ÿWPCü -nŒÁù}!. jv/Më®ôö²á­œ3©z©»ƒÕÛÀ¸GªOIÍeqŒ! Ú³“aFÐhm¹DÅ/'&u!¤fèÂÛ®EæE‘oMx”—Cà ìÿ­ôùŠõbÿ©2§Ñ4ÆÃõ­FÜ`Ä»—µ8;ú †|à Or)!XrÍ·a÷-"Ù¬^ s»`øÌ n©bG‰K“R’;ÿ å0hǞǙËJ«áŒÓ2Ü9X޼«s1\ŧHŸ‘ð 'O ÝDmÁÂ7rφc­N#´±b©2Íî¡ÄºD½”° 01aPÓÌóýæËpÈo “šg‰«]@ü+q…bcµ«yžqW«öÛ.Œ {”5YPІI¼´¤,à="ÐO6âÁ® ¡›+NEçIŸvÂ=v)ÅèÒ£A#GÅY\õJ\ßøÃlbd:xî¶/ú;gcGÔ€âä­“¢eõd t5ÁáiŸåË{ùÓ¨z)Å?t \1{þ©+Çk§mcÎOŸ…ugî=˜ ©·â•Ó¦X†ÐñUBÈ·Ž‚]J£•}š_4z#,Š^ç›øÕΨ ˆ+Swxþ.Æâ­¨)žT!@¢¤²Daû–‡¹C°Ë£9¶9?i¿,lãb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ ‘ Ƨ Æm Æ3 Æù 0¤¿Nce 0DmE±(³³³³ÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛÛbññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññ 0ëùùùù Bää 0¤ D3¥ D-Ø 0K ASPÆ£ 0¤i 0D  A«Q»$§Š+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular8n_+ð3ž3|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 Series PCL 6ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 Ñ ° ÑLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿z$©©Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ù»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ô_ÔÌà  à€ Ñ e Ñ- ù-(|G2CÃ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ù»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô£Ñò»»Ô d(|3¿z$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ù»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿z$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ù»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ù»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ù»»»ÔÑ8€ZXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ€ïOÑÑ€ OYÑà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îˆî»¼ÙÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Ù»îîˆ.#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAugust€7,€2001€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XZX»¼ÙÔÌò òÔ#†¼Ù»XXZ#ÔANTHONY€D.€MYERS,€òòet€al.€óóv.€W.€ALLEN€BRYAN,€IIIòòóóÔ‡XZX»¼ÙÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Williamson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€I€25483€€€€€€Russ€Ô_ÔHeldmanÔ_Ô,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„03188„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€10,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€case€originated€as€a€suit€against€a€subdivision€developer,€W.€Allen€Bryan,€III,€(ð ðBryanðð),€forÐ xÈ  Ðfraud,€negligent€misrepresentation,€and€violation€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,€allÐ d´ Ðpredicated€on€the€failure€of€a€subdivision€plat€plan€to€reflect€an€existing€drainage€easement.€Ð P  ÐThereafter,€Bryan€filed€a€third„party€complaint€seeking€indemnification€from€the€surveyor€whoÐ <Œ Ðprepared€the€plat€plan,€Ô_ÔRaganÔ_Ô„Smith,€Associates,€Inc.€(ð ðÔ_ÔRaganÔ_Ô„Smithðð),€in€the€event€Bryan€was€castÐ (x Ðin€judgment.€€On€this€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€54.02€appeal,€we€are€presented€with€the€issue€of€whetherÐ d ÐBryanððs€cause€of€action€for€failure€to€reflect€the€drainage€easement€on€the€plat€plan€is€barred€by€theÐ P Ðfour„year€statute€of€repose€for€surveying€errors.€The€court€below€granted€Ô_ÔRaganÔ_Ô„Smith€summaryÐ ì< Ðjudgment,€finding€that€Bryanððs€claim€is€barred€by€the€aforesaid€statute€of€repose.€€Bryan€appeals,Ð Ø( Ðarguing€that€Ô_ÔRaganÔ_Ô„Smith€is€not€entitled€to€summary€judgment€because,€according€to€Bryan,€theÐ Ä Ðomission€of€the€drainage€easement€is€an€engineering€error,€not€a€surveying€error,€and€hence,€so€theÐ ° Ðargument€goes,€the€subject€claim€is€not€barred€by€the€four„year€statute€of€repose€for€surveying€errors.€Ð œì ÐIn€the€alternative,€Bryan€argues€that€even€if€the€failure€to€reflect€the€drainage€easement€on€the€platÐ ˆØ Ðplan€is€a€surveying€error,€his€third„party€complaint€was€timely€filed.