading,€written€motion,€or€other€paper,€anÐ 4„ Ðattorney€or€unrepresented€party€is€certifying€that€to€the€best€of€theÐ  p Ðpersonððs€knowledge,€information,€and€belief,€formed€after€an€inquiryÐ  \ Ðreasonable€under€the€circumstances,€ð!ðÐøH` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(1)€it€is€not€being€presented€for€any€improper€purpose,€such€asÐ Ð  Ðto€harass€or€to€cause€unnecessary€delay€or€needless€increase€in€theÐ ¼  Ðcost€of€litigation;Шø` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à(2)€the€claims,€defenses,€and€other€legal€contentions€thereinÐ €Ð Ðare€warranted€by€existing€law€or€by€a€nonfrivolous€argument€for€theÐ l¼ Ðextension,€modification,€or€reversal€of€existing€law€or€theÐ X ¨ Ðestablishment€of€new€law.€.€.€.ÐD!”` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€determining€whether€an€attorneyððs€or€partyððs€conduct€violates€Rule€11.02,€theÐ #l! Ðtest€to€be€applied€is€ð ðððone€of€objective€reasonableness€under€all€the€circumstances€.€.€.€and€theÐ $X" Ðreasonableness€of€the€attorneyððs€belief€must€be€assessed€in€light€of€the€circumstances€existing€at€theÐ ô$D # Ðtime€the€document€in€question€was€signed.ðððð€€òòMcGaugh€v.€Galbreathóó,€996€S.W.2d€at€194òò€óó(quotingòòÐ à%0!$ ÐAndrews€v.€Bibleóó,€812€S.W.2d€at€288).׃8×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РÌ&"% Їà  àà ` àBecause€this€matter€involves€a€taking€of€private€property€by€governmental€entitiesÐ ° Ðthrough€eminent€domain,€we€must€examine€Tennesseeððs€eminent€domain€statutes€and€cases€toÐ œì Ðdetermine€whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€finding€that€Nationalððs€and€its€attorneysðð€conduct€was€notÐ ˆØ Ðobjectively€reasonable€in€light€of€the€then„existing€circumstances.€€òòSee€id.óó€€The€TennesseeÐ tÄ ÐConstitution€provides€the€state€government€an€inherent€right€of€eminent€domain,€the€power€to€takeÐ `° Ða€personððs€property€for€public€purposes,€stating:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThat€no€manððs€particular€services€shall€be€demanded,€or€propertyÐ $ t Ðtaken€or€applied€to€public€use,€without€the€consent€of€hisÐ  ` Ðrepresentatives,€or€without€just€compensation€being€made€therefor.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€21.€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€7„34„104(a)(1),€ðð€29„16„101,€òòet€seq.óó,€ðð€29„17„Ð Ô$  Ð801,€òòet€seq.óó€(providing€the€power€of€eminent€domain€to€counties€and€municipalities).€€TheÐ À  Ðgovernmentððs€eminent€domain€power€is€a€limitation€on€a€personððs€ownership€of€his€property.€€òòCityÐ ° Ðof€Chattanooga€v.€Classic€Refinery,€Inc.óó,€No.€03A01„9712„CV„00552,€1998€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€854,Ð œì Ðat€*€9€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€17,€1998),€òòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó,€(citing€òòHarper€v.€Trenton€Hous.Ð ˆØ ÐAuth.óó,€274€S.W.2d€635,€641€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1954)).€€ð ððð[B]ecause€the€power€of€eminent€domain€isÐ tÄ Ðagainst€common€right,ðð.€.€.€statutes€granting€such€power€are€to€be€strictly€construed€against€theÐ `° Ðcondemnor,€.€.€.€and€the€procedures€prescribed€by€those€statutes€ððmust€be€followed.€.€.€.ðððð€òòRoaneÐ L œ ÐCounty€v.€Christmas€Lumber€Co.,€Inc.óó,€No.€E1999„00370„COA„R9„CV,€2000€Tenn.€App.€LEXISÐ 8 ˆ Ð493,€at€*€7€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€27,€2000),€òòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó,€(citations€omitted)€(quotingÐ $ t ÐòòVinson€v.€Nashville,€Chattanooga€&€St.€Louis€Ry.óó,€321€S.W.2d€841,€844€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1958);€(òòCityÐ  ` Ðof€Chattanooga€v.€Stateóó,€272€S.W.€432,€434€(Tenn.€1925)).Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€governmentððs€eminent€domain€power€is€considerable.€€Even€in€the€face€of€thisÐ Ô$  Ðconsiderable€power,€a€property€owner€faced€with€the€governmentððs€taking€of€her€property€for€a€publicÐ À  Ðpurpose€still€has€a€right€to€question€the€governmentððs€actions.