ÿWPCE àÑD¸ö¸Éǹ‘›‚ªŠø z¸ôÄè?uE(qBa´L‡|Íbk}F>£bä³²¬"¯Zì0Œ*ƒÒºÔŽøzÆE^ƒ_`ƒ'ðDŒýÍ!¼ÀfåfÛ´O‰~8;ä0öQk4&Ë÷â gG¡ÆdÈI’–$ êö›Œ-<ý¶UpƒÞK®‘–~l[¦.ë68šÐ¤Å«îþ?ž–õÌ1níøídØ/ ³aLëg7; ä-¦VzÚR¹­¨^×£T’ihûO;|;;+OXÛw™êv3º³€bÌf4AŽŸ^ËËAW3㛌Þ$K ¡h(˜7ŸõkZ?®QÚÏ„>í"O‘+@‹ï`¡I{›§C?î:w”éP™Äk$âûMþ#†ð‡eöŠ3ÆÄlú¦“U[iÏÙÍÊ?è LÁ£Û§/æ£A”{^l”=h2f*ëqúg-{ÍHûQ×k %zv쥻,ÒÚ¥ÄËÍ bf¥P=(œ¤¡Ñ˜¾ûÙ½±õKM0<žé&&aÛ^59´sýØäX®¡ìÑ䮨ÇßÈò±á2þg mþŒJÔMe©´Eçm"¿I”^I!åY‹Ë¦ËÉZµ;Á½K71Õ~ZªÊqZšb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ f‘ Æ÷ ƽ ƃÆI 0DNSÏU$E, .......................b:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 0ëBBBB B-- 0¤J D3î D-! 0KNN AS™Æì 0¤² 0DV A«š»—&+â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÑuV)(â¥S¸É 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.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 SeriÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0 \Ý ƒRÂ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€Chancellor€originally€assigned€to€this€case€recused€himself€because€of€a€conflict€of€interest.€€The€matterÐ ° Ðwas€transferred€to€Circuit€Court€Judge€O.€Duane€Slone,€who€heard€the€case€by€interchange.€Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÅÝ ƒRÂ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€land€was€actually€purchased€from€Irene€Gamble€and€Roma€Lois€Gamble,€both€of€whom€are€defendantsÐ ° Ðin€the€action.€€Ms.€Roma€Gamble€was€in€poor€health€and€did€not€participate€in€a€material€manner€at€trial.€€For€this€reason,Ð tÄ Ðwe€will€omit€any€further€reference€to€Defendant€Roma€Gamble.€€  Ý ƒRÂ$$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿¥ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€The€tree€referenced€by€Gamble€was€not€the€persimmon€tree€which€Ô_ÔJeffriesÔ_Ô€claims€marked€the€boundary.- ù-(|G2Â$$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¿¥ò»»Ô d(|3ÿv$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÿv$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€­»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼­»»»ÔÑ8€S¡XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î,­ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼­»îî, #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJuly€11,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XS¡X»¼­ÔÌÌÌò òÔ#†¼­»XXS¡ò#ÔMARILYN€WILLOCKS€JEFFRIES€v.€IRENE€GAMBLE,€òòet€alóó.ó óÐ Ò " ÐÌÔ€XS¡X»¼­Ôà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Blount€CountyÐ ø H Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99„137€€€€€€O.€Duane€Slone,€Judge,€by€InterchangeÐ ä 4  ÐÌÌFILED€AUGUST€6,€€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¨ø  Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<“` AßÐ ”ä  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E„2000„03120„COA„R3„CVÐ ß  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<f` AßÐ g· Ðó óÌÌÓ  ÓÌAfter€purchasing€approximately€30€acres€of€land€from€Defendant,€Plaintiff€later€discovered€that€theÐ :Š Ðdeed€had€been€incorrectly€drafted.€€Plaintiff€brought€suit€seeking€to€have€the€deed€reformed.€€TheÐ &v ÐTrial€Court€held€that€Plaintiff€had€proven€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€parties€hadÐ b Ðintended€for€a€.61€acre€tract€of€land€to€be€part€of€the€property€sold€to€Plaintiff€and€the€deed€should,Ð þN Ðtherefore,€be€reformed€to€include€this€additional€land.