ÿWPCS ‹|¡ðŒKôÓ$¯΢dIàÊÐeõë”®9lØÀÁdŽ'a-DI÷”#F™BÛ’7QƆZ?ÇuY'½œ›„“r£kÝ9«W·”¿ªúj”TºøµLÚë]:;VN.Û„—–3ÏÛ³ZDì®™”´ÐÞ®“¯[P¯Sc%œ(õ@BmBŒóŒd1LÍS}çëòâÂà´ÕeÂvªª»/  z9f II3`Ëp‹4k5ú¯7ØòQ‚2ÇÿûNËÏXsêÁ¨ô¤‘ýã$Ìæã"ƒ«’›\9©Ù%Pø·aö`‚Øó§Õ¡?)áˆ%zð¨öC'1mà-'È<µ_~†ØjwÐs*ëg˜ûÏÚ ݓHUÔj|Ýzþ°"× ˆíÃYqt!5Õ+%5·ÃXµ¹´¦OºøpY3;äŸïjnŒ8EtÎÂ[>÷åÝŸ«ˆ7˜2»:e*6 áôÍVàŽÛ$ßþ!ÿÚM$˲fªæšYÜV|¹™ã*Ï ÝEt ˆP;XјlDúÅŽJ–Ï 9®s žježIf¬ÿÌúyéâÄãù 3P²ªì®µ¸"ú6Q{ ´Áø,S‹¬û¤ªÚK‰ÌfÓ¿¶@b %\^ b 0ˆnU+NöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ Ð Æ‘ ÆW Æ Æã f©NfEwfy¿ß 0DžfââââââââââââââââââââbHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0ëPPPP B;; 0¤X D3ü D-/ 0K\\ AS§Æú 0¤À 0Dd A«¨»–ž-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular¬|&-ê:i¢×+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ µÝ ƒR<$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯!ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€savings€statute€under€review€by€the€Court€in€òòNashville,€C.€&€Ô_ÔSt.L.Ô_Ô€Ry.óó€was€then€set€forth€at€section€4446Ð ° Ðof€Shannonððs€Code.€In€all€aspects€pertinent€to€the€present€case€it€encompassed€Ô_ÔT.C.A.Ô_Ô€28„1„105(a).€€€€€€€€€€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ- ù-(|G2<$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€i»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯!ò»»Ô d(|3ÿj$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€i»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÿj$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€i»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€i»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼i»»»ÔÑ8€PXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ€²ÏÑÑ€²ÏÑÑ€²ÏÑÑ€²ÏÑà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îHiÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼i»îîHP#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€30,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XPX»¼iÔÌò òÔ#†¼i»XXP;#ÔLARRY€E.€€Ô_ÔPARRISHÔ_Ô,€et€alòòóó.€v.€€ROBERT€S.€€MARQUIS,€et€al.€Ô‡XPX»¼iÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Knox€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€€1„701„01€€€€Dale€C.€Workman,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌFILED€DECEMBER€30,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€€E2002„01131„COA„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓIn€this€appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Knox€County€the€Appellants,€Larry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô€and€Larry€E.Ð xÈ  ÐÔ_ÔParrishÔ_Ô,€P.C.,€contend€that€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€dismissing€their€cause€of€action€upon€grounds€thatÐ d´ Ðit€was€not€timely€filed€under€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a).€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court.Ð P  ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€€R.€€App.€€P.€€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed;€CauseÐ (x ÐRemandedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼i»àXPà#ÔÔ‡XPX.¼iÔHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€€Franksóó,Ð ì< ÐJ.,€and€òòGary€R.€Wade,€Ô_ÔSp.J.Ô_Ôóó,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌJohn€J.€Ô_ÔMulrooneyÔ_Ô,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellants,€Larry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô€and€Larry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô,Ð ° ÐP.C.€€Ð œì ÐÌDeborah€C.