ÿWPCb 3# ÚUNå %3 0 (9w@a4¡µ 0@Ä 0l 0Dp 0J´ 0Tþ 0^R 0h° 0r 0|Š 0† 0Œ 1u 0d‘ U>õ B)3 B\ D3y DC¬ AMï U*< f k þ –} AQÆd 0D* 0Dn D/² Bá‹þˆ‰v~vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nL(Î(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ i£jk l m n opÓ€|Œƒ*#dddddd3|x("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ 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`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d d 'ÿÿdxd7Border 1dd*"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ûÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òOctober€1,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝLisa€Williamsðð€supervisor,€Phyllis€Webb,€also€testified€at€trial;€however,€none€of€herÏtestimony€related€to€the€McCanns€or€to€their€fitness€as€parents.€Ì ôÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝPrior€to€January1,€1996,€the€relevant€statute€provided€that:ÌÌà8 àà àIf,€at€any€time€between€the€filing€of€a€petition€and€the€issuance€of€the€finalÏorder€completing€the€adoption,€it€is€made€known€to€the€court€that€circumstances€areÏsuch€that€the€child€should€not€be€given€in€adoption€to€the€petitioners,€the€court€mayÏdismiss€the€proceedings.ÌÌT.C.A.€ðð36„1„123(a)€(1991).Ì ŒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Georgia€court€ruled€that€these€surrenders€were€ineffective€to€surrender€the€MotherððsÏparental€rights€because,€by€virtue€of€the€Motherððs€prior€execution€of€surrenders€in€favor€of€theÏDepartment€of€Family€and€Children€Services,€the€Mother€had€no€parental€rights€to€surrender.€€Ì*+,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€also€note€that€the€Mother€has€not€revoked€the€surrenders€in€accordance€withÏTennesseeððs€current€adoption€laws,€which€permit€a€parent€to€revoke€the€surrender€within€ten€daysÏof€execution€by€appearing€in€court€and€revoking€the€surrender€under€oath.€€T.C.A.Ïðð36„1„112(a)(1)€(1996).€€After€the€expiration€of€this€ten„day€period,€a€parentððs€right€to€revoke€theÏsurrender€is€limited€by€subsection€(d).€€T.C.A.€ðð36„1„112(a)(1)(F)(I)€(1996).€€AlthoughÏsubsection€(d)€permits€a€surrender€to€be€set€aside€upon€clear€and€convincing€evidence€of€duress,Ïfraud,€intentional€misrepresentation,€or€other€specified€invalidities›,€any€action€to€revoke€a€surrenderÏunder€subsection€(d)€must€be€initiated€within€thirty€days€of€the€surrenderððs€execution.€€T.C.A.Ïðð36„1„112(d)€(1996).Ì ~Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ýòòò òSeeó óóó€ò òòòClarkv.€Buttry›óóó ó,€174€S.E.2d€356,€358€(Ga.€Ct.€App.),€ò òòòaffððdóóó ó,€177€S.E.2d€89Ï(Ga.€1970);€ò òòòIn€re€Adoption€of€A.S.S.óóó ó,€907€P.œ2d›€913,€918„19€(Kan.€Ct.€App.€1995);Ïò òòòWebbv.€Wileyóóó ó,€600€P.2d€317,€319€(Okla.€1979).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ýò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌÙ€*ÙßR€#%"A1-j|¨` Å `€€@ÿRßà@ àAT€JACKSONó óÌÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌà à)Ìò òANTHONY€EARL€McCANN€andó óà à)à àDyer€County€Chancery€CourtÌò òCYNTHIA€McCANNó ó,à à)à àNo.€95A1Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Petitioners/Appellees.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.A.€No.€02A01„9704„CH„00092Ìà à)Ìò òPEGGY€McCANN€PATTERSONó óà à)Ìò òWEATHERSó ó,à à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Intervening€Petitioner/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Chancery€Court€of€Dyer€County€at€Dyersburg.Ìò òHonorable€J.€Steven€Stafford,€Chancellor€ó óÌÌÌÌò òA.€Don€Walker,€IIIó ó,€Dyersburg,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Petitioner/Appellant.ÌÌÌò òJohn€W.