€€We€affirm.Ð tÄ ÐÓýÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ L œ ÐAffirmed;€Case€Remandedó óÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.,€Ô#†¼Ù»àXZ–#ÔÔ‡XZX.¼ÙÔóódelivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€Hòòouston€M.€Ô_ÔGoddardÔ_Ô,Ð #`" ÐÔ_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óó€and€òòHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ü#L# ÐÌLouis€W.€Oliver,€III,€Ô_ÔHendersonvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€W.€Allen€Bryan,€III.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌJefferson€C.€Orr,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Ô_ÔRaganÔ_Ô„Smith€Associates,€Inc.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÓ¦ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Ù»XXZñ #ÔÔ‡XZX»¼ÙÔÐ „)Ô$) ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Ù»XXZM#ÔÔ‡XZX»¼ÙÔÓ  ÓÐ  \+¬&+ý ÐÑ OYÑâ  âѰ°Ñâ  âÑ  ÑÔ_Ôà@¤¤&ìàI.€€òòFactsóóˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àIn€1992,€Bryan,€a€subdivision€developer,€purchased€a€tract€of€land€in€Williamson€County,Ð ˆØ Ðwhich€he€later€developed€into€a€subdivision€known€as€Beech€Tree.€€Shortly€after€purchasingÔ#†¼Ù»XXZ«#ÔÔ€XZX»¼ÙÔ€theÐ tÄ Ðproperty,€he€entered€into€an€oral€agreement€with€Ragan„Smith,€a€surveying€company,€to€prepare€aÐ `° Ðplat€plan€for€the€subdivision.€€On€December€7,€1993,€a€plat€plan€entitled€ð ðFinal€Plat,ðð€outlining€theÐ L œ Ð16€lots€in€the€subdivision€by€metes€and€bounds,€was€completed,€certified,€and€stamped€by€Roger€H.Ð 8 ˆ ÐFuqua,€a€Registered€Land€Surveyor€employed€by€Ragan„Smith.€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àOn€or€before€January€1,€1995,€Bryan€requested€that€Ragan„Smith€make€a€minor€revision€toÐ ü L  Ðthe€plat€plan€for€Lot€No.€15€in€the€subdivision.€€As€stated€on€the€plat€plan,€the€sole€purpose€of€thisÐ è 8  Ðrevision€was€to€ð ðsit€[sic]€out€an€easement€for€subsurface€disposal€systemsðð€for€a€neighboringÐ Ô$  Ðlandowner.€€This€revision€to€the€plat€plan,€entitled€ð ðMinor€Revision€Lot€No.€15€Beech€Treeðð(ð ðMinorÐ À  ÐRevisionðð),€was€completed€by€Fuqua€on€January€5,€1995.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€original€plaintiffs,€Anthony€D.€Myers€and€his€wife,€Tina€Myers€(ð ðcollectively€referredÐ „Ô  Ðto€in€this€opinion€as€ð ðthe€Myersðð),€€entered€into€a€contract€with€Bryan€to€purchase€Lot€No.€15.€€InÐ pÀ Ð1997,€the€Myers€discovered€a€drainage€ravine€on€their€lot€running€through€the€building€site,€the€effectÐ \¬ Ðof€which€was€to€substantially€decrease€the€size€of€the€house€that€could€be€built€on€the€lot.€€ThisÐ H˜ Ðravine,€however,€was€not€reflected€on€the€plat€plan€that€Bryan€had€shown€the€Myers.€€As€a€result,€onÐ 4„ ÐMay€22,€1998,€the€Myers€instituted€the€underlying€action€against€Bryan,€alleging€fraud,€negligentÐ  p Ðmisrepresentation,€and€violation€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,€with€respect€to€theirÐ  \ Ðpurchase€of€Lot€No.€15.€€They€alleged€that€the€plat€plan€was€not€accurate€because€it€did€not€show€theÐ øH Ðdrainage€easement€on€their€lot.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àOn€December€28,€1998,€Bryan€filed€a€third„party€complaint€against€Ragan„Smith,€allegingÐ ¼  Ðthat€Bryan€was€entitled€to€indemnification€from€Ragan„Smith€for€any€damages€awarded€againstÐ ¨ø ÐBryan€for€deficiencies€in€the€plat€plan€prepared€by€Ragan„Smith.€€Thereafter,€Ragan„Smith€filed€aÐ ”ä Ðmotion€for€summary€judgment€asserting€that€Bryanððs€cause€of€action€was€barred€by€the€four„yearÐ €Ð Ðstatute€of€repose€for€surveying€errors€set€forth€in€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114.