€€Stevens€and€Summer€H.€Stevens,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee,€Ronald€C.Ð tÄ ÐÔ_ÔKoksalÔ_ÔÐ `° ÐÌFrank€Q.€Ô_ÔVettoriÔ_Ô,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee,€Robert€S.€€MarquisÐ 8!ˆ  ÐÓgÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼i»XXP–#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔÐ #`" ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼i»XXPï #ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔÓ  Óà  àOn€July€15,€1997,€the€Appellants€filed€a€cause€of€action€for€malicious€prosecution€against€theÐ è$8 $ ÐAppellees,€Robert€S.€Marquis€and€Ronald€C.€Ô_ÔKoksalÔ_Ô,€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Shelby€County.€€OnÐ Ô%$!% ÐMay€14,€1999,€that€Court€granted€the€Appellees'€motions€for€summary€judgment€and€entered€its€orderÐ À&"& Ðdismissing€the€case€with€prejudice.€€Thereafter,€Appellants€appealed€the€dismissal€to€this€Court.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÌà  àAs€reflected€in€òòLarry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô,€et€al.€v.€Robert€s.€Marquis,€et€al.,€óóan€unreported€opinion€ofÐ „)Ô$) Ðthis€Court€filed€in€Jackson€on€July€31,€2000,€the€Court€of€Appeals€affirmed€the€judgment€of€theÐ p*À%* ÐShelby€County€Circuit€Court€dismissing€the€Appellantsðð€case,€although€upon€the€alternative€groundÐ \+¬&+ Ðâ âof€improper€venue,€and€remanded€the€cause€to€the€Circuit€Court€€"for€further€proceedings€consistentÐ H,˜',ý ÐѲÏÑâ âÑTRY,3Ø'LetterXà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑâ âÑ  ÑÔ_Ôwith€this€opinion."€€On€November€27,€2000,Ô#†¼i»XXPM #ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ€in€compliance€with€our€opinion€and€judgment,€theÐ ° ÐCircuit€Court€entered€an€order€of€dismissal€without€prejudice€which€provides€as€follows:Ð œì Ðâ âÌÒ€°ÒÒž°ÒThis€cause€is€before€the€Court€upon€remand€from€the€Court€of€Appeals;€and€itÐ tÄ Ðappearing€that€by€an€Order€entered€December€2,€1997€this€Court€denied€theÐ `° Ðmotions€of€all€defendants€to€dismiss€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P€12.02(3)€forÐ L œ Ðimproper€venue€in€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court;€and€it€appearing€that€by€anÐ 8 ˆ ÐOrder€entered€November€12,€1998€this€Court€granted€the€motions€of€allÐ $ t Ðdefendants€for€summary€judgment€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56€and€dismissedÐ  ` Ðthe€plaintiffs'€malicious€prosecution€claim;€and€it€appearing€that€by€an€OpinionÐ ü L  Ðand€Judgment€filed€July€31,€2000€the€Court€of€Appeals€modified€this€Court'sÐ è 8  ÐOrder€entered€November€12,€1998€from€a€summary€judgment€dismissal€to€aÐ Ô$  Ðdismissal€for€improper€venue€in€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court,€and,€asÐ À  Ðmodified,€affirmed€this€Court's€dismissal€of€plaintiff's€malicious€prosecutionÐ ¬ü  Ðclaim€only€on€the€alternative€ground€of€improper€€venue;€it€is,€therefore,€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà Ø àORDERED,€ADJUDGED€AND€DECREED€that:Ð pÀ ÐÌà Ø à1.€€The€plaintiffs'€malicious€prosecution€claim€is€hereby€dismissedÐ H˜ Ðpursuant€to€Rule12.02(3)€for€improper€venue€in€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court;Ð 4„ ÐÌà Ø à2.€€This€dismissal€is€without€prejudice;€andÐ  \ ÐÌà Ø à3.€€The€costs€of€this€cause€are€taxed€against€plaintiffs.Ð ä4 ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°žÒà  àOn€November€8,€2001,€the€Appellants€filed€a€new€action€for€malicious€prosecution€againstÐ ¼  Ðthe€Appellees€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Knox€County.