WPCa RKL }ZLԖnkqMꊞ6Ÿ>O~(pϛUkXbN-C2XYga΃yО` Y?Y/+q8;Ĺ ^(' Y#KUjuiKz?x$9L=k]Y7 W +\%'JO<%kXѢ]#i)jg_B(# F UNQ % 0 UN w 4    B 0? 0D%SiU:U:{ fZ D3EEE 0Dxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx AO   0D D/ BDHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nL(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($71dXdXd7  HgITR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT(Y Z 6Times New Roman RegularEEDEDDEUEӀ'3|x   $H$XX `   1    X<X$Therearetwodefendants.TheswornaccountisdirectedtoRonE.Campbell.#$XX<~# d((3$ !7<XXdXXd7  H$XXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   `   0  (#$  0   I  $H$XX `   2    X<X$Duringtheinterveningyearsofdormancy,thecasewastwicedismissedforlackof  prosecution,andtwicereinstated.#$XX<~# Xg XXXr$  XXg Ad   FILEDo  r$   August27,1999  CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular Xg XXXr$  XXg Ad   FILEDo  r$   August25,1999  CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular q  $H$XX `   3    X<X$Thiswasarenewalnotewhichapparentlyaggregatedvariouspromissorynotes  executedbyFormpak,Inc.totheplaintiffbankoritspredecessorinownership.#$XX<~# \  $H$XX `   4    X<X$Accordingtotheappellantsbrief.Althoughoflittlerelevancetotheinstantcase,the  releaseofthetitlelienwasinadvertent.#$XX<~# P  8$HXX `   5    X XThisStatementofEvidenceauthorizedbyRule24,T.R.A.P.wasnotobjectedtoand  henceisavailableuponappellatereview.#XX ~# 'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !7<XXdXXd7  H$XXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T     $7<XdXXd7   l*6&"h 8 `Extt06ll*6&"h 8 `Extt06l $$INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATKNOXVILLE     NATIONSBANKOFTENNESSEE,  ) p HAMILTON  X  $$CHANCERY `     h     ) p (No.73919) ( x  ` Plaintiff/Appellant h     ) p  8   `     h     )v. `     h     ) p NO.03A019808CH00279 X   `     h     ) p  h  FORMPAK,INC.and h     ) p HON.HOWELLN.PEOPLES x  RONCAMPBELL, h     ) p CHANCELLOR   `     h     ) ` Defendants/Appellees    ) p REVERSEDANDREMANDED   `     h     ) p andREMANDED  RonCunningham,Knoxville,forAppellant.C.MarkWarren,Chattanooga,forAppellees. @( e  OPINION#   e! #Ԉ H   `     h      p INMAN,SeniorJudge "    ` ThisisanactionfiledonNovember15,1993onaswornaccount.ThecomplaintallegesthatonAugust7,1990the defendantsignedanotepayabletotheplaintiff,   #  1      ׀whichremainsunpaidandforwhichjudgmentisdemanded. (@$"  ` Bothdefendantsanswered.Executionofthenotewasadmitted.Failuretopaywasdenied.BywayofaffirmativedefensethedefendantsallegedthatonFebruary10,1993theplaintiff initiatedlitigationwithdefendantsandthatthecasewassettled.ThedefendantCampbellspeciallypleadedthatthepromissorynotewasexecutedbyhimasPresidentofFormpak,Inc.c.andnotindividually. ` ThecasewasheardonFebruary19,1998.  #  2      ׀TheChancellorfound: 51., 8 `  TwoloansweremadebyNationsBanktoFormpak,Inc.;therewasapriorlawsuitinvolvingwhathasbeenidentifiedasthe commercialnote;thelawsuitwasresolvedbyagreementoftheparties;thatintheimplementationoftheagreementdismissingthepreviouslawsuitthetitletothetruckwasreleased;theindividualsinvolvedinthattransactionwerenotheretotestify;theevidenceofwhathappenedfromNationsBanksperspectiveascontainedinacomputerprintoutofnotes;andthesenotesindicatedthatonJune23,1993thecustomerwastoldthathecouldkeepthetruckandhadpaidthenoteoff.Therearetwointerpretationsabouttherelease,one,thatthereleasetoMr.CampbellandFormpak,Inc.wasintendedtoreleaseMr.Campbellfromliabilityfortheconsumernote,andtheotherinterpretationisthatthereleasewasnotintendedtoreleaseMr.CampbellandFormpak,Inc.fromtheconsumernote.TheChancellorfoundthatastatementcontainedinthenotesbyaMr.Yates,anemployeeofNationsBank,indicatesthatNationsBankintendedtoreleaseMr.Campbellfromliabilityontheconsumernote;itis,therefore,ORDERED,ADJUDGEDANDDECREEDthat: ` 8"` 8" 8 `  1.  ThePlaintifffailedtomeetitsburdenbypreponderance   oftheevidencetoshowthatFormpakandMr.Campbellwerestillliablefortheconsumernoteandthereforethiscaseisdismissed. ` 8"` 8"  ` Theplaintiffappeals,andpresentsforreviewtheproprietyofthisfinding. ` Ourreviewisdenovoontherecordaccompaniedbyapresumptionof 0 correctnessunlesstheevidenceotherwisepreponderates.Rule13(d),T.R.A.P. ` AnearlieractionwasfiledagainstFormpaktoenforceasecurityagreementforapromissorynotedatedSeptember10,1990  #  3      ׀bywhichtheplaintiffacquireda $ securityinterestin alltheaccountsreceivable,inventory,fixtures,andequipmentownedbyFormpak.ThisactionwassettledonFebruary12,1993.Theagreedorderofdismissalrecitesthat Formpak,Inc.