€€A€court€should€be€cautious€beforeÐ ¬ü  Ðtaking€action,€particularly€òòsua€sponteóó,€that€restricts€a€property€ownerððs€right€to€question€the€actionsÐ ˜è  Ðof€her€government€in€taking€her€property.€€The€right€of€an€individual€to€question€the€eminent€domainÐ „Ô  Ðactions€of€the€government,€without€fear€of€retaliation€by€the€government,€is€fundamental€under€ourÐ pÀ ÐConstitution.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð21.€€This€fundamental€right€serves€as€the€foundation€for€ourÐ \¬ Ðanalysis€of€the€Trial€Courtððs€Rule€11€sanctions.Ð H˜ Ðò òÌà  àà ` àó óThe€record€on€appeal€shows€the€Trial€Court€apparently€based€its€determination€thatÐ  p ÐNational€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€and€that€Nationalððs€attorneyððs€also€violated€RuleÐ  \ Ð11.02(2)€by€the€following€conduct:€(1)€raising€the€defenses€of€subject€matter€and€òòin€personamÐ øH Ðóójurisdiction;€(2)€objecting€to€the€Petitionersðð€right€to€take€the€Property€under€eminent€domain;€(3)€theÐ ä4 Ðpositions€National€took€in€the€Answer,€in€the€Motion€for€Payment€of€Proceeds€and€at€the€show„causeÐ Ð  Ðhearing€regarding€the€issue€of€just€compensation;€and€(4)€the€correspondence€National€sent€to€theÐ ¼  ÐHaywoods€regarding€its€decision€to€add€Nationalððs€attorneyððs€fees€to€the€balance€of€the€HaywoodsððÐ ¨ø Ðmortgage.€€We€will€address€each€of€these€matters€to€determine€whether€the€Trial€Court€erred€inÐ ”ä Ðfinding,€òòsua€sponteóó,€that€this€conduct€constituted€sanctionable€conduct€under€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2).€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€Answer,€National€and€its€attorneys€raised€the€defenses€of€lack€of€subject€matterÐ X ¨ Ðjurisdiction€and€lack€of€òòin€personamóó€jurisdiction.€€Although€not€specifically€stated€as€such€in€theÐ D!” ÐAnswer,€the€record€shows€National€and€its€attorneys€based€these€defenses€upon€claimed€insufficientÐ 0"€  Ðservice€of€process€since€the€Notice€and€Petition€were€not€sent€to€Nationalððs€registered€agent€forÐ #l! Ðservice€of€process€in€Tennessee.€ò òó ó€ò òó óòòóóUnder€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(1)€&€(2),€defenses€to€lack€ofÐ $X" Ðjurisdiction€òòshallóó€be€asserted€in€a€responsive€pleading€or€in€a€written€motion.€€Moreover,€the€NoticeÐ ô$D # Ðprovided,€consistent€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(c),€that€National€had€only€5€days€from€theÐ à%0!$ Ðdate€the€Notice€was€given€to€file€a€written€objection€to€the€taking.€€The€Notice€also€stated€that€if€noÐ Ì&"% Ðwritten€objection€was€given€within€the€5„day€period,€Petitioners€would€have€the€right€to€takeÐ ¸'#& Ðpossession€of€the€Property.€€òòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(c).€€The€record€shows€the€Notice€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðaddressed€to€Nationalððs€Miamisburg,€Ohio,€address€instead€of€Nationalððs€registered€agent€for€serviceÐ )à$( Ðof€process€in€Tennessee.€€The€record€also€shows€National€did€not€file€an€objection€within€the€5„dayÐ |*Ì%) Ðperiod€to€the€Petition.€€In€light€of€the€constraints€placed€on€National€by€the€5„day€rule€set€forth€byÐ h+¸&* ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(c)€and€the€requirement€of€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(1)€&€(2)€thatÐ ° Ðjurisdiction€defenses€be€raised€in€a€responsive€pleading€or€motion,€we€hold€that€National€and€itsÐ œì Ðattorneys€acted€with€objective€reasonableness,€even€if€in€error,€in€raising€these€jurisdiction€defensesÐ ˆØ Ðin€the€Answer.€€òòSee€McGaugh€v.€Galbreathóó,€996€S.W.2d€at€194.€€òòóóAccordingly,€we€hold€it€was€errorÐ tÄ Ðfor€the€Trial€Court€to€find€National€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€and€that€the€attorneysÐ `° Ðviolated€Rule€11.02(2)€by€raising€these€defenses,€and€we€reverse€this€holding€of€the€Trial€Court.€€Ð L œ Ðò òó óÌà  àà ` àNext,€we€address€whether€National€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2)Ð $ t Ðwhen,€in€the€Answer,€they€objected€to€Petitionersðð€right€to€take€the€Property€under€eminent€domainÐ  ` Ðand€contended€the€Petition€should€be€dismissed.