€€Thereafter,€in€April,€2002,€the€Court€enteredÐ ¨ø Ðorders€granting€motions€for€summary€judgment€filed€by€the€Appellees€on€grounds€that€theÐ ”ä ÐAppellants'€new€action€was€late€filed€under€the€savings€statute€set€forth€at€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a)Ð €Ð Ðbecause€it€was€filed€over€one€year€after€the€Court€of€Appeals€entered€its€opinion€and€judgment€ofÐ l¼ ÐJuly€31,€2000.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€issue€we€address€in€this€appeal€is€restated€as€follows:Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àWas€the€one€year€period€allotted€the€Appellants€for€commencement€of€a€new€action€underÐ $X" ÐT.C.A.€28„1„105(a)€properly€computed€from€the€date€of€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€whichÐ ô$D # Ðaffirmed,€as€modified,€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Courtððs€original€order€of€dismissal€or€should€suchÐ à%0!$ Ðone€year€period€have€been€computed€from€the€date€of€the€Circuit€Courtððs€order€of€dismissal€enteredÐ Ì&"% Ðupon€remand€in€compliance€with€the€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Appeals?Ð ¸'#& ÐÔ#†¼i»XXPy#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔà  àÌà  àOther€issues€raised€in€this€appeal€are€pretermitted€by€our€conclusions€set€forth€herein.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐѲÏÑâ âÑTRY,3Ø'LetterY,3Ø'Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑâ âÑ  Ñà  àThe€standard€governing€our€review€of€a€trial€court's€decision€to€grant€a€motion€for€summaryÐ ° Ðâ âjudgment€is€well€settled.€€Because€the€trial€court's€judgment€involves€purely€a€question€of€law,€it€isÐ œì Ðnot€entitled€to€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€See€òòCarvell€v.€Bottoms,€óó900€S.W.2d€23€(Tenn.€1995).€Ð ˆØ ÐOur€sole€task€in€reviewing€such€a€judgment€is€to€determine€whether€the€requirements€of€Rule€56€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€have€been€met.€€See€òòMason€v.€Seaton,óó€942€S.W.2d€470Ð `° Ð(Tenn.€1997).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àAs€stated€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€this€State€in€òòByrd€v.€Hallóó,€847€S.W.2d€208€(Tenn.€1993)€Ð $ t Ðð ðRule€56€comes€into€play€only€when€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€to€any€material€fact€and€the€movingÐ  ` Ðparty€is€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€The€facts€relevant€to€the€issue€now€before€us€areÐ ü L  Ðnot€in€dispute.€€It€is,€therefore,€our€duty€to€determine€whether,€as€a€matter€of€law,€the€Appellees€areÐ è 8  Ðentitled€to€the€judgment€granted€by€the€Trial€Court.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àThe€Appellants€assert€that,€contrary€to€the€conclusion€of€the€Trial€Court,€their€complaint€€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðtimely€filed€under€the€savings€statute€set€forth€at€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a)€which€states€in€pertinent€partÐ ˜è  Ðas€follows:Ð „Ô  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø à(a)€If€the€action€is€commenced€within€the€time€limited€by€a€rule€or€statuteÐ \¬ Ðof€limitation,€but€the€judgment€or€decree€is€rendered€against€the€plaintiff€upon€anyÐ H˜ Ðground€not€concluding€the€plaintiffððs€right€of€action,€or€where€the€judgment€orÐ 4„ Ðdecree€is€rendered€in€favor€of€the€plaintiff,€and€is€arrested,€or€reversed€on€appeal,€Ð  p Ðthe€plaintiff,€or€the€plaintiffððs€representatives€and€privies,€as€the€case€may€be,€mayÐ  \ Ðfrom€time€to€time,€commence€a€new€action€within€one€(1)€year€after€the€reversalÐ øH Ðor€arrest.