[haspaid]thenoteinfull....andthat NationsbankofTennesseedoesherebyreleaseallinventory,furniture,fixtures,andequipmentandthepersonalguaranteeofRonandDianeCampbell.....񀀀Aswillbeseenlater,thisorderpertainedonlytothecommercialnote. ` Thepromissorynote[theconsumerloan]involvedinthelitigationatBarwasexecutedonAugust7,1990.Theborrowedfundswereutilizedforthepurchaseof 50. a1991GMCJimmy,inwhichtheplaintiffacquiredasecurityinterestbytitlelien,whichwasreleased aspartoftheagreedorder.  #  4          ` Theconsumernoteisnotintherecord,butitsessentialandmaterialprovisionsarerecitedintheStatementofEvidence,filedinlieuofatranscript.p  %  5      ׀The  ` unrefutedevidencerevealsthatRonCampbell admittedthatheexecutedthenotetopurchasea1991GMCtruck,andtheat hesignedthedocument[note]twice,ondifferentlines,onesignaturelinecontained[his]signatureaccompaniedbythedesignationPresident,[and]theotherlinecontaininghissignaturehadnotothermarkbesideshissignature.HetestifiedthathedidnotsignthenotepersonallybutonlyasarepresentativeofFormpak,butcouldnotexplainwhyhesignedthenotetwice. ` Aloanofficerfortheplaintiff,BillBledsoe,testifiedthatthebankhasseparatedivisionsforthehandlingofpromissorynotes,onelocatedinCharlotteandtheotherinGreensboro,andthatthesedivisiondonotshareinformation.TheCharlotteofficehandlescommercialpaper.MrBledsoetestifiedthattheBankdidnotintendtoreleaseMr.Campbellfromliabilityfortheconsumerloan. ` TheappellantarguesthatMr.Campbellwasrequiredtobepersonallyliableasevidencedbyhissignatures,oneofwhichwasappendedinhisroleasPresidentofFormpak,Inc.,whilethesecondsignaturewasunadorned. ` T.C.A.473402(b)(2)providesthatapersonactingorpurportingtoactorarepresentativeisliableontheinstrumentunlessheprovesthatthepartiesdidnotsointend.Asbetweentheimmediateparties,parolevidenceisadmissibletoprovethesignersagency,FDICv.TennesseeWildcatServs.,Inc.,839F.2d25(6thCir. p3., 1988),ifunlesstheinstrumentitselfmanifestssomeambiguity.UnitedAm.Bankv.First  МCitizensNatlBank,764S.W.2d555,(Tenn.Ct.App.1988).See,also,Acme   Metals,Inc.v.Weddington,575S.W.2d15,(Tenn.Ct.App.1978);BillWalker& @ Assoc.v.Parrish,770S.W.764,(Tenn.Ct.App1989).Theappelleedoesnotrely  ` heavilyonhisassertionthathesignedthenotesolelyinarepresentativecapacity,whichisunderstandableinlightofthefactthatheoffersnoexplanationforhisactionsinsigningtheinstrumentonbehalfofFormpakInc.,andagainindividually.WeholdthatthepreponderanceoftheevidenceestablishedthatMr.Campbellintendedtobepersonallyliableontheconsumerloan. ` Evenso,theappelleearguesthathewasreleasedfromliabilitybythereleaseinstrumentheretoforereferenced,andthusitisthattheliabilityofthedefendantshingesuponadeterminationofwhetherthereleaseencompassedtheconsumernote. ` T.C.A.247106providesthatallreleasesshallhaveeffectaccordingtotheintentionsoftheparties.See,QualityCareNursingServices.,Inc.񛀜vs.Coleman,728 P  МS.W.2d1,(Tenn.1987). ` Itshouldbenotedthattheagreedorderofdismissalofthesuittorecoverthecommercialnotemakesnomentionoftheconsumernote,theproceedsofwhichfinancedthepurchaseofthetruck,andtheconsumernotewasneverreturnedtoMr.Campbell.Anotherbankofficialsaidthatthereleaseofthetitlelienonthetruckwasmadeinerror,andthatitwasnevertheintentionofthepartiesthattheconsumerloanwouldbeforgiven.ItshouldfurtherbenotedthatthesumpaidbyMr.Campbellinsettlementofthecaseinvolvingthecommercialnotedidnot P1,* includetheamountowingontheconsumerloan.Thefactthatthetrucklienwas p3., released,albeitmistakenly,orthatabankofficialsaidthatMr.Campbell could havehistruck:isoflittlesignificancetoaresolutionofthiscase.Neither 730 Мownership,norpossessionpermission,norwhetherthetruckissubjecttoasecurityinterest,isatissue.  ` Finally,wenotethatthestatementbyanotherbankofficial,Mr.Yates,that Mr.Campbellpaidthenoteoff,apparentlyreferredtothecommercialnote,ratherthantheconsumerloan. ` Itresultsthatthejudgmentofdismissalisnotsupportedbyapreponderanceofalltheevidence,andthattheappellantisentitledtorecoverontheconsumerloanfromFormpak,Inc.andMr.Campbell.Thejudgmentisaccordinglyreversed,andthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforadeterminationoftheamountowing,includingprincipal,interest,andattorneyfeesaspermittedintheconsumernote.Costsareassessedtotheappellees.Thepetitiontorehearisgranted.̛ ` Theopinionheretoforefiledinthiscaseiswithdrawn. `     h     _______________________________ `     h     WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:_______________________________HerschelP.Franks,Judge_______________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,Judge