€€The€trial€court€granted€Ragan„Ð l¼ ÐSmithððs€motion,€finding€ð ðthat€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€to€any€material€fact€with€respect€to€theÐ X ¨ Ðthird„party€action€which€has€been€filed€against€Ragan„Smith€Associates,€Inc.,€and€that€said€third„Ð D!” Ðparty€action€is€untimely€and€barred€as€a€matter€of€law€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114€....ððÐ 0"€  ÐÌà  àBryan€appeals,€challenging€the€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment.€Bryan€argues€thatÐ $X" Ðthere€is€a€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€as€to€whether€the€absence€of€a€drainage€easement€on€a€platÐ ô$D # Ðplan€is€a€surveying€error.€€In€the€alternative,€he€argues€that€even€if€the€omission€of€the€drainageÐ à%0!$ Ðeasement€is€a€surveying€error,€his€third€party€complaint€was€timely€filed.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌÐ  ¤(ô#' Ðà@TTìàII.€€òòStandard€of€ReviewóóˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àIn€deciding€whether€a€grant€of€summary€judgment€is€appropriate,€courts€are€to€determine€ð ðifÐ ˆØ Ðthe€pleadings,€depositions,€answers€to€interrogatories,€and€admissions€on€file,€together€with€theÐ tÄ Ðaffidavits,€if€any,€show€that€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€to€any€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€partyÐ `° Ðis€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.04.€€When€presented€with€aÐ L œ Ðsummary€judgment€motion,€the€trial€court€ð ðmust€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceÐ 8 ˆ Ðin€favor€of€the€nonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discardÐ $ t Ðall€countervailing€evidence.ðð€òòò òByrd€v.€Hallóóó ó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210„11€(Tenn.€1993).€€If€there€is€aÐ  ` Ðdispute€as€to€any€material€fact,€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€must€be€denied.€€òòò òId.óóó ó€at€211.€€AÐ ü L  Ðmaterial€fact€is€one€that€must€be€decided€in€order€to€resolve€the€claim€or€defense€at€which€the€motionÐ è 8  Ðis€aimed.€òòò òId.óóó óÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àThe€party€seeking€summary€judgment€has€the€initial€burden€of€demonstrating€that€there€is€noÐ ¬ü  Ðgenuine€issue€of€material€fact€and€that€it€is€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€òòò ò€Id.óó€ó óat€215.€€ThisÐ ˜è  Ðburden€may€be€met€by€either€affirmatively€negating€an€essential€element€of€the€non„moving€partyððsÐ ˆØ  Ðclaim€or€by€conclusively€establishing€an€affirmative€defense.€€òòò òId.óóó ó€at€215€n.€5.€€Once€the€moving€partyÐ tÄ Ðsatisfies€its€burden,€the€burden€then€shifts€to€the€nonmoving€party€to€establish€that€there€are€disputedÐ `° Ðmaterial€facts€creating€genuine€issues€that€must€be€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€òòò òId.€óóó óat€215.Ð Lœ ÐÌà  àSince€summary€judgment€presents€purely€a€question€of€law,€our€review€is€òòde€novoóó€with€noÐ $t Ðpresumption€of€correctness€as€to€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.òòò ò€€Hembree€v.€Stateóóó ó,€925€S.W.2d€513,€515Ð ` Ð(Tenn.€1996).Ð üL ÐÌà@vv(ìàIII.ˆÐ Ô$ ÐÌà@k k ìàA.€€òòSurveying€Error€v.€Engineering€ErroróóˆÐ ¬ü ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€granted€Ragan„Smith€summary€judgment€because€it€found€that€Bryanððs€claimÐ „Ô Ðagainst€Ragan„Smith€is€barred€by€the€four„year€statute€of€repose€for€surveying€errors.