€€As€discussed,€one€of€the€eminent€domain€statutesÐ ü L  Ðunder€which€the€Petitioners€proceeded,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803,€provides€that€notice€of€theÐ è 8  Ðfiling€of€a€petition€for€condemnation€shall€be€given€to€the€property€owner€ð ðat€least€five€(5)€days€priorÐ Ô$  Ðto€the€taking€of€any€additional€steps€in€the€case.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(a)€&€(b).€€TheÐ À  Ðstatute€also€contemplates€an€objection€by€the€property€owner€to€the€condemnorððs€right€to€take€theÐ ¬ü  Ðproperty,€stating€that€ð ð[a]fter€the€expiration€of€[5]€days€from€the€date€of€the€giving€of€such€notice€òòifÐ ˜è  Ðthe€right€to€take€is€not€questionedóó,€the€condemnor€shall€have€the€right€to€take€possession€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðproperty€or€property€rights.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(c)€(emphasis€added);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòTownÐ pÀ Ðof€Collierville€v.€Norfolk€S.€Ry.€Co.óó,€1€S.W.3d€68,€73€n.5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998)€(noting€that€Tenn.Ð \¬ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€29„17„803(c)€ð ðimplicitly,€if€not€explicitly,€[entitles]€Norfolk€Southern€to€question€theÐ H˜ ÐTownððs€right€to€takeðð).€€In€light€of€this€statute,€National€had€the€right,€at€least,€to€raise€an€objectionÐ 4„ Ðin€its€Answer€to€Petitionersðð€right€to€take€the€Property€and€acted€with€objective€reasonableness€inÐ  p Ðraising€this€objection.€€To€impose€Rule€11€sanctions€under€these€circumstances,€including€the€severeÐ  \ Ðtime€constraints,€against€a€property€owner€for€objecting€to€the€governmentððs€right€to€take€property€Ð øH Ðeffectively€would€eliminate€a€property€ownerððs€right€to€object€to€the€already„vast€power€of€eminentÐ ä4 Ðdomain.€€Consequently,€we€hold€it€was€error€for€the€Trial€Court€to€hold€that€Nationalððs€objecting€toÐ Ð  ÐPetitionersðð€right€to€take€the€Property€constituted€a€violation€of€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2),€and€we€reverseÐ ¼  Ðthis€determination.Ð ¨ø Ðò òó óÌà  àà ` àWe€next€determine€whether€National€and€its€attorneys€engaged€in€sanctionableÐ €Ð Ðconduct€under€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2)€regarding€the€issue€of€the€proceeds€the€Petitioners€deposited€withÐ l¼ Ðthe€Trial€Court€Clerk€for€the€taking€of€the€Property.€€As€grounds€for€finding€Rule€11.02€violationsÐ X ¨ Ðby€National€and€its€attorneys,€the€Trial€Court€cited€Nationalððs€position€regarding€the€issue€of€justÐ D!” Ðcompensation€for€the€taking€of€the€Property.€€The€Statement€of€the€Evidence,€as€discussed,Ð 0"€  Ðcharacterized€the€argument€National€made€at€the€show„cause€hearing€regarding€this€issue€as€beingÐ #l! Ðcontrary€to€the€position€National€previously€took€in€its€Motion€for€Payment€of€Proceeds.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„802€requires€a€governmental€entity€that€is€exercising€itsÐ à%0!$ Ðeminent€domain€powers€under€Tenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€29„17„801,€òòet€seq.óó,€to€deposit€with€the€Trial€CourtÐ Ì&"% ÐClerk€the€amount€of€compensation€it€determines€the€property€owner€is€entitled€to€for€the€taking€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€property.€€Thereafter,€the€property€owner€has€three€options€regarding€the€deposit€which€are,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðgenerally€stated:€(1)€accept€the€amount€of€the€deposit€as€full€settlement€for€the€taking€of€the€property;Ð )à$( Ð(2)€not€accept€the€deposit€and€appear€for€trial€to€determine€the€issue€of€just€compensation;€or€(3)Ð |*Ì%) Ðobtain€the€deposit,€while€disputing€the€amount€deposited,€and€try€the€issue€of€just€compensation.€Ð h+¸&* ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€29„17„804,€29„17„805,€&€29„17„806.€€The€record€shows€National€sought€toÐ ° Ðproceed€under€the€third€option€as€it€raised€the€defense,€in€its€Answer,€that€the€condemnation€was€anÐ œì Ðunconstitutional€taking€without€just€compensation€while€also€filing€a€Motion€for€Payment€ofÐ ˆØ ÐProceeds€in€which€it€stated€that€no€party€disputed€that€the€amount€Petitioners€had€deposited€was€justÐ tÄ Ðcompensation.