WPCF Dۧ"Fbc"s#6`i0/IWMg~i.r\Nvl|'sbeET z_ 9mBUM+|9=c2P} 8 c#Q=z,@Y'=YEg T:?f^ ۄIE[|o#ሡj!gY .}mGl.>NJyx#4EݏY=yJ=yQ/#ohuB^ by+tiP?!J Lg4d(:}RTZH]|w%זRL;WHNCsnͺWl|Ɵiq: 6+/X{9 t?NT%Es,Z/MQJhڷ ^zgU.-Z{+eI~ Ťsg"He!gUuD 4sیi$b#\ %% ^ + 07 UN w 4 z+  w  m 2  ]# 0DN-//E777777777777777777777777b999999999999999999999999999999999999 0AAAA B,, 0I D5 D-" 0KOO AS 0 0DW A\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK4,,,,0W/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular=.:i+00 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|xU ( R.$      1     _ԀWhetherthis glosswas_manuscripted_ԀbeforeorafterthedecreewassignedbytheChancellordoesnot  appear.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0   - -(|G2$ !.8}dd8         0   d(|3v$ !.8}dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3v$ !.8}dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8}dd8     _  }8XXXdd8  @ }INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#} #Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefs,May22,2003 L XXX} #}XXX#JOSEPHW.HOUSTON,etal.v.CHARLESD._MOUNGER_,etal.XXX}  J @@ AppealfromtheChanceryCourtfor_Roane_ԀCounty  J @@No.13,335FrankV.Williams,III,Chancellor  6 FILEDOCTOBER23,_2003_    @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200200779_COA_ԄR3CV   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Afterjudgmentwasentered,certaininaccuracies,deemedtobeclericalerrorsinanengineering x  surveyofextensiveproperties,werediscoveredwhichwereresolvedbythetrialcourtfollowing d hearings,andthejudgmentwascorrectedoramendedovertheappellantsobjections.Thisappeal P followed,butnotranscriptoftheproceedingswasfiled,andtheappellantspurportedStatementof < theEvidencedidnotreceivetheapprobationoftheChancellor.Consequently,theappellantcourt (x mustassumethattheevidencewassufficienttosupportthejudgment,andtheappealisdismissed. d  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtisAffirmed  <   #}XX#XXX.}WilliamH._Inman_,Sr.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichCharlesD.Susano,Jr.,#}XXX#XXX}  andD.Michael_Swiney_,JJ.#}XXh #XXX.},joined.  CharlesD._Mounger_,Kingston,Tennessee,ProSe.  JohnW.Cleveland,_Sweetwater_,Tennessee,forappellees,JosephHoustonandJoyceHouston. ` _Jimmie_ԀD.Turner,OliverSprings,Tennessee,forappellees,_Jimmie_ԀD.Turner,_Weldon_ԀWebb, 8!  HarveyLoweandEdithLowe. $"t! p OPINION #}XXX #XXX} #L# #}XXXy #XXX} I.  %$!%     Thisisaboundarylinecase.Followingtwodaysoftestimonywithahundredormore '"' exhibits,theChancellorfoundthatafencememorializedtheeasternboundaryoftheHouston (#( propertywithinthenorthernboundarypassingthroughaspring.TheChancellororderedasurvey )$) oftheselines,thecornersanddistancestobeincorporatedinthefinaldecree.Afterthedecreewas p*%* drafted,oneofthecourseswasstrickenandareversecallwasinterlined,apparentlyingoodfaith, \+&+  butneverthelessincorrectly.Thecorrectcall S.22deg.10min.13sec.E.386.55ft.waslinedout, H,', _and S.23deg.04min.45sec.E.383.59feetwaserroneouslysubstituted.Thedecreewasentered  inOctober,2000.       Thedefendants,hereappellants,filedamotiontoenforcethefinaldecreeandforthe t appointmentofaSpecialMaster,allegingthataplatrecordedbyHoustonafterentryofthefinal ` decreedidnotconformtothedecretaldescriptionandthereforewasacloudonthedefendantstitle, L  andthat thefinalitythatthecourtandthepartiessought...stilleludesus.Thedefendantsmoved 8  thecourttoappointanothersurveyorasSpecialMastertoprepareaplatthatconformedtothefinal $ t decree.  `   ThismotionwasheardFebruary11,2002,andthefinaldecreewascorrectedasfollows:The  8  boundarylineinquestionasshownontherecordedplatwasdeclaredtobecorrect,andthefinal $  decreewasconformedtotheplat,withtheglossmanuscriptedbythedefendantsattorneyordered   tobestricken.  #  1           Thedefendantsappeal,insistingthattheChancellorhadnojurisdictiontoamendormodify   orclarifythedecreewhichwasenteredtwentymonthsearlier.Thisinsistenceissomewhatatodds p withtheirmotiontoenforcethejudgmentwhich,ineffect,actuatedthepostjudgmentproceeding \ theappellantsnowcomplainof. H 0   `  (#(#    II.  \    Under Rule59.04,Tenn.R.Civ.P. , amotiontoalteroramendajudgmentisrequiredtobe 4 filedandservedwithinthirtydaysaftertheentryofthejudgment.UnderRule60.02,relieffroma $ finaljudgmentmaybeawardedfor,interalia,mistakeorinadvertence,ifamotionisfiledwithin  oneyearafterjudgment.Sincethepostjudgmentpleadingwasfiledmorethanoneyearafter  judgmentwasentered,neitheroftheseRulesisapplicable.    ButRule60.01providesthatclericalmistakesinjudgmentsmaybecorrectedbythecourt p atanytimeonitsowninitiativeoronmotionofanypartyandaftersuchnotice,ifany,asthecourt \  orders.TheChancellorfoundthattheerrorinquestionwasclericalinnature,essentiallyoccasioned H! bytheappellantscounselinmistakenlyobliteratingthecorrectcallandsubstitutinganincorrectcall 4"  therebydisjoiningtheboundary.Anindependentsurveyortestifiedconcerningtheinconsistency  #p! betweentheMemorandumOpinionandthefinaldecree,andtheChancellorthereuponcorrectedthe  $\" error. $H #   Butiftheerrorcomplainedofcannotbelabeledasaclericalone,Rule60.02 doesnotlimit & "% thepowerofacourttoentertainanindependentactiontorelieveapartyfromajudgment,order,or ' #& proceeding,andwearenotawareofanyauthoritywhichdisallowstheprocedureemployedbythese (#' parties,concurredinbytheChancellor,asanindependentaction.See, Jenkinsv.McKinney, 533  S.W.2d275(Tenn.1996); Tatev.CountyofMonroe ,578S.W.2d642,(Tenn.Ct.App.1978).   III. x z    Aresolutiononthemeritsofthislawsuitisbeyondappellatereachbecauseofthefailureof P  theappellanttimelytofileanappropriaterecordoftheproceedingsinthetrialcourt. <    Rule24(c),Tenn.R.App.P.,providesaspertinenthere:  d 8  8`   (c)StatementoftheEvidenceWhenNoReport,Recital,orTranscript  <  IsAvailable.Ifnostenographicreport,substantiallyverbatimrecital (  ortranscriptoftheevidenceorproceedingsisavailable,theappellant   shallprepareastatementoftheevidenceorproceedingsfromthebest   availablemeans,includingtheappellantsrecollection.The   statementshouldconveyafair,accurateandcompleteaccountof   whattranspiredwithrespecttothoseissuesthatarethebasisof t appeal.Thestatement,certifiedbytheappellantortheappellants ` counselasanaccurateaccountoftheproceedings,shallbefiledwith L theclerkofthetrialcourtwithin90daysafterfilingthenoticeof 8 appeal.Uponfilingthestatement,theappellantshallsimultaneously $t servenoticeofthefilingontheappellee,accompaniedbyashortand ` plaindeclarationoftheissuestheappellantintendstopresenton L appeal....8` x` x   TheappellantfiledhisnoticeofappealonMarch28,2002,followedbythefilingofa  purportedstatementoftheevidenceonAugust21,2002.    OnOctober1,2002,thetrialjudgeenteredanorderthat  8  8`   [T]heproposedStatementofEvidenceandProceedingsUnderRule \  24(c)doesnotrepresentafair,accurate,andcompleteaccountof H! whattranspiredinthesensethattheproposedstatementdoesnot 4"  containevenanarrativeaccountoftheevidence,muchlessa  #p! substantiallyverbatimrecitaloftheevidence. $\"` x` x   Weparticularlynotice,thatinthepostjudgmentproceeding,initiatedbytheappellants,oral %4!$ testimonywasadduced.  & "%   {(  ItisthesettleddutyoftheappellanttocomplywithRule24(c)totheendthatweareassured (#' ofatranscriptoftheproceedingsorastatementoftheevidencewhichconveysafair,accurateand )$( completeaccountofwhattranspiredinthetrialcourt. Nickasv.Capadalis ,954S.W.2d735(Tenn. *%) Ct.App.1997); Statev.Boling ,840S.W.2d944(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).Indefaultofthis l+&* requirement,theappellatecourtmustassumethesufficiencyoftheevidencetosupportthe  judgment. Sherrodv.Wix ,849S.W.2d780(Tenn.Ct.App.1992).    Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedandtheappealisdismissed.Costsareassessed t totheappellant,CharlesD.Mounger. `    `     h     ___________________________________  `    `     h     WILLIAMH.INMAN,SENIORJUDGE