€€Defendants€appeal.€€We€affirm.€€Ð ê: ÐÌÌÓ±ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theÐ šê ÐChancery€Court€Affirmed;€Case€Remanded.ó óÐ †Ö ÐÓ  ÓÌÌòòD.€Michael€Swiney,€J.,€óódelivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.,óóÐ J"š! Ðjoined.€€òòHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.óó,€not€participating.Ð 6#†" ÐÌÌDavid€R.€Duggan,€Maryville,€Tennessee€for€the€Appellants€Irene€Gamble€and€Roma€Lois€Gamble.Ð ú%J!% ÐÌÌChris€Ô_ÔRallsÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔMaryvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee€for€the€Appellee€Marilyn€Willocks€Jeffries.Ð ¾($( ÐÌÐ  –*æ%*ýÿ Ðà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óˆÐ ° ÐÌò òà@ÛÛ%ìàòòBackgroundó óóóˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€Marilyn€Willocks€Jeffries€(ð ðJeffriesðð)€purchased€a€tract€of€land€fromÐ `° ÐDefendant€Irene€Gamble€(ð ðGambleðð)׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€consisting€of€approximately€thirty€acres€located€in€BlountÐ L œ ÐCounty.€€Jeffries€alleges€that€she€later€discovered€that€the€warranty€deed€omitted€an€approximate€.61Ð 8 ˆ Ðacre€tract€(ð ðTractðð)€of€land€which€was€intended€to€be€part€of€her€purchase.€€Jeffries€asserted€that€sinceÐ $ t Ðobtaining€the€property€in€1995,€she€exercised€dominion€and€control€over€the€Tract€and€it€was€theÐ  ` Ðpartiesðð€intention€for€the€Tract€to€be€included€in€the€land€she€bought.€€Jeffries€alleged€in€herÐ ü L  ÐComplaint€that€there€was€a€mutual€mistake€made€by€the€parties,€and€she,€therefore,€was€entitled€toÐ è 8  Ðreformation€of€the€deed.€€Jeffries€tendered€to€the€Trial€Court€the€sum€of€$3,660.00,€which€sheÐ Ô$  Ðclaimed€was€the€agreed€upon€value€of€the€Tract€at€the€time€the€property€originally€was€purchased.€Ð À  ЀÌà  àà ` àGamble€essentially€denied€that€she€intended€to€sell€the€Tract€to€Jeffries€or€that€thereÐ ˜è  Ðwas€a€mutual€mistake.€€Gamble€filed€a€counter„claim€asking€the€Trial€Court€to€eject€Jeffries€from€theÐ „Ô  ÐTract€and€to€restore€possession€to€Gamble.€€Gamble€also€requested€that€the€property€be€returned€toÐ pÀ Ðher€in€the€same€condition€as€it€was€in€at€the€time€Jeffries€wrongfully€asserted€dominion€and€controlÐ \¬ Ðover€the€Tract.€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àJeffries€testified€that€she€purchased€the€property€from€Gamble€because€she€wantedÐ  p Ðto€return€to€the€community€where€she€had€grown€up€and€most€of€her€family€still€resided.€€JeffriesÐ  \ Ðstated€that€she€and€Gamble€agreed€on€a€purchase€price€of€$6,000.00€per€acre€for€the€land.€€JeffriesÐ øH Ðstated€that€as€three€sides€of€the€property€purchased€were€fenced€in,€she€discussed€with€Gamble€theÐ ä4 Ðboundary€for€the€remaining€side.€€According€to€Jeffries,€she€and€Gamble€agreed€that€the€boundaryÐ Ð  Ðwould€be€by€a€persimmon€tree.€€Jeffries€admitted€that€Gamble€and€her€son€did€not€want€to€sell€a€barnÐ ¼  Ðlocated€near€the€Tract€and€that€they€wanted€to€keep€some€distance€from€the€property€being€sold€andÐ ¨ø Ða€house€occupied€by€Gambleððs€granddaughter.€€Once€it€was€agreed€that€Jeffries€would€not€beÐ ”ä Ðpurchasing€the€barn,€she€claims€they€quickly€agreed€on€what€would€be€the€boundary€line.