WPC # VUNa % 0w@ 4   0J 0Te 0^ 0h 0r 0| 0m 0 1u 0dU>\U*B)DC AM0U*} BSv~pv D3 0@ AO4 0DI D/ BHP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLd(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(3c$7|XXdXXd7  HTXXTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT }[~{EETӀf|$3|x2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Times% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd-!C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d#    H \RA'\  ##   YYY FILED#X August4,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.#AppellateCourtClerk  dPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . #Xd#    H \RA'\    7XdXXd7   R"$!A1-j|` . `@Rߛ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATKNOXVILLE  @ (July1998Session) JASONRAINS,CRYSTALL.  ) HAMILTONCIRCUITCARNEYandKATHYCARNEY, )      ) NO.03A019801CV00025  Plaintiffs/Appellant )v.      )      ) HON.W.NEILTHOMAS,IIIEDWINSCOTTSUSSDORFF,III ) JUDGEa/k/a/EDSUSSDORFF,VICKIR. )SUSSDORFF,E.SCOTT  )SUSSDORFandALLSTATE  )INSURANCECOMPANY,  )      ) Defendants/Appellees  ) AFFIRMEDRichardA.Schulman,Chattanooga,forAppellantsCrystalandKathyCarney.SamuelR.Anderson,DavidL.Moss,Chattanooga,forAppellees. @  OPINION       INMAN,SeniorJudge  Whileridingaspassengersinanautomobileownedbydefendantanddrivenbyaclosefriendofdefendantsson,theinterveningplaintiffwasseriouslyinjuredinaonecaraccidentwhenthedriverapparentlyfellasleepatthewheel.Thepassengerintervenedinthedriverspetitionandallegedthatthevehiclehadbeendrivenwiththeexpressorimpliedpermissionofitsownerandsoughtadeclaratoryjudgmentthathisinsurerwasthereforeliableforherinjuries.Thetrialcourtfoundthedriverdidnothavesuchpermissionanddismissedintervenorspetition,andsheappeals. Weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. @ I  JasonScottRains[ Jason],theoriginalplaintiff,age20,isaneighborand bestfriendofdefendantScottSussdorff[ Scott]also20,whosefather,defendantEdwinScottSussdorff,III[ Sussdorff]ownedaPontiacGrandAmvehiclewhichheinsuredthroughdefendantAllstateInsuranceCompany. ThepolicyofinsuranceprovidesthatAllstateinsuredSussdorff,anyresident,and anyotherpersonusing[theauto]withtheinsuredspermission. InthelateeveninghoursofMay5,1995,withSussdorffsexpresspermission,ScottdrovetheGrandAmtoDavidJohnsonshouseforapartyandtospendthenight.WhenScottarrivedhefoundJohnsonscarparkedfirstinthedrivewayandJasonscarbehindJohnsons;ScottparkedhisfatherscarbehindJasons,andthereafterneitherJohnsonscarnorJasonscouldbemovedwithoutfirstmovingtheSussdorffcar. At1:00a.m.JasonagreedtodriveplaintiffCrystalCarney,age18,tomeethermotherattheHolidayInnwhereshewastoattendamotherdaughterallnightfunction.Johnsonagreedtoaccompanythem.WhenJasoncouldnotfindhiscarkeys,heawakenedScottandobtainedhispermissiontodriveSussdorffscar.Duringthetripanaccidentoccurredwhichseriouslyinjuredallofthevehiclesoccupants. @ II  CarneycontendsthatJasonhadSussdorffsexpressorimpliedpermissiontousethevehicleandthereforeisanadditionalinsuredundertheAllstatepolicy. Nowitnessestestifiedatthehearing;thepartiessubmittedasevidencethedepositionsofSussdorff,hiswife,Scott,Jason,JohnsonandCarney,alongwithAllstatespolicyofinsuranceandastipulationthatJasonwasnotonthebusinessoftheSussdorffswhentheaccidentoccurred. ThetrialcourtfoundthatJasondidnothaveSussdorffspermissiontodrivetheGrandAm,andforthatreasonwasnotanadditionalinsuredundertheAllstatepolicy.Hedismissedtheinterveningpetition. OurreviewofthefindingsoffactmadebythetrialCourtisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialCourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionofthecorrectnessofthefinding,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Tenn.R.App.P.,Rule13(d);Campbellv.FloridaSteelCorp.,919S.W.2d26(Tenn.1996). Whenacaseisheardentirelyupondepositions,thepresumptionofcorrectnessofthefactualfindingsofthetrialjudgedoesnotapplywiththesamestrictnessasitdoesincasesheardorallywherethetrialjudgehastheopportunitytoviewandappraisethewitnesses.HohenbergBros.Co.v.