€Palmeró ó,€THE€PALMER€LAW€FIRM,€Dyersburg,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Petitioner/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÌà àò òFARMER,€J.ó óÌÌò òCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òHIGHERS,€J.ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓÓÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓà àPeggy€McCann€Patterson€Weathers€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€order€which€granted€theÏpetition€of€Appellees€Anthony€Earl€McCann€and€Cynthia€McCann€to€adopt€the€two€minor€childrenÏof€Weathersðð€daughter,€Virginia€Darlene€McCann€Wills.€€We€affirm€the€courtððs€final€order€ofÏadoption.ÌÌà àPetitioner€Anthony€Earl€McCann€is€the€adoptive€father€of€Virginia€Darlene€McCannÏWills€(Mother)€and,€thus,€the€grandfather€of€the€two€minor€children.€€In€their€petition,€McCann€andÏhis€wife,€Cynthia€McCann,€sought€to€adopt€the€two€children,€William€Randall€McCann,€bornÏMay31,€1990,€and€Marlene€Dayne€McCann,€born€April10,€1992.€€The€McCanns€acquiredÏcustody€of€the€two€children€in€proceedings€before€the€Juvenile€Court€of€Bartow€County€for€theÏState€of€Georgia€in€December€1994.€€The€parental€rights€of€the€childrenððs€natural€parents,€includingÏthe€Mother,€previously€were€terminated€by€the€Georgia€court.€€The€Mother€had€executed€two€setsÏof€surrenders€relinquishing€her€parental€rights€to€the€children,€the€first€set€being€executed€in€favorÏof€the€Bartow€County€Department€of€Family€and€Children€Services€and€the€second€in€favor€of€theÏMcCanns.ÌÌà àAppellant€Peggy€McCann€Patterson€Weathers€(Grandmother)€is€the€childrenððsÏgrandmother€and€Anthony€Earl€McCannððs€former€wife.€€The€Grandmotherððs€involvement€in€theseÏproceedings€began€when€she€filed€a€motion€to€intervene€in€which€she€opposed€the€McCannsððÏpetition€to€adopt€the€children.€€As€grounds€for€her€opposition,€the€Grandmother€alleged€that€theÏMother€was€confused€at€the€time€she€executed€the€surrenders€of€parental€rights€and€that€the€MotherÏwished€to€revoke€the€surrenders.€€The€Grandmother€also€alleged€that€Anthony€Earl€McCann€wasÏnot€a€proper€party€to€adopt€the€children€because€of€his€prior€history€of€domestic€violence.ÌÌà àThe€Mother€later€filed€a€motion€to€join€in€the€Grandmotherððs€motion€to€intervene.€ÏThe€Motherððs€motion€was€dismissed,€however,€after€the€attorney€for€the€Mother€and€theÏGrandmother€advised€the€trial€court€that€the€Mother€wished€to€withdraw€as€a€party€to€this€actionÏand€that€she€no€longer€wished€to€oppose€the€adoption.ÌÌà àAt€the€trial€held€in€May€1996,€the€Grandmother€claimed€that€adoption€by€theÏMcCanns€was€not€in€the€best€interests€of€the€children€because€of€Anthony€Earl€McCannððs€historyÏof€violent€behavior€toward€the€Grandmother€and€because€of€Cynthia€McCannððs€alleged€sexualÏindiscretions.€€Mr.McCann€acknowledged€that€numerous€violent€confrontations€occurred€duringÏhis€prior€marriage€to€the€Grandmother,€which€lasted€from€1966€to€1987.€€McCann€admitted€hittingÏthe€Grandmother€with€his€fist,€pushing€her€against€a€wall,€and,€on€one€occasion,€holding€a€shotgunÏto€her€head.€€McCann€also€testified,€however,€that€he€married€his€present€wife,€Cynthia€McCann,Ïin€1988€and€that€there€had€been€no€incidents€of€violence€during€this€marriage.€€The€Mother€hadÏlived€in€the€McCannsðð€home€for€various€periods€of€time€since€1988,€and€she€corroboratedÏMcCannððs€testimony€about€the€lack€of€violence€in€his€present€marriage.ÌÌà àThe€Grandmother€also€presented€the€testimony€of€witnesses€who€claimed€that€theyÏhad€observed€Cynthia€McCann€engaging€in€sexual€activities€with€men€to€whom€she€was€notÏmarried.€€For€example,€Cynthia€McCannððs€former€brother„in„law€testified€that€he€once€observedÏMrs.