€€After€theÐ €Ð Ðsurvey€was€conducted,€an€iron€pin€and€a€flag€were€set€into€the€property€showing€the€boundary€line.€Ð l¼ ÐThe€location€of€the€iron€pin€and€flag€is€consistent€with€Jeffriesðð€claim€as€to€where€it€was€agreed€theÐ X ¨ Ðproperty€boundary€would€be.€€The€iron€pin€and€flag€were€set€by€the€surveyor,€Tony€AbbottÐ D!” Ð(ð ðAbbottðð)€and€his€son.€€Jeffries€stated€that€with€the€exception€of€the€barn,€she€was€buying€the€wholeÐ 0"€  Ðfield.€€Abbott€prepared€the€plat€which€was€recorded€in€the€Blount€County€Register€of€Deeds€Office.€Ð #l! ÐThis€plat€was€used€by€the€attorney€who€prepared€the€deed.€€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àÔ_ÔJeffriesÔ_Ô€first€learned€there€was€a€problem€with€the€deed€when€she€wanted€to€build€aÐ à%0!$ Ðbarn€on€the€Tract.€€Although€she€was€unable€to€locate€the€iron€pin,€Jeffries€knew€where€the€propertyÐ Ì&"% Ðline€was€and€had€the€footers€for€the€barn€set€accordingly.€€Abbott€came€to€the€property€with€a€metalÐ ¸'#& Ðdetector€and€could€not€locate€the€pin€either.€€Jeffries€then€asked€Abbott€to€re„survey€the€propertyÐ ° Ðbecause€her€son€was€purchasing€some€of€her€property,€and€it€was€going€to€be€divided.€€This€is€whenÐ œì Ðshe€learned€there€had€been€a€mistake€in€the€drafting€of€the€plat€and€deed€which€did€not€show€theÐ ˆØ ÐTract€as€being€part€of€the€property€she€had€purchased.€€Abbott€told€her€he€had€inadvertentlyÐ tÄ Ðdecreased€the€amount€of€property€she€had€bought€through€an€error€in€setting€the€appropriate€boundaryÐ `° Ðline,€that€it€was€his€fault,€and€he€ð ðapologized€profusely.ðð€€When€Jeffries€tried€to€explain€the€situationÐ L œ Ðto€Gamble,€Gamble€told€her€she€was€too€ill€to€discuss€it€and€Ô_ÔJeffriesÔ_Ô€needed€to€discuss€the€situationÐ 8 ˆ Ðwith€her€son,€Roy€Gamble.€€Jeffries€did€this,€claiming€that€when€she€did€so,€Mr.€Gamble€was€ð ðquiteÐ $ t Ðhostile.ðð€€Jeffries€stated€that€Gamble€never€complained€or€otherwise€indicated€that€she€thoughtÐ  ` ÐJeffries€was€trespassing€on€her€property.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àGamble€testified€that€Jeffries€approached€her€about€buying€some€of€her€land€whichÐ Ô$  ÐGamble€had€inherited€from€her€deceased€husband.€€Gamble€stated€that€the€property€lines€wereÐ À  Ðdiscussed€before€a€sale€price€was€determined.€€The€original€discussions€were€for€the€property€lineÐ ¬ü  Ðto€go€from€Jeffriesðð€driveway€up€to€a€certain€tree€located€next€to€property€owned€by€neighbors.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р˜è  ÐGamble€believed€the€boundary€line€was€set€that€day.€€Except€for€inspecting€the€property€a€few€daysÐ „Ô  Ðbefore€trial,€Gamble€has€not€been€back€to€the€property€since€that€time.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àA€plat€was€prepared€by€Abbott€and€a€deed€also€was€prepared€which€Gamble€signed.€Ð H˜ ÐGamble€stated€that€she€has€known€Tony€Abbott€virtually€his€whole€life€and€they€attend€the€sameÐ 4„ Ðchurch.€€Gamble€testified€that€the€plat€and€deed€correctly€showed€the€property€she€had€intended€toÐ  p Ðsell€to€Jeffries.€€There€is€a€house€occupied€by€Gambleððs€granddaughter€and€a€barn€on€the€propertyÐ  \ Ðclose€to€the€Tract.€€Gamble€claimed€that€she€told€Jeffries€she€wanted€to€keep€the€land€where€the€barnÐ øH Ðwas€located€and€would€not€sell€that€part€of€the€property.