€€Ð ä4 ÐÒ°€ÒÒ°€ÒÌà  àAs€we€have€noted€on€prior€occasion,€ð ð[t]he€purpose€of€the€savings€statute,€Tennesse€Code€Ð ¼  ÐAnnotated€ðð€28„1„105(a),€is€to€provide€a€diligent€plaintiff€with€an€opportunity€to€renew€its€suit€if€itsÐ ¨ø Ðcomplaint€is€dismissed€by€any€judgment€or€decree€that€does€not€conclude€its€right€of€actionðð.€€òòTurnerÐ ”ä Ðv.€Aldoróó€òòCo.€of€Nashville,€Inc.óó,€827€S.W.2d€318€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€In€the€instant€case€theÐ €Ð ÐAppellantsðð€original€lawsuit€filed€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Shelby€County€was€dismissed€for€improperÐ l¼ Ðvenue€and€the€Appellants€were€entitled€to€file€a€new€action€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a)Ô#†¼i»XXPê#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ.€€TheÐ X ¨ ÐAppellants€contend€that€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€calculating€the€one€year€limitation€under€the€statuteÐ D!” Ðfrom€the€date€of€the€Court€of€Appealsðð€judgment€of€July€31,€2000,€which€affirmed,€as€modified,€theÐ 0"€  ÐCircuit€Courtððs€order€€dismissing€the€Appellantsðð€original€action.€€They€argue€that€their€new€actionÐ #l! Ðwas€timely€filed€on€November€8,€2001,€because€the€one€year€allowed€€for€filing€a€new€action€did€notÐ $X" Ðbegin€to€run€until€November€27,€2000,€when€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court€entered€its€order€ofÐ ô$D # Ðdismissal€upon€remand.€Ô#†¼i»XXPè+#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ€The€Appellants€contend€that€the€Court€of€Appealsðð€judgment€enteredÔ#†¼i»XXP¼.#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ€onÐ à%0!$ ÐJuly€31,€2000,€did€not€constitute€final€adjudication€of€the€case€because€it€did€not€include€languageÐ Ì&"% Ðproviding€for€dismissal€but,€instead,€ordered€that€the€case€be€remanded€for€further€action€by€theÐ ¸'#& ÐCircuit€Court.€€The€Appellants€maintain€that€upon€remand€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðreinvested€with€jurisdiction€in€the€case€and€that€until€that€court€entered€its€judgment€of€dismissal€onÐ )à$( ÐNovember€27,€2000,€there€was€no€final€adjudication.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àAlthough€the€Appellants€assert€that€there€are€no€Tennessee€cases€which€specifically€addressÐ ° Ðthe€issue€raised€in€this€case,€they€offer€two€cases€as€being€sufficiently€analogous€to€support€theirÐ œì Ðposition€„€òòEvans€v.€Perky,€óó647€S.W.2d€636€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.1982)€and€òòNashville,€C.€&€St.€L.€Ry.€v.€óóÐ ˆØ ÐòòBoltonóó,€184€S.W.€9€(Tenn.€1916).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€Appellants€argue€that€theòò€Evans€óócaseòòð ðóóis€persuasive€authority€that€the€one€year€allowedÐ L œ Ðto€file€a€new€action€under€the€savings€statute€commences€on€the€date€of€the€order€that€dismisses€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcase.ððÔ#†¼i»XXPD/#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔÐ $ t ÐÌà  àIn€€òòEvansóó€the€issue€before€this€Courtòò€óówas€whether€the€one€year€allowed€for€filing€a€new€actionÐ ü L  Ðunder€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a)€ran€from€the€date€that€the€plaintiffs€filed€notice€of€nonsuit€or€from€the€dateÐ è 8  Ðthe€trial€court€entered€its€order€approving€the€nonsuit.