ϜMissouriPacificR.R.,586S.W.2d117(Tenn.App.1979). @ III  SussdorfftestifiedthathehadgivenJasonexpresspermissiontodrivehisGrandAmontwooccasionspriortothisaccident.However,healsotestifiedthathehadgivenScottandhisotherchildrenastandingorderthat Youdontletanybodyjustjustanybodydriveyourcar.ScotttestifiedthatheknewhewasneverallowedtodrivehisfathersGrandAmwithoutexpresspermission,nordidhethinkhisfriendJasoncoulddrivethecarwithouthisfatherspermission.Jason,however,testifiedthathedrovetheGrandAm ...somanytimesthatyoucouldntcount,withScottspermissionandwithouthisfathersknowledge. ThepartiesagreethatJasondidnothaveSussdorffsexpresspermissiontodrivetheGrandAmonthenightoftheaccidentbutthathedidhavetheexpresspermissionofScott.PlaintiffsarguethatJasonhadSussdorffsimpliedpermissiontodrivethevehiclebecauseofthecourseofconductbetweenSussdorffandJason. WeagreewiththetrialcourtthattheevidencepreponderatesinfavorofafindingthatJasondidnothavesuchpermission. UnderTennesseelaw,impliedpermissionmustbe theactorconductofthenamedassured.Itmustamounttoanintendedselectionofthepersontooperatethecar.Noimpliedpermissioncanarisemerelybecauseamanobtainedpossessionofthecarwithouttheknowledgeofthenamedassured,regardlessofwhatpermissionwasgivenbyotherpersons...theessentialpointiswhetherthenamedassuredexerciseshispersonaldiscretionandgrantshisownpermissiontotheparticularperson.Schultzv.TennesseeFarmersMutualIns.Co.,404S.W.2d480(Tenn.1966). OnthetwooccasionswhenJasondroveSussdorffsGrandAmwithSussdorffsknowledge,theconditionsweresomewhatexigent.InoneinstanceJasonscarwasbeingrepairedintheSussdorffsdrivewayandthejobwasnotfinishedwhenhehadtogohome,soSussdorffauthorizedhimtodrivethecarhome.OnthesecondoccasionJasonrequestedtodrivetheGrandAmtotakehismotherandhandicappedsistertolunchandbackhome. PlaintiffcontendsthatthecircumstancesonthenightoftheaccidentwereagainexigentandthereforeJasonreasonablyassumedthat,hadhecalledMr.Sussdorff,permissionwouldhavebeengranted.Clearly,byhisowntestimony,Jasonknewthatarequestforpermissionhadalwaysbeenrequired,yethefailedtoobtainsuchpermission.WefindnoconvincingevidenceintherecordthatSussdorffscourseofconductwouldhavereasonablyledJasontobelievehecoulddriveSussdorffsGrandAmunderanycircumstanceswithouthisexpresspermission. @ IV  PlaintiffarguesthatsheisentitledtorecoverbecauseJasonwasasecondpermittee,sincehesecuredScottspermissiontodrivehisfatherscar.IndeedScotttestifiedthathehadgivenJasonpermissiontodrivehisfatherscar[withouthisfathersknowledge]onfivetotenoccasions.However,Scottalsotestifiedthatheknewthathisfatherdidnotpermitanyone,evenhisownson,todrivetheGrandAmwithouthisexpresspermission.ThereforeJasoncannotbeacoveredsecondpermitteeunderTennesseelaw,whichrequiresthatsecondpermitteesmusthavepermissionfromthenamedinsured.Schultzv.TennesseeFarmersMutualIns.Co.,404S.W.2d480(Tenn.1966). WefindtheevidencepreponderatesinfavorofthetrialcourtsfindingthatJasonRainsdidnothavetheexpressorimpliedpermissionofEdwinScottSussdorfftodrivehisvehicleandthereforeisnotanadditionalinsuredundertheAllstatepolicy. Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedwithcostsassessedtotheappellants.̀            _______________________________      WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:_______________________________HerschelP.Franks,Judge_______________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,Judge