€€Gamble€testified€that€at€no€time€did€sheÐ ä4 Ðintend€to€sell€the€Tract€to€Jeffries.€€Gamble€never€went€on€the€property€with€Jeffries€to€show€herÐ Ð  Ðexactly€where€the€property€line€would€be.€€Gamble€admitted€that€on€the€same€day€she€learned€JeffriesÐ ¼  Ðwas€claiming€there€was€a€problem€with€the€deed€because€it€did€not€show€Jeffries€owning€the€Tract,Ð ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔJeffriesÔ_Ô€offered€her€money€for€the€Tract.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àRoy€Gamble€also€was€called€as€a€witness.€€Prior€to€the€sale,€Mr.€Gamble€farmed€theÐ l¼ Ðproperty€sold€to€Jeffries.€€Mr.€Gamble€testified€that€the€second€time€he€went€to€the€property€withÐ X ¨ ÐJeffries€and€Abbott€was€when€the€boundary€lines€of€the€property€to€be€sold€were€established.€€AfterÐ D!” Ðthat€meeting,€Abbott€was€supposed€to€survey€the€property.€€Mr.€Gamble€saw€the€plat€and€deed€thatÐ 0"€  Ðhad€been€prepared.€€According€to€Mr.€Gamble,€the€plat€and€deed€correctly€showed€the€amount€ofÐ #l! Ðproperty€that€was€intended€to€be€sold.€€Mr.€Gamble€was€aware€that€Jeffries€had€bricks€delivered€andÐ $X" Ðplaced€on€the€Tract.€€Mr.€Gamble€did€not€say€anything€about€this€to€Jeffries,€but€could€not€explainÐ ô$D # Ðwhy.€€Mr.€Gamble€realized€there€had€been€a€mistake€when€Jeffries€started€building€a€barn€on€theÐ à%0!$ ÐTract.€€Instead€of€talking€with€Jeffries,€Mr.€Gamble€contacted€an€attorney.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àà ` àAbbott€testified€at€trial.€€He€is€the€County€Engineer€for€Blount€County.€€He€alsoÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconducts€land€and€construction€surveying€and€is€a€licensed€surveyor.€€He€has€lived€in€the€sameÐ )à$( Ðcommunity€as€Gamble€and€attends€the€same€church.€€He€went€to€school€with€Roy€Gamble.€€JeffriesÐ ° Ðand€Abbott€are€first€cousins.€€Abbott€was€present€when€Gamble€and€Jeffries€determined€where€theÐ œì Ðproperty€line€would€be.€€When€surveying€the€property,€an€iron€pin€and€flag€was€placed€at€the€areaÐ ˆØ Ðwhere€the€boundary€line€would€be.€€There€was€a€persimmon€tree€located€at€the€corner€where€the€ironÐ tÄ Ðpin€and€flag€were€located.€€Abbott€prepared€the€plat€and€it€was€recorded.€€Sometime€in€1999,€heÐ `° Ðdiscovered€that€he€had€made€a€mistake.€€Jeffries€had€called€him€and€indicated€that€she€was€going€toÐ L œ Ðsell€a€portion€of€the€land€to€her€son€and€needed€her€land€divided.€€Jeffries€also€told€him€she€could€notÐ 8 ˆ Ðfind€the€iron€pin.€€Abbott€went€to€the€property€to€locate€the€pin.€€The€pin€was€not€where€he€hadÐ $ t Ðoriginally€placed€it.€€Abbott€did€not€discover€the€error€he€had€made€on€the€plat€until€he€ð ðwent€backÐ  ` Ðin€there€to€re„establish€the€pointðð.€€Abbott€then€testified€as€follows:Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà0¸ ` x` xàWhere€did€they€agree€the€line€should€be?ÐÔ$ ¸ x¸ x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà ¸ àThe€only€understanding€I€ever€had,€based€on€the€conversationÐ ¬ü  Ðthat€we€had€in€that€field€that€day,€that€corner€was€to€be€there€in€theÐ ˜è  Ðvicinity€of€that€persimmon€tree.Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà ¸ àAll€right.€€Consistent€with€what€Mrs.€Jeffries€is€claiming€inÐ \¬ Ðthis€lawsuit?ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà0¸ ` x` xàYes.