€€The€defendants€sought€summary€judgment,Ð Ô$  Ðarguing€that€the€filing€of€notice€of€nonsuit€was€sufficient€to€dismiss€the€plaintiffsðð€case€and€€that€noÐ À  Ðfurther€action€was€required€of€the€trial€court€to€trigger€the€one€year€limitation€period€under€theÐ ¬ü  Ðstatute.€€We€disagreed.€€We€noted€that€€T.R.C.P.€41€provides€for€nonsuit€by€either€oral€or€writtenÐ ˜è  Ðnotice,€that€the€partiesðð€rights€and€privileges€are€the€same€whether€the€notice€is€oral€or€written€andÐ „Ô  Ðthat€there€is€no€reason€to€distinguish€between€the€two€forms€of€notice€with€respect€to€the€ð ðdignity€andÐ pÀ Ðpostureðð€of€each€before€the€court.€€Citing€several€Tennessee€cases,€we€then€recognized€the€wellÐ \¬ Ðestablished€rule€of€law€that€ð ðA€Court€speaks€only€through€its€written€judgments,€duly€entered€uponÐ H˜ Ðits€minutes.€Therefore,€no€oral€pronouncement€is€of€any€effect€unless€and€until€made€a€part€of€aÐ 4„ Ðwritten€judgment€duly€entered.ðð€In€accordance€with€this€rule,€we€concluded€that€the€one€year€statuteÐ  p Ðof€limitations€in€òòEvans€óóran€from€the€date€of€the€entry€of€the€trial€courtððs€order€and€not€from€the€dateÐ  \ Ðthe€nonsuit€was€filed.Ô#†¼i»XXP–4#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ€We€construe€our€decision€in€òòEvans€óóto€mean€that,€because€an€oral€notice€ofÐ øH Ðnonsuit€does€not€constitute€ð ða€judgment€or€decreeðð€as€is€required€under€T.C.A.€28„1„105,€neither€willÐ ä4 Ða€written€notice€of€nonsuit€constitute€such€ð ða€judgment€or€decreeðð€there€being€no€basis€forÐ Ð  Ðdistinguishing€between€the€legal€effect€of€the€two€forms€of€notice.€€€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àAs€does€the€case€before€us,€€òòEvansóó€dealt€with€the€proper€computation€of€the€one€year€timeÐ ”ä Ðlimitation€under€T.C.A.€28„1„105(a).€However,€òòEvans€óóis€distinguishable€from€the€present€case€in€thatÐ €Ð ÐòòEvans€óóinvolved€the€question€of€whether€the€judgment€necessary€to€trigger€the€running€of€the€one€yearÐ l¼ Ðlimitation€under€the€statute€was€the€notÔ#†¼i»XXPS;#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔice€of€nonsuit€or€the€entered€judgment€of€the€court.€€TheÐ X ¨ Ðpresent€matter€involves€the€very€different€question€of€whether€such€ð ðjudgment€or€decreeðð€was€theÐ D!” Ðjudgment€entered€by€€this€Court€or€the€subsequent€order€of€the€Circuit€Court€entered€in€complianceÐ 0"€  Ðwith€the€judgment€of€this€Court€upon€remand.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àIn€the€second€of€the€two€cases€cited€by€the€Appellants,òò€Nashville,€C.€&€L.€Ry.€v.€Bolton,Ð ô$D # Ðsupra,óó€aòò€óóÔ#†¼i»XXPó>#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔjudgment€in€favor€of€the€plaintiff€was€reversed€on€appeal€and€the€case€was€remanded€to€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcircuit€court.€The€plaintiff€then€terminated€the€case€by€taking€a€voluntary€nonsuit.€Within€one€yearÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€nonsuit€the€plaintiff€commenced€her€action€anew€in€the€circuit€court€of€another€county.€TheÐ ¸'#& Ðdefendant€asserted€that€the€plaintiff€should€have€commenced€the€new€action€within€one€year€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âdate€of€the€appellate€judgment€of€reversal€rather€than€within€one€year€of€the€nonsuit.