€McCann€in€bed€with€her€former€husband€and€another€man€in€1984€or€1985.€€Another€witnessÏtestified€that€she€observed€Cynthia€McCann€in€bed€with€another€man€in€1990€while€Mrs.McCannÏwas€married€to€Anthony€Earl€McCann.€€Cynthia€McCann€denied€both€allegations.€€ÌÌà àDuring€the€trial,€employees€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Human€Services(DHS)Ïtestified€on€behalf€of€the€McCanns.€€Specifically,€social€counselor€Lisa€Williams× ƒ& ××  ×€testified€that€sheÍperformed€both€the€original€home€study€and€the€adoptive€home€study€on€the€McCannsðð€homeÏrelative€to€the€adoption.€€Williams€testified€that,€in€performing€the€home€studies,€she€investigatedÏthe€McCannsðð€finances,€checked€police€records,€visited€the€children€at€the€McCannsðð€home,€andÏtalked€to€several€references€provided€by€the€McCanns,€including€friends€and€family.€€Williams€alsoÏtestified,€without€objection,€that€these€references€ð ðwere€favorableðð€to€the€McCanns.€€WilliamsÏrecommended€that€the€McCanns€be€permitted€to€adopt€the€children,€testifying€that€ð ðthe€familyÏappeared€capable€of€providing€for€[the]€children€materially€and€also,€appeared€able€to€provide€theÏlove€and€nurture€for€[their]€physical€and€emotional€needs.ððÌÌà àBased€on€the€evidence€presented€at€trial,€the€trial€court€entered€a€memorandumÏopinion€in€which€the€court€found€that€adoption€by€the€McCanns€was€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests.€ÏThe€trial€court€later€entered€a€final€order€of€adoption,€and€this€appeal€followed.ÌÌà àOn€appeal,€the€Grandmother€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€(1)in€ruling€thatÏadoption€by€the€McCanns€was€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests,€(2)in€admitting€the€testimony€of€theÏDHS€employees,€and€(3)in€failing€to€set€aside€the€surrenders€whereby€the€Mother€relinquished€herÏparental€rights€to€the€children.ÌÌà àCiting€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€36„1„118,€the€Grandmother€firstÏcontends€that€she€presented€clear€and€convincing€evidence€of€circumstances€indicating€that€adoptionÏby€the€McCanns€was€not€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests.€€As€pertinent,€section€36„1„118€providesÏthat:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àIf€at€any€time€between€the€surrender€of€a€child€directly€toÏprospective€adoptive€parents€and€the€filing€of€an€adoption€petition€orÏat€any€time€between€the€filing€of€an€adoption€petition€and€theÏissuance€of€the€final€order€of€the€adoption,€it€is€made€known€to€theÏcourt€on€the€basis€of€clear€and€convincing€evidence€thatÏcircumstances€are€such€that€the€child€should€not€be€adopted,€theÏcourt€may€dismiss€the€adoption€proceedings€or,€if€no€adoptionÏproceedings€have€been€commenced,€the€court€may€order€theÍsurrender€or€parental€consent€to€prospective€adoptive€parents€to€beÏrevoked€and€may€modify€or€dismiss€any€order€of€guardianshipÏpreviously€entered,€and€may€order€the€reinstatement€of€parentalÏrights,€all€in€consideration€of€the€best€interests€of€the€child.ÌÌÓÓÌT.C.A.€ðð36„1„118(a)€(1996).€€The€Grandmother€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€deniedÏthe€McCannsðð€petition€for€adoption€under€this€section€based€on€the€evidence€of€Anthony€EarlÏMcCannððs€violent€acts€toward€the€Grandmother€during€their€marriage,€as€well€as€evidence€ofÏCynthia€McCannððs€sexual€indiscretions.ÌÌà àThis€argument€is€without€merit.€€The€trial€courtððs€memorandum€opinion€issued€inÏMay€1996€reveals€that€the€court€considered€all€of€this€evidence€but€found€that€the€Grandmother€hadÏfailed€to€meet€her€burden€of€proving,€either€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence× ƒ' ××  ×€or€by€clear€andÏconvincing€evidence,€that€adoption€by€the€McCanns€was€not€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests.€€InÏmaking€this€finding,€the€trial€court€noted€that,€although€it€was€undisputed€that€Mr.McCann€and€theÏGrandmother€had€a€ð ðtumultuous€marriage€involving€a€great€deal€of€physical€violence,ðð€the€proofÏalso€ð ðclearly€revealed€that€there€[had]€been€no€allegations€of€any€type€of€violence€since€the€couplesððÏdivorce€in€1987.ðð€€As€for€Cynthia€McCannððs€alleged€sexual€indiscretions,€the€trial€court€noted€that,Ïwith€one€exception,€all€of€these€acts€ð ðoccurred€more€than€ten€years€ago€and€prior€to€her€marriage€toÏMr.€McCannðð€and,€further,€that€ð ð[a]ll€of€the€alleged€incidents€were€emphatically€denied€by€Mrs.ÏMcCann.ðð€€In€subsequently€granting€the€McCannsðð€petition,€the€trial€court€specifically€found€thatÏthe€adoption€was€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests.ÌÌà àIn€adoption€proceedings,€our€standard€of€review€is€ð ðde€novo€upon€the€record€of€theÏtrial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€[trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact],Ïunless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.ðð€€òòò òSonetv.€Unknown€Father€ofÏHastyó óóó,€797€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€App.€1990);€T.R.A.P.€13(d).€€Where€conflicting€evidence€isÏpresented€at€trial€as€to€the€best€interests€of€the€children,€the€trial€courtððs€findings€are€entitled€to€greatÏweight.€€òòò òSonetó óóó,€797€S.W.2d€at€5.€€After€a€careful€review€of€the€record€in€this€case,€we€concludeÏthat€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€adoption€by€theÏMcCanns€was€in€the€childrenððs€best€interests.ÌÌà àIn€affirming€the€final€adoption€order,€we€reject€the€Grandmotherððs€contention€thatÏthe€trial€court€erred€in€admitting€the€testimony€of€the€DHS€employees€on€the€grounds€that€theirÏtestimony€was€based€on€hearsay€and€that€they€had€not€been€qualified€as€experts.€€In€order€toÏpreserve€an€evidentiary€error€for€appellate€review,€a€party€is€required€to€object€to€the€evidence€at€theÏtime€of€its€admission€at€trial.€€òòò òWoodsonv.€Porter€Brown€Limestone€Co.ó óóó,€916€S.W.2d€896,Ï907€n.10€(Tenn.€1996);€T.R.E.€103(a)(1).€€During€the€DHS€employeesðð€testimony,€theÏGrandmother€failed€to€raise€a€single€hearsay€objection€to€their€testimony.€€The€Grandmother€alsoÏfailed€to€challenge€the€employeesðð€testimony€on€the€ground€that€they€had€not€been€qualified€asÏexperts.€€The€only€objection€raised€by€the€Grandmother€related€to€the€home€study€reports€which€theÏMcCanns€sought€to€introduce€into€evidence,€and€the€trial€court€sustained€this€objection€on€theÏground€that€the€home€studies€constituted€inadmissible€hearsay.€€òòò òSeeó óóó€òòò òMcKeehanv.€McKeehanó óóó,ÏNo.02A01„9407„CV„00165,€1995€WL€695124,€at€**2„3€(Tenn.€App.€Jan.11,€1996)€(excludingÏguardian€òòò òad€litemó óóó€report€as€inadmissible€hearsay).€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€conclude€thatÏthe€Grandmother€has€waived€this€issue€for€purposes€of€appellate€review.ÌÌà àWe€likewise€reject€the€Grandmotherððs€attack€on€the€validity€of€the€MotherððsÏsurrenders€by€which€she€relinquished€her€parental€rights€to€the€children.€€Although€theÏGrandmother€raised€this€issue€in€her€statement€of€the€issues€presented€for€review,€the€argumentÍportion€of€the€Grandmotherððs€brief€fails€to€set€forth€her€contentions€with€respect€to€this€issue.€ÏAccordingly,€the€Grandmother€has€waived€this€issue€for€purposes€of€appellate€review.€€òòò òSeeó óóóÏòòò òBlairv.€Badenhopeó óóó,€940€S.W.2d€575,€576„77€(Tenn.€App.€1996);€T.R.A.P.27.