WPCd 4Vj 0(yw@ 0l 0DU 0J 0T 0^7 0h 0r 0|o 0 0q 1u 0dv UB % U6" U>X B) DC AM BOU*lN D3v~.v 0@ AO 0D D/ BGf|$3|x($ DDDDE DӀ((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 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<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX<  9p`(Courier New<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd-$C << G d<  9p`(Arial  !  #d#!  ''   YYY FILED'X June26,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.'AppellateCourtClerk  D !#d#!  $          ""& TheTrialJudgerejectedplaintiffsevidencethatthevehiclewasbeingoperatedbyathirdparty.&&&&'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ellan Geneva  ellan Geneva ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . !        \RA'\7MXXdd7""R%($A1-j|`  `@Rߛ ̀@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATKNOXVILLE HAROLDREECE&MIKE  )C/ANO.03A019712CV00532GRIMMETT,    )      )HAMILTONCIRCUIT PlaintiffsAppellees,  )      )HON.RUSSELLHENSON,v.      )JUDGEBYDESIGNATION      )KARENREDDICK&LARRY  )REDDICK,     )REVERSED      )AND DefendantsAppellants.  )DISMISSED̜LLOYDA.LEVITT,LEVITT&LEVITT,Chattanooga,forPlaintiffsAppellees.LAURABETHRUFOLO,ROBINSON,SMITH&WELLS,Chattanooga,forDefendantsAppellants.̜@ OPINION ̜        Franks,J.  Inthisactionfordamagesforinjuriessustainedasaresultofanautomobileaccident,theTrialJudge,afterabenchtrial,enteredjudgmentfortheplaintiffsanddefendantshaveappealed.  PlaintiffsallegethatonJuly20,1994atnight,theyhadstoppedataredlightandwererearendedbyanotherautomobilewhichleftthescene,bearinglicenseplate: LUMINA3".ItisnotdisputedthatthelicenseplatewasregisteredtoandownedbythedefendantsKarenReddickandLarryReddick.  Afterhearingtheevidence,theTrialJudgeinhisruling,observed:0 0 Mr.Reddickmusthavebeendrivingthatcar,inspiteofthetestimonyoftheplaintiff.AndIreasonthatheprobablywasinbedasleepatthattime.Thatthen,foronereasonoranother,hegotoutinhiscar,hadaspatwithhiswifeorsomething,theywerehavingtroubleatthetime,andhegoesoutinhiscarandrearendedthiscar,realizinghewasintroubleandleft....[a]sIindicatedorsaid,determiningthefactwasthattheplaintiffobservedthisLUMINA3tagatthescene,andthatwasthereishardlyanyotherwaythathecouldhavegottenthat,becauseitwashadalreadybeenreportedthenextmorning.ThatisthereasonIcametotheconclusionthatMr.thedefendantwasdrivingthecar.  Onappeal,defendantshaveraisedthreeissues,thefirstbeingthattheCourterredinfailingtogranttheirmotionforsummaryjudgment.Thisissueisnotreviewableonappeal,thecasehavinggonetotrialonthemerits.SeeCortezv.Alutech,Inc.,941S.W.2d891(Tenn.App.1996).NextdefendantsinsistthattheevidencedoesnotsupporttheTrialCourtsfindingoffactthat defendantLarryReddickwasdrivingtheautomobilethatallegedlyrearendedtheautomobiledrivenbytheplaintiffs.  PlaintiffReecetestifiedthatwhenhewasstoppedatthelighthewasstruckfromtherearbyamotorvehicle,andadarkcomplectedmalewithamustacheapproachedthevehicle,inquiringiftheywereok.However,afteralightingfromthevehicle,plaintiffspoketoawomaninthedriversseatoftheothervehicle,whohad blondishcoloredhair.Theothercarthenleftthesceneandatthattimeplaintiffsmadeanotationofitslicenseplatenumber.AfewdayslaterplaintiffswerecalledtothepolicestationandmettheReddickswhohadbroughttheircartothestation.NodamagewasobservableontheReddicksvehicle,andplaintiffscouldnotidentifytheReddicksasoccupantsofthevehicleonthenightoftheaccident,atonepointstating nowhenaskediftheReddickswereinthevehicle.Subsequently,plaintiffswereabletodeterminethatZafforKaddourawasthepersonwhoalightedfromtheothervehicleandinquiredabouttheirconditiononthenightoftheaccident.Kaddourawasnotcalledtotestify.  Defendantstestifiedthattheircarwashousedintheirgarageonthenightinquestion,andthattheybothwereinbedasleepwhentheallegedaccidenttookplaceandtheyhadgivennoonepermissiontousetheirvehicle.̜  WereviewtheevidencedenovoaccordingtheTrialJudgethepresumptionofcorrectness,unlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.T.R.A.P.13(d).PlaintiffsrelyuponT.C.A.5510311asabasistosupporttheTrialCourtsϜjudgment.Thestatuteandplaintiffstestimonycreatethepresumptionofabailment.However,theTrialJudgerejectedthisplaintiffstestimonyonthisissue. )   כMoreover,thisstandingalonewouldnotestablishabasisforrecovery.AstheSupremeCourtsaidinHamrickv.SpringCityMotorCompany,708S.W.2d383(Tenn.1986)atp.385:0 0 Permissiveuse,standingalone,establishesonlyabailment.Inandofitself,itisnotabasisfortheimpositionofpersonalliabilityupontheownerofavehicle....Itiswellsettledthatordinarily,abailorisnotliableforthenegligenceofabailee.Ӝ  WeconcludethattheevidencepreponderatesagainsttheTrialCourtsfindings.T.R.A.P.Rule13(d).Theevidenceclearlyestablishesbeyonddisputethatthedefendantswerenotinthevehiclethatstruckplaintiffsvehicle.Accordingly,theTrialCourtsfindingthatdefendantReddickwasoperatingthevehicleatthetimeoftheaccidentisnotsupportedbytheevidence.  ThejudgmentoftheTrialCourtisreversedandthecauseremandedwithcostoftheappealassessedtoplaintiffs.Ӝ@        __________________________      HerschelP.Franks,J.̜CONCUR:___________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.___________________________WilliamH.Inman,Sr.J.