Ð p¸ x¸ x ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà ¸ àWho€made€the€mistake,€Mr.€Abbott?ÐÐ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAà ¸ àI€made€a€mistake.Шø` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQà ¸ àAnd€you€have€told€everybody€that?ЀÐ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àAà0 ¸ àYes.ÐX ¨¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌà  àà ` àQà0 ¸ àYou€take€responsibility€for€it?Ð0"€ ¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌà  àà ` àAà0 ¸ àYes.Ð$X"¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌAbbott€also€testified€he€was€on€the€property€in€1997€because€Jeffries€was€having€problems€withÐ à%0!$ ÐGambleððs€daughter€cutting€wood€from€Jeffriesðð€property.€€He€stated€the€iron€pin€and€flag€then€wereÐ Ì&"% Ðlocated€where€they€had€been€placed€originally,€near€the€persimmon€tree.€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€addition€to€the€live€testimony,€the€parties€stipulated€to€the€testimony€of€severalÐ )à$( Ðwitnesses.€€Prior€to€trial,€Gamble€filed€a€motion€in€limine€seeking€to€preclude€this€testimony€claimingÐ |*Ì%) Ðit€was€irrelevant.€€The€Trial€Court€denied€the€motion,€although€no€reason€for€doing€so€was€set€forthÐ h+¸&* Ðin€its€order.€€Prior€to€trial,€Gamble€orally€renewed€the€objection.€€The€Trial€Court€again€overruled€theÐ ° Ðmotion,€stating€ð ð[c]ircumstantially,€it€might€tend€to€prove€that€the€[property]€lines€were€as€Mrs.Ð œì ÐJeffries€claims€that€they€are,€so€I€certainly€think€that€these€facts€would€be€relevant.ðð€€While€the€partiesÐ ˆØ Ðagreed€that€these€witnesses€were€not€present€during€discussions€about€the€boundary€line,€the€partiesÐ tÄ Ðstipulated€that€these€witnesses€would€testify€as€follows€(subject€to€Gambleððs€previous€objections):Ð `° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àWith€regard€to€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses,€Mack€Brown,Ð 8 ˆ ÐCharlie€Long,€Andy€Waters€and€Wells€Waters,€the€parties€stipulateÐ $ t Ðthat€an€iron€pin€and€flag€that€were€set€by€Tony€Abbott€and€his€son,Ð  ` ÐTyler€Abbott,€in€1995,€and€which€were€shown€to€them€by€the€PlaintiffÐ ü L  Ðin€1995€or€1996,€were€located€as€she€claims€the€property€line€shouldÐ è 8  Ðbe€located€in€this€action.ÐÔ$ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThese€witnesses€will€also€testify€that€they€maintained€theÐ ¬ü  Ðentire€area€in€dispute€in€this€cause€for€Ms.€Jeffries€from€1995€on€andÐ ˜è  Ðthat€their€activities€included€plowing,€seeding€and€mowing€hay€duringÐ „Ô  Ðthat€period€of€time.ÐpÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àIt€is€further€stipulated€that€these€witnesses€would€testify€that€Ð H˜ ÐMs.€Jeffries€caused€to€be€placed€on€a€portion€of€the€area€in€disputeÐ 4„ Ðcertain€construction€materials€during€late€1998.Ð p` x` x ÐÌà@ÙÙ'ìà*€*€*€*ˆÐ øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€parties€stipulate€that€Daniel€Tyler€Abbott,€if€called€toÐ Ð  Ðtestify,€would€state€that€he€assisted€his€father,€Tony€Abbott,€in€settingÐ ¼  Ðthe€iron€pin€and€flag€at€the€point€which€the€Plaintiff€claims€is€theÐ ¨ø Ðcorrect€line.€€That€he€was€shown€where€the€Gambles€claim€theÐ ”ä Ðoriginal€line€between€the€parties€is€located€in€the€middle€of€the€fieldÐ €Ð Ðand€that€this€is€not€the€same€location€that€he€helped€Tony€AbbottÐ l¼ Ðplace€the€original€iron€pin€and€flag€in€1995.