ÌÌà àEven€if€this€issue€were€properly€presented€for€this€courtððs€review,€we€would€rejectÏit€because€the€record€reflects€that€the€Mother€has€never€revoked€the€surrenders.€€The€MotherÏinitially€executed€surrenders€which€relinquished€her€parental€rights€to€the€children€in€favor€of€theÏBartow€County€Department€of€Family€and€Children€Services€in€Georgia.€€An€order€entered€by€theÏJuvenile€Court€of€Bartow€County€in€October€1994€indicates€that€the€Mother€attempted€to€revokeÏthese€surrenders€but€that€she€did€not€do€so€within€the€time€permitted€by€Georgia€law.€€In€enteringÏits€October€1994€order,€therefore,€the€Georgia€court€ruled€that€the€initial€surrenders€remained€validÏand€unrevoked.€€This€ruling€remained€undisturbed€when€the€Georgia€court€entered€its€orderÏawarding€custody€of€the€children€to€the€McCanns€in€December€1994.€€ÌÌà àThe€Mother€also€executed€surrenders€relinquishing€her€parental€rights€to€theÏchildren€in€favor€of€the€McCanns.€€Even€if€these€surrenders€were€effective€to€relinquish€theÏMotherððs€parental€rights,× ƒ( ××  ×€we€note€that€the€Mother€likewise€has€not€revoked€these€surrenders€inÏaccordance€with€Tennessee€law.€€Under€the€adoption€laws€in€effect€at€the€time€the€Mother€executedÏthe€surrenders,€the€Mother€had€the€absolute€right,€provided€a€petition€to€adopt€had€not€been€filed,€toÏrevoke€the€surrender€within€fifteen€days€from€the€date€of€execution€by€appearing€in€the€trial€courtÏand€presenting€the€court€with€a€written€revocation€of€surrender.€€T.C.A.€ðð36„1„117(b)€(1991).€ÏOnce€a€petition€to€adopt€was€filed,€the€Motherððs€right€to€revoke€the€surrender€was€not€absolute,€butÏwas€subject€to€the€trial€courtððs€determination€of€what€was€in€the€best€interests€of€the€children.€ÏT.C.A.€ðð36„1„117(e)(1)€(1991).€€Upon€entry€of€a€final€adoption€order,€the€Motherððs€right€toÍrevoke€the€surrender€was€governed€by€rule€60.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€InÏorder€to€set€aside€an€adoption€order€under€this€rule,€the€Mother€would€be€required€to€present€clearÏand€convincing€evidence€of€the€grounds€for€vacating€the€order,€such€as€that€the€surrenders€wereÏobtained€by€fraud€or€undue€influence.€€òòò òIn€re€Bishopó óóó,€678€S.W.2d€471,€472€(Tenn.€App.€1984);ÏT.R.C.P.€60.02(2).ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€Mother€executed€the€surrenders€relinquishing€her€parentalÏrights€to€the€children€in€favor€of€the€McCanns€in€April€1994.€€The€Mother€did€not€seek€to€revokeÏthe€surrenders€until€August€1995,€more€than€one€year€later,€when€she€filed€a€motion€to€join€in€theÏGrandmotherððs€petition€opposing€the€adoption€of€the€children.€€This€attempt€to€revoke€theÏsurrenders€was€untimely€because€it€was€not€filed€within€fifteen€days€of€the€Motherððs€execution€ofÏthe€surrenders€as€required€by€statute.€€T.C.A.€ðð36„1„117(b)€(1991).€€Moreover,€the€MotherððsÏmotion€to€intervene€was€ineffective€to€revoke€the€surrenders€because€the€trial€court€subsequentlyÏdismissed€the€Motherððs€motion€when€her€attorney€represented€to€the€court€that€she€had€changed€herÏmind€and€no€longer€wished€to€oppose€the€adoption.€€Although€the€Motherððs€deposition€revealedÏthat€she€wished€to€revoke€the€surrenders,€the€record€indicates€that€she€made€no€further€attempts€toÏdo€so.× ƒ/ ××  ×€€Inasmuch€as€the€Mother€has€failed€to€effectively€revoke€the€surrenders,€and€inasmuch€asÏthe€Grandmother€has€no€standing€to€assert€the€Motherððs€parental€rights,× ƒ0 ××  ×€we€conclude€that€thisÏissue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àThe€trial€courtððs€judgment€is€affirmed€and€this€cause€remanded€for€furtherÏproceedings.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Appellant,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)