€€While€the€language€used€in€the€Answer€and€Motion€for€Payment€of€ProceedsÐ `° Ðcertainly€could€have€been€better€worded€to€properly€reflect€Nationalððs€choice€to€obtain€the€depositÐ L œ Ðwhile€disputing€the€issue€of€just€compensation,€National€had€the€right€to€choose€this€option.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐTherefore,€while€Nationalððs€positions€in€the€Answer€and€Motion€for€Payment€of€Proceeds€and€at€theÐ $ t Ðshow„cause€hearing€may€have€been€inartfully€stated,€they€were€not€necessarily€inconsistent€and€wereÐ  ` Ðobjectively€reasonable€under€the€then„existing€circumstances.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€it€was€error€forÐ ü L  Ðthe€Trial€Court€to€find€this€conduct€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2),€and€we€reverse€the€Trial€CourtððsÐ è 8  Ðdetermination€on€this€issue.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌò òó óà  àà ` àFinally,€we€must€determine€whether€it€was€error€for€the€Trial€Court€to€hold€thatÐ ¬ü  ÐNational€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02€because€of€the€February€22,€2000,€correspondenceÐ ˜è  ÐNational€sent€to€the€Haywoods€regarding€Nationalððs€attorneyððs€fees€incurred€in€this€matter.€€AsÐ „Ô  Ðdiscussed,€this€letter€is€not€a€part€of€the€record€on€appeal€but,€according€to€Roger€HaywoodððsÐ pÀ Ðtestimony,€this€correspondence€stated€that€National€had€hired€an€attorney€to€protect€its€interest€andÐ \¬ Ðthat€the€attorneyððs€fees€would€be€added€to€the€Haywoodsðð€mortgage€balance.€€The€language€containedÐ H˜ Ðin€Rule€11€shows€that€the€rule€applies€to€pleadings,€written€motions€and€other€papers€which€areÐ 4„ Ðpresented€to€the€court€ð ðwhether€by€signing,€filing,€submitting,€or€later€advocating.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.Ð  p ÐP.€11.02.€€òòSee€also€State€v.€Milleróó,€E2000„03038„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€582,Ð  \ Ðat€*€6€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Aug.€2,€2001),€òòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó,€(holding€that€Rule€11€ð ðclearlyÐ øH Ðapplies€only€to€pleadings,€motions,€or€other€papers€filed€by€a€party€or€the€partyððs€attorneyðð).€€TheÐ ä4 Ðrecord€on€appeal€shows€the€February€22,€2000,€correspondence€was€never€filed,€submitted€orÐ Ð  Ðotherwise€relied€upon€by€National€and€its€attorneys€in€court.€€Accordingly,€due€to€the€facts€andÐ ¼  Ðcircumstances€presented€by€the€record€on€appeal,€we€hold€it€was€error€for€the€Trial€Court€to€hold€thatÐ ¨ø ÐNational€and€its€attorneys€violated€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2)€by€sending€this€correspondence€to€theÐ ”ä ÐHaywoods,€and€we€reverse€this€determination.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` à€We€believe€the€Trial€Courtððs€decision€to€impose€Rule€11€sanctions,€òòsua€sponte,€óóunderòòÐ X ¨ Ðóóthe€facts€and€circumstances€presented€in€the€record€before€us,€places€an€unnecessary€chill€on€allÐ D!” Ðproperty€ownersðð€right€to€question€the€eminent€domain€actions€of€the€government.€€We€believe€suchÐ 0"€  Ða€result€is€neither€desirable€as€policy€nor€appropriate€under€the€law.€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€remaining€issues€on€appeal€concern€the€Rule€11€sanctions€the€Trial€CourtÐ ô$D # Ðimposed€upon€National€and€its€attorneys.€€Since€we€hold€that€National€and€its€attorneys€did€notÐ à%0!$ Ðengage€in€any€sanctionable€conduct€under€Rule€11.02(1)€&€(2),€these€issues€are€pretermitted.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* Ðà@  %ìàòòò òConclusionˆÐ ° Ðó óóóÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€reversed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€TrialÐ ˆØ ÐCourt€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€required,€if€any,€consistent€with€this€Opinion€and€forÐ tÄ Ðcollection€of€the€costs€below.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellees,€the€City€ofÐ `° ÐBrentwood€and€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ð L œ ÐÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð À  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGEà Ð àÐ ¬ü  Ðà  àà ` à