€€The€trial€courtÐ pÀ Ðbased€its€decision€on€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114€(a)€(2000),€which€provides€as€follows:Ð \ ¬ ÐÌà  àà8 ` à(a)€All€actions€to€recover€damages€against€any€person€engaged€in€theÐ 4"„  Ðpractice€of€surveying€for€any€deficiency,€defect,€omission,€error€orÐ  #p! Ðmiscalculation€shall€be€brought€within€four€(4)€years€from€the€date€theÐ  $\" Ðsurvey€is€recorded€on€the€plat.€€Any€such€action€not€instituted€withinÐ ø$H # Ðthis€four€(4)€year€period€shall€be€forever€barred.€€òòThe€cause€of€actionÐ ä%4!$ Ðin€such€cases€shall€accrue€when€the€services€are€performed.ÐÐ& "%` x` x ÐÌóó(Emphasis€added).òòò òóóó ó€€In€finding€that€this€particular€statute€of€repose€barred€Bryanððs€claim€againstÐ ¨(ø#' ÐRagan„Smith,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€the€omission€of€a€drainage€easement€from€a€plat€plan€isÐ ”)ä$( Ða€surveying€error.€€Ð €*Ð%) ÐÐ l+¼&* Ðà  àUnder€Tennessee€law,€ð ðthe€practice€of€land€surveyingðð€is€defined€asÐ ° ÐÌà  àà8 ` àthose€activities€set€forth€in€ðð€62-18-102(3),€and€the€establishment€orÐ ˆØ Ðreestablishment€of€corners,€boundaries,€and€locations€of€lots,€parcels,Ð tÄ Ðtracts,€or€divisions€of€land,€including€distances,€directions,€andÐ `° Ðacreage,€or€fractional€parts€thereof;€€and€also€including,€but€notÐ L œ Ðlimited€to,€the€correct€determination€and€description€of€the€same€forÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€purpose€of€furnishing€a€legal€description€of€any€land€surveyed€toÐ $ t Ðbe€used€in€deeds€or€other€instruments€of€conveyances€for€the€purposeÐ  ` Ðof€conveying€title€to€the€area€surveyed.Ðü L ` x` x ÐÌT.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114(b)€(2000).€€As€pertinent€to€the€issues€on€this€appeal,€T.C.A.€ðð€62„18„102(3)Ð Ô$  Ð(1997)€ð!ð€as€alluded€to€in€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114(b)€ð!ð€provides€that€the€following€are€included€within€theÐ À  Ðconcept€of€ð ðthe€practice€of€land€surveyingðð:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àà8 ` àany€service€of€work,€the€adequate€performance€of€which€involves€theÐ „Ô  Ðapplication€of€special€knowledge€of€the€principles€of€mathematics,€theÐ pÀ Ðrelated€physical€and€applied€sciences,€and€the€relevant€requirementsÐ \¬ Ðof€law€for€adequate€evidence€to€the€act€of€measuring€and€locatingÐ H˜ Ðlines,€angles,€elevations,€natural€and€man-made€features€in€the€air,€onÐ 4„ Ðthe€surface€of€the€earth,€within€underground€workings,€and€on€theÐ  p Ðbeds€of€bodies€of€water€for€the€purpose€of€determining€areas€andÐ  \ Ðvolumes,€for€the€monumenting€of€property€boundaries,€and€for€theÐ øH Ðplatting€and€layout€of€lands€and€subdivisions€thereof,€including€theÐ ä4 Ðtopography,€drainage,€alignment€and€grades€of€streets,€and€for€theÐ Ð  Ðpreparation€and€perpetuation€of€maps,€records,€plats,€field€notes,Ð ¼  Ðrecords€and€property€descriptions€that€represent€these€surveys....Шø` x` x ÐÌT.C.A.€ðð€62„18„102(3).Ð €Ð ÐÓ*2ÓÌÓ  Óà  àBryan€argues€that€Ragan„Smith€is€not€entitled€to€summary€judgment€because€there€is€aÐ X ¨ Ðgenuine€issue€of€material€fact€as€to€whether€the€failure€to€reflect€the€drainage€easement€on€the€finalÐ D!” Ðplat€is€an€engineering€error€or€surveying€error.€Bryan€argues€that€the€placement€of€a€drainageÐ 0"€  Ðeasement€on€a€plat€map€is€an€engineering€function.€€In€support€of€this€argument,€Bryan€submitted€theÐ #l! Ðaffidavit€of€DeWayne€Caldwell,€a€licensed€surveyor€and€engineer.€€In€his€affidavit,€Caldwell€statedÐ $X" Ðthat€in€his€opinion€ð ðit€is€a€surveying€function€to€prepare€a€site€contour€map€and€drainage€worksheetÐ ô$D # Ðbut,€it€is€an€engineering€function€to€determine€the€need€for€a€drainage€easement€and€then€to€calculateÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€size€of€that€drainage€easement€to€be€shown€on€a€Final€Plat€in€accordance€with€any€applicableÐ Ì&"% Ðzoning€and€subdivision€regulations.