€€ÐX ¨` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€trial,€the€Trial€Court׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€issued€a€Judgment€and€Order€for€Reformation,€finding€thatÐ 0"€  ÐJeffries€had€proven€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€there€was€a€mutual€mistake€in€the€deed.€Ð #l! ÐThe€Trial€Court€also€concluded€that€the€evidence€did€not€support€the€equitable€defenses€of€estoppelÐ $X" Ðand€waiver.€€The€Trial€Court€ordered€the€deed€to€be€reformed€and€that€the€funds€deposited€by€JeffriesÐ ô$D # Ðinto€the€court€registry€be€disbursed€to€Gamble.€€This€appeal€followed.Ð à%0!$ Ðâ âÐ Ì&"% ÐÔ& ` Ôâ âà@))%ìàò òòòDiscussionóóó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àà ` àA€review€of€findings€of€fact€by€a€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€trialÐ ˆØ Ðcourt,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€isÐ tÄ Ðotherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòBrooks€v.€Brooksóó,€992€S.W.2d€403,€404€(Tenn.€1999).€€ReviewÐ `° Ðof€questions€of€law€is€òòde€novoóó,€without€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòSee€Nelson€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,Ð L œ ÐInc.óó,€8€S.W.3d€625,€628€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÔ'`°aCÔÌà  àà ` àWe€first€address€Gambleððs€argument€that€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€admitting€testimonyÐ  ` Ðof€various€witnesses.€€As€indicated€above,€prior€to€and€at€trial,€Gamble€argued€that€this€testimony€wasÐ ü L  Ðirrelevant€and€the€testimony€was€stipulated€to€subject€to€the€objections.€€The€Trial€Court€ruled€thatÐ è 8  Ðthis€testimony€was€relevant€because€it€might€tend€to€prove€that€the€property€lines€were€as€JeffriesÐ Ô$  Ðclaimed.Ð À  ÐÌà  àà ` àRelevant€evidence€is€generally€admissible€unless€the€federal€or€state€constitutions,Ð ˜è  Ðapplicable€procedural€rules,€or€other€laws€require€its€exclusion.€€òòCastelli€v.€Lienóó,€910€S.W.2d€420,Ð „Ô  Ð425€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995).€€In€order€to€be€relevant,€evidence€must€tend€to€make€the€existence€of€aÐ pÀ Ðfact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€itÐ \¬ Ðwould€be€without€the€evidence.€€òòId.óó;€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€€ð ðOne€of€the€most€important€functions€ofÐ H˜ Ða€trial€judge€is€to€control€the€admission€of€the€evidence.€€Trial€judges€have€broad€discretion€over€theÐ 4„ Ðadmissibility€of€evidence€ð8ð€the€order€of€the€proof€ð8ð€the€scope€and€extent€of€examination€ð8ð€andÐ  p Ðthe€qualification€of€expert€witnesses.ðð€€òòCastellióó,€910€S.W.2d€at€425€(citations€omitted).€€An€appellateÐ  \ Ðcourt€will€reverse€a€trial€courtððs€decision€on€the€relevancy€of€evidence€only€if€there€has€been€an€abuseÐ øH Ðof€discretion€and€when€the€error€has€affected€substantial€rights€of€one€or€both€of€the€parties.€€òòId.óó€atÐ ä4 Ð425„26;€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€103(a).€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€determining€whether€a€mutual€mistake€exists,€a€trial€court€should€take€intoÐ ¨ø Ðconsideration€the€surrounding€circumstances€and€any€factors€which€tend€to€shed€light€on€what€theÐ ”ä Ðparties€intended.