€€€Our€SupremeÐ )à$( ÐѲÏÑâ âÑTRY,3Ø'LetterY,3Ø'Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑâ âÑ  ÑCourt€disagreed,€holding€€that€the€one€year€to€re„file€the€new€action€under€the€savings€statute׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€shouldÐ ° Ðâ âbe€computed€from€the€date€of€the€nonsuit.€€The€Appellants€argue€that€this€case€ð ðis€persuasiveÐ œì Ðauthority€that€the€one€year€allowed€by€the€savings€statute€to€refile€an€action€following€a€appellateÐ ˆØ Ðdecision€and€remand€begins€to€run€upon€the€date€of€termination€of€the€action€in€the€trial€courtÐ tÄ Ðfollowing€remand.ðð€€We€disagree.Ð `° ÐÌà  àWe€find€a€crucial€distinction€between€the€present€matter€and€òòNashville€C.€&€L,€Ry.€óóin€that€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðlatter€case€involved€a€reversal€which€did€not€mandate€dismissal€of€the€plaintiffððs€cause€of€action€inÐ $ t Ðthe€trial€court.€Instead,€the€case€was€remanded€to€the€trial€court€where€the€plaintiff€had€the€choice€ofÐ  ` Ðcontinuing€prosecution€of€her€case€or€taking€a€voluntary€nonsuit.€€The€Supreme€Court€found€thatÐ ü L  Ðsuch€a€reversal€with€remand€was€not€the€sort€of€reversal€which€would€begin€the€one€year€limitationÐ è 8  Ðperiod€for€filing€a€new€action€under€the€saving€statute€and€noted€as€follows€at€page€11:Ð Ô$  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Ò[T]he€judgment€itself€must€be€one€that€brings€to€a€rest€or€conclusion€the€action€asÐ ¬ü  Ðthen€pitched€and€prosecuted,€whether€by€dismissal,€arrest,€or€reversal.€€A€reversalÐ ˜è  Ðwith€remand€is€not€such€a€conclusion.€€It€is€but€a€temporary€check€in€the€progressÐ „Ô  Ðof€the€same€suit.Ð pÀ ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àAlthough€the€Court€states€that€reversal€with€remand€is€not€the€conclusion€of€a€cause€of€action€Ð H˜ Ðwhich€is€required€under€the€savings€statute,€it€is€evident€from€the€facts€that€the€Court€is€not€referringÐ 4„ Ðto€a€remand€for€dismissal,€as€in€the€present€case,€but€rather€to€a€remand€which€allows€continuationÐ  p Ðof€the€same€suit€in€the€trial€court€from€which€it€was€appealed.€€The€critical€question€is€whether€theÐ  \ Ðjudgment€ð ð€bringsÔ#†¼i»XXPFA#ÔÔ‡XPX»¼iÔ€to€a€rest€or€conclusion€the€action€as€then€pitched€or€prosecutedðð€or€does€it€merelyÐ øH Ðeffect€ð ða€temporary€check€in€the€progress€of€the€same€suit.ððÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àIt€is€our€determination€that€the€judgment€and€opinion€entered€by€this€Court€on€July€31,€2000,Ð ¼  Ðconcluded€€the€Appellantsðð€cause€of€action€ð ðas€then€pitched€or€prosecuted.ðð€€Although€our€judgmentÐ ¨ø Ðdid€not€specifically€order€dismissal€of€the€Appellantsðð€case,€that€was€its€necessary€effect.€Ð ”ä ÐFurthermore,€the€order€of€the€Shelby€County€Circuit€Court€òòdidóó€specifically€order€dismissal€of€theÐ €Ð ÐAppellantsðð€case€and,€upon€affirmation€of€that€order,€the€element€of€dismissal€became€an€implicitÐ l¼ Ðpart€of€our€judgment.€Although€we€did€not€agree€with€the€grounds€upon€which€the€Circuit€CourtÐ X ¨ Ðbased€its€decision€and€affirmed€on€the€alternate€grounds€of€improper€venue,€nevertheless€we€didÐ D!” Ðaffirm€the€Circuit€Court€decision€to€the€extent€that€it€dismissed€the€Appellantsðð€case.€€Upon€suchÐ 0"€  Ðaffirmation,€the€Appellantsðð€case€as€then€prosecuted€was€effectively€terminated.€€€Ð #l! ÐÌà  à€The€Appellantsðð€argument€that€our€judgment€was€not€a€final€adjudication€because€weÐ ô$D # Ðremanded€the€case€€for€further€proceedings€is€without€merit.€The€sole€reason€for€remand€specifiedÐ à%0!