ðð€€Significantly,€there€is€no€assertion€by€Caldwell€that€the€act€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðòòplacing€óóa€drainage€easement€on€a€plat€plan€is€an€engineering€function;€rather€he€opines€simply€thatÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€determination€of€the€need€for€an€easement€and€the€calculation€of€the€size€of€the€easement€areÐ )à$( Ðengineering€tasks.€€Furthermore,€Caldwell€did€not€testify€that€a€surveyor€should€òònotóó€depict€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðpresence€of€a€drainage€easement€on€a€plat€plan.€€Therefore,€assuming,€without€deciding,€that€this€isÐ h+¸&* Ðan€issue€that€is€susceptible€to€expert€testimony,€it€is€clear€that€Caldwellððs€testimony,€when€properlyÐ ° Ðanalyzed,€does€not€establish€that€the€placing€of€a€drainage€easement€on€a€site€plan€is€an€engineeringÐ œì Ðfunction.€Ð ˆØ ÐÌÓ´6ÓÓ  Óà  àAs€further€support€for€his€position€that€the€omission€of€a€drainage€easement€is€an€engineeringÐ `° Ðerror,€Bryan€argues€that€the€placement€of€a€drainage€easement€on€a€plat€plan€does€not€fall€within€ð ðtheÐ L œ Ðpractice€of€land€surveyingðð€as€defined€by€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114(b).€€We€disagree.€€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114(b)Ð 8 ˆ Ðdirects€us€to€T.C.A.€ðð€62„18„102(3)€which€in€turn€provides€that€ð ðthe€practice€of€land€surveyingððÐ $ t Ðincludes€ð ðòòthe€act€of€measuring€and€locatingóó€lines,€angles,€elevations,€òònaturalóó€and€man„made€òòfeaturesóóÐ  ` Ðin€the€air€[and]€òòon€the€surface€of€the€earthóó€....ðð€€(Emphasis€added).€€We€find€that€the€placement€of€aÐ ü L  Ðdrainage€easement€on€a€plat€plan€is€an€act€that€reflects€the€measuring€and€locating€of€a€natural€featureÐ è 8  Ðon€the€surface€of€the€earth,€and€therefore,€the€omission€of€the€drainage€easement€from€the€plat€planÐ Ô$  Ðis€a€surveying€rather€than€engineering€error.Ð À  ÐÓ >ÓÌÖ€ÿÿÖà@©© ìàB.€€òòStatute€of€ReposeóóˆÐ ˜è  ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€trial€court€concluded€that€Bryanððs€third„party€action€against€Ragan„Smith€was€ð ðuntimelyÐ pÀ Ðand€barred€as€a€matter€of€law€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114,ðð€the€four„year€statute€of€repose€forÐ \¬ Ðsurveying€errors.€€The€court€concluded€that€the€completion€of€the€Final€Plat€on€December€7,€1993,Ð H˜ Ðwas€the€event€that€triggered€the€commencement€of€the€four„year€repose€period.€€As€a€result,€the€trialÐ 4„ Ðcourt€found€that€Bryanððs€third„party€complaint,€filed€on€December€21,€1998,€was€barred€by€thatÐ  p Ðstatute.€€Bryan€argues€that€the€court€below€erred€in€finding€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€as€toÐ  \ Ðwhich€survey€is€at€issue€in€the€underlying€suit.€€Bryan€asserts€that€the€Minor€Revision,€completed€onÐ øH ÐJanuary€5,€1995,€is€the€appropriate€plat€for€determining€the€timeliness€of€the€indemnification€action,Ð ä4 Ðnot€the€Final€Plat.Ð Ð  ÐÓÉBÓÌÓ  Óà  àOn€the€basis€of€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114(a),€in€order€to€determine€if€a€cause€of€action€is€barred€byÐ ¨ø Ðthe€four„year€statute€of€repose,€it€is€essential€to€determine€when€the€repose€period€begins€to€run.€Ð ”ä ÐAccording€to€the€statute,€the€cause€of€action€must€be€brought€within€four€years€from€the€date€theÐ €Ð Ðsurvey€is€ð ðrecorded€on€the€plat.ðð€€In€òòò òDouglas€v.€Williamsó óóó,€857€S.W.2d€51€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993),€thisÐ l¼ ÐCourt€held€that€ð ðas€used€in€T.C.A.