€òòCity€of€Memphis€for€Use€and€Benefit€of€State€v.€Mooreóó,€818€S.W.2d€13,€16€(Tenn.Ð €Ð ÐCt.€App.€1991);€76€C.J.S.€Reformation€of€Instruments€ðð€28€(1972).€€We€conclude€that€the€Trial€CourtÐ l¼ Ðdid€not€abuse€its€discretion€when€it€determined€that€the€testimony€at€issue€was€relevant€to€show€thatÐ X ¨ Ðthe€parties€had€intended€for€the€Tract€to€be€part€of€the€land€sold€to€Jeffries.€€While€clearly€notÐ D!” Ðconclusive€on€this€issue,€it€is€relevant.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àà ` àGamble€also€argues€that€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€denying€Gambleððs€motion€forÐ $X" Ðsummary€judgment€filed€prior€to€trial€and€further€erred€when€it€concluded€there€had€been€a€mutualÐ ô$D # Ðmistake€entitling€Jeffries€to€reformation€of€the€deed.€€The€main€issue€to€be€decided€by€the€Trial€CourtÐ à%0!$ Ðwas€whether€the€parties€intended€for€the€Tract€to€be€part€of€the€land€sold€to€Jeffries.€€If€it€was,€thenÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€parties€were€operating€under€a€mutual€mistake€regarding€the€accuracy€of€the€plat€and€deed.€€ThisÐ ¸'#& Ðwas€a€factual€determination.€€As€to€any€factual€conclusions€made€by€the€Trial€Court€regarding€whatÐ ¤(ô#' Ðtranspired€between€the€parties€and€what€they€intended€to€buy€or€sell,€these€conclusions€are€based€inÐ )à$( Ðlarge€part€on€witness€credibility.€€The€Trial€Court€had€the€opportunity€to€observe€both€the€parties€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðtheir€witnesses,€as€well€as€the€manner€and€demeanor€of€those€who€actually€testified€at€the€trial.€€TheÐ h+¸&* ÐTrial€Courtððs€factual€determination€involving€witness€credibility€will€be€given€great€weight€onÐ ° Ðappeal.€€òòSee€Barnhill€v.€Barnhillóó,€826€S.W.2d€443,€448€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991)(citingòò€Town€of€AlamoÐ œì Ðv.€Forcum„James€Co.óó,€205€Tenn.€478,€327€S.W.2d€47€(1959)).€€As€recently€noted€by€this€Court€inÐ ˆØ ÐòòRice€v.€Riceóó,€983€S.W.2d€680,€682€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998):Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[O]n€an€issue€which€hinges€on€witness€credibility,€[the€trial€court]Ð L œ Ðwill€not€be€reversed€unless,€other€than€the€oral€testimony€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðwitnesses,€there€is€found€in€the€record€clear,€concrete€and€convincingÐ $ t Ðevidence€to€the€contrary.Ð `` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€order€to€reform€a€written€instrument€because€of€a€mistake,€there€must€have€beenÐ è 8  Ðeither€a€mutual€mistake,€or€a€mistake€of€one€party€influenced€by€the€other€party's€fraud.€€òòWilliams€v.Ð Ô$  ÐBotts,óó€3€S.W.3d€508,€509€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999).€€ð ðA€ððmistakeðð€is€an€act€which€would€not€have€beenÐ À  Ðdone,€or€an€omission€which€would€not€have€occurred,€but€from€ignorance,€forgetfulness,Ð ¬ü  Ðinadvertence,€mental€incompetence,€surprise,€misplaced€confidence,€or€imposition,€and€it€must€beÐ ˜è  Ðmutual€or€fraudulent.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€509„510.€€Before€an€instrument€may€undergo€reformation€for€mistake,Ð „Ô  Ðthe€evidence€must€be€clear,€cogent,€and€convincing.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòCharton€v.