$ Ðin€our€judgment€was€so€that€the€Trial€Court€could€institute€ð ðfurther€proceedings€òòconsistent€with€ourÐ Ì&"% Ðopinionóó.ðð€(emphasis€added)€€Subsequent€to€our€determination€that€the€Trial€Court€was€not€the€properÐ ¸'#& Ðvenue€for€the€Appellantsðð€case€and€that€the€case€was€properly€dismissed,€the€Trial€Court€was€Ô_ÔwithoutÐ ¤(ô#' ÐѲÏÑâ âÑTRY,3Ø'LetterY,3Ø'Letter 3Ø' Letter 3Ø' LetterTÑâ âÑ  Ñauthority€to€take€any€action€which€would€have€allowed€the€Appellants€to€continue€their€case€in€thatÐ ° Ðcourt.€€It€is€well€settled€that€ð ð€inferior€€courts€must€abide€the€orders,€decrees€and€precedents€of€higherÐ œì Ðcourts.€The€slightest€deviation€from€this€rigid€rule€would€disrupt€and€destroy€the€sanctity€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðjudicial€processðð€òòÔ_ÔBargerÔ_Ô€v.€Brockóó,€535€S.W.2d€337€(Tenn.€1976).€In€òòÔ_ÔJ.N.Ô_Ô€Moore€v.€ChattanoogaÐ tÄ ÐElectric€Railway€Company€et€al.óó€109€S.W.€497€(Tenn.€1907)€the€plaintiff€contended€that€a€judgmentÐ `° Ðof€the€United€States€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€was€not€final€because€the€act€establishing€that€courtÐ L œ Ðprovided€that€cases€determined€by€the€Court€on€appeal,€and€in€which€it€had€rendered€a€final€decision,Ð 8 ˆ Ðshould€be€remanded€to€the€district€or€circuit€court€€ð ðfor€further€proceedings€to€be€taken€in€pursuanceÐ $ t Ðof€such€determination.ðð€€€Our€Supreme€Court€noted€the€limited€authority€of€the€district€or€circuitÐ  ` Ðcourt€upon€remand€at€page€501:Ð ü L  ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°ÒThe€judge€of€the€Circuit€Court€cannot€open€the€case€when€it€is€remanded.€€HeÐ Ô$  Ðcannot€in€any€way€modify€the€judgment€of€the€higher€court.€€He€has€no€judicialÐ À  Ðfunction€to€exercise€in€the€matter.€€He€cannot€exercise€any€discretion.€€All€that€canÐ ¬ü  Ðbe€done€is€to€execute€the€judgment€of€the€appellate€court,€and€this€is€merely€aÐ ˜è  Ðministerial€act.(citations€omitted)Ð „Ô  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àFinally,€we€note€the€following€statement€from€51€American€Jurisprudence,€Limitation€ofÐ \¬ ÐActions,€Section€299:Ð H˜ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°ÒFor€the€purposes€of€a€savings€statute,€a€court€action€that€is€reversed€and€remandedÐ  p Ðfor€the€obligatory€ministerial€act€of€dismissal€is€terminated€on€the€date€of€theÐ  \ Ðreversal,€rather€than€on€the€date€of€the€dismissal€in€the€lower€court.Ð øH ÐÒ°€ÒÒ°€Ò€Ìà  àAlthough€in€the€instant€case€this€Courtððs€judgment€of€July€31,€2000,€affirmed,€rather€thanÐ Ð  Ðreversed,€the€order€of€the€Circuit€Court,€the€result€was€dismissal€of€the€Appellantsðð€case€and€the€orderÐ ¼  Ðentered€by€the€Circuit€Court€consistent€with€such€judgment€upon€remand€was€merely€an€ð ðobligatoryÐ ¨ø Ðministerial€act.ðð€€The€one€year€allotted€to€the€Appellants€for€commencing€a€new€action€began€whenÐ ”ä Ðour€judgement€was€entered€on€July€31,€2000Ô#†¼i»XXPPN#Ô.Ð €Ð ÐÌÔ€XPX»¼iÔà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€and€remand€forÐ ¤ ô Ðcollection€of€costs€below.€€Costs€of€appeal€are€adjudged€against€Larry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô,€Larry€E.€Ô_ÔParrishÔ_Ô,Ð !à ÐP.C.€and€their€surety.Ð |"Ì  ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à_________________________________________Ð ,&|!$ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àHOUSTON€M.€GODDARD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÐ 'h"% Ѐà  à€Ð (T#& ÐÌà  à€€