€ðð€28„3„114,€the€words,€ððrecorded€on€the€platðð€mean€the€productionÐ X ¨ Ðof€some€drawing€or€written€instrument€evidencing€the€results€of€a€survey.ðð€òòò òId.óóó ó€at€54.€€With€respectÐ D!” Ðto€the€Final€Plat,€that€occurred€on€December€7,€1993.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àBryan€argues€that€the€critical€drawing€is€the€Minor€Revision,€not€the€Final€Plat.€He€contendsÐ $X" Ðthat€the€four„year€repose€period€began€on€January€5,€1995,€the€date€when€the€surveyor€completed€theÐ ô$D # Ðdrawing€of€the€Minor€Revision.€€Because€he€filed€his€third„party€complaint€on€December€21,€1998,Ð à%0!$ Ðhe€argues€that€his€action€was€timely€filed.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àAs€further€support€for€his€argument€that€the€Minor€Revision€is€the€plat€for€determining€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âtimeliness€of€his€action,€Bryan€points€out€that€the€Minor€Revision€states€that€it€ð ðvoids,€vacates€andÐ )à$( ÐÑïOÑâ âÑe°Ñâ âÑ  Ñsupercedes€Lot€No.€15€on€the€Plan€of€Beech€Tree€as€of€record€in€Plat€Book€20,€Page€19,€R.O.W.C.Ð e ÐTenn.ðð€€Therefore,€he€contends,€as€to€Lot€No.€15,€the€Final€Plat€no€longer€exists.Ð Qì Ðâ âÌà  àWe€disagree€with€Bryanððs€argument€that€the€Minor€Revision€is€the€plat€plan€for€determiningÐ )Ä Ðthe€running€of€the€statute€of€repose.€€If€Ragan„Smith€made€a€surveying€error€by€omitting€the€drainageÐ ° Ðeasement,€this€error€was€committed€on€the€Final€Plat€completed€on€December€7,€1993.€€As€soon€asÐ  œ Ðthis€drawing€was€completed,€according€to€òòò òDouglasóóó ó,€the€four„year€statute€of€repose€began€running.€Ð í ˆ ÐThe€Minor€Revision,€completed€on€January€5,€1995,€did€nothing€to€change€the€Final€Plat€òòas€far€asÐ Ù t Ðthe€drainage€easement€is€concernedóó.€€€As€stated€on€the€Minor€Revision,€the€sole€purpose€of€theÐ Å ` Ðrevision€was€to€ð ðsit€[sic]€out€an€easement€for€subsurface€disposal€systems€for€...€[an]€adjoiningÐ ± L  Ðproperty€owner,€and€the€addition€of€a€small€tract€to€the€west€[of]€Lot€15€to€make€up€the€area€ofÐ  8  Ðeasement€as€agreed€to€by€both€property€owners.ðð€€The€easement€for€subsurface€disposal€had€nothingÐ ‰$  Ðto€do€with€the€drainage€easement€omitted€from€the€Final€Plat.€€If€an€error€was€made,€it€was€made€onÐ u  ÐDecember€7,€1993,€the€date€of€the€Final€Plat.Ð aü  ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€original€complaint€filed€by€the€Myers€was€based€upon€the€survey€reflectedÐ 9Ô  Ðon€the€Final€Plat.€€Since€that€suit€prompted€the€original€defendantð!ðBryanð!ðto€file€his€third€partyÐ %À Ðcomplaint,€we€find€that€the€latter€action€was€likewise€predicated€on€the€Final€Plat€dated€DecemberÐ ¬ Ð7,€1993.€€Because€the€alleged€faulty€survey€occurred€more€than€four€years€before€Bryan€filed€his€thirdÐ ý˜ Ðparty€complaint€on€December€21,€1998,€his€cause€of€action€is€barred€as€a€matter€of€law€by€T.C.A.Ð é„ Ððð€28„3„114.€As€a€result,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€correctly€granted€Ragan„Smith€summaryÐ Õp Ðjudgment.Ð Á\ ÐÓàFÓÌà@rr#ìàIV.€€òòConclusionóóˆÐ ™4 ÐÌÓ  Óà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€granting€summary€judgment€to€Ragan„Smith€is€affirmed.€€ThisÐ q  Ðcase€is€remanded€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary,€consistent€with€this€opinion,Ð ]ø Ðpursuant€to€applicable€law.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellant,€W.€Allen€Bryan,€III.Ð Iä ÐÓWVÓÓ«^Óà  à€Ð 5Ð ÐÓÖWÓà@ìì*ìàˆÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_______________________________Ð ù ” Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCHARLES€D.€SUSANO,€JR.,€JUDGE