€Burgessóó,€1989€WL€105655Ð pÀ Ðat€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€reviewing€the€entire€record€in€this€case,€we€do€not€believe€that€the€evidenceÐ 4„ Ðpreponderates€against€the€Trial€Courtððs€findings€and€conclusion€that€Jeffries€had€proven€by€clear€andÐ  p Ðconvincing€evidence€that€the€parties€intended€for€the€Tract€to€be€part€of€the€property€purchased€byÐ  \ ÐJeffries.€€The€parties€were,€therefore,€operating€under€a€mutual€mistake€as€to€the€accuracy€of€theÐ øH Ðdeed.€€ð ðIf€the€deed€fails€to€express€correctly€the€contract€made,€the€court€will€reform€the€instrumentÐ ä4 Ðto€conform€to€the€real€intention€of€the€parties.ðð€€òòCharton€v.€Burgessóó,€1989€WL€105655€at€*3€(Tenn.Ð Ð  ÐCt.€App.€1989).€€Based€on€the€Trial€Courtððs€factual€conclusion,€which€we€affirm,€Ô_ÔJeffriesÔ_Ô€was€entitledÐ ¼  Ðto€reformation€of€the€deed.€€In€light€of€this€conclusion,€Gambleððs€argument€that€the€Trial€Court€erredÐ ¨ø Ðin€denying€her€motion€for€summary€judgment€is€without€merit€as€the€vast€majority€of€the€proofÐ ”ä Ðsubmitted€on€behalf€of€Jeffries€at€trial€was€also€submitted€in€affidavits€in€opposition€to€the€motionÐ €Ð Ðfor€summary€judgment.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àGambleððs€remaining€argument€is€that€Jeffries€is€estopped€from€denying€the€accuracyÐ D!” Ðof€the€deed€because€the€boundaries€established€in€the€deed€were€utilized€by€Jeffries€in€subdividingÐ 0"€  Ðthe€property€when€she€sold€a€portion€of€the€land€to€her€son.€€The€testimony€by€Jeffries€was€that€sheÐ #l! Ðattempted€to€resolve€this€matter€amicably€by€informing€Gamble€of€the€mistake€in€the€deed€and€payingÐ $X" Ðfor€the€additional€land€since€the€purchase€price€did€not€reflect€the€.61€acre€Tract.€€When€this€provedÐ ô$D # Ðunsuccessful,€she€filed€suit€to€reform€the€deed.€€At€the€time€the€property€was€sold€to€her€son,€theÐ à%0!$ Ðboundary€lines€were€as€reflected€in€Jeffriesðð€deed,€even€though€they€were€incorrect€due€to€a€mutualÐ Ì&"% Ðmistake€by€the€parties.€€Even€though€the€deed€was€wrong,€it€was,€nevertheless,€signed€and€recorded.€Ð ¸'#& ÐWe€do€not€believe€that€the€equitable€doctrine€of€estoppel€required€Jeffries€to€subdivide€her€propertyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbased€on€what€she€believed€the€correct€boundary€line€to€be€when€selling€a€portion€of€the€land€to€herÐ )à$( Ðson.€€This€is€even€more€apparent€since:€1)€litigation€to€reform€the€deed€had€not€yet€been€completedÐ |*Ì%) Ðand€there€was€no€judicial€conclusion€that€Jeffries€was€entitled€to€reformation€of€the€deed;€and€2)Ð h+¸&* ÐGamble€was€not€involved€in€the€sale€of€land€from€Jeffries€to€her€son.€€This€argument€is€withoutÐ ° Ðmerit.Ð œì ÐòòóóÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionó óóóˆÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed.€€This€case€is€remanded€to€the€Trial€CourtÐ L œ Ðfor€further€proceedings€as€may€be€required,€if€any,€consistent€with€this€Opinion,€and€for€collectionÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€costs€below.€€Costs€of€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Appellants€Irene€Gamble€and€Roma€Lois€GambleÐ $ t Ðand€their€surety.Ð  ` ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð „Ô  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEYÐ pÀ Ð