ÿWPC`# œp=4@mŽK-rR‹Ì´\´ó¤ï+x¿éËÝû÷%K(rDsìâh’ÿ4žõ}ÎKr×=Ó~oз ¼}{UåaøîΛ¯ïª™CÍ xCÉTk„'à)gñ¸UÈë‹…ü´ ¸Õš˜§ƒ«mÍøÃÿvS™KùB½$·x% Y@§B5ÇlK·¤&î¿ÉÑu2žàëVd„8Š-CE`ïþ´•â¾Ó¶aŠøµ?adöOYcs¥ÀÍ;â¦F$áÃÞ¤¹÷Ê~졬Xs0ïÑýEø‘–c —Ú ÈK‰û‡D=Ñ-vò²a,êÔÅÞ\kKvtæaB¯Ì7ÏIé aæ,¸[hNüS±¼b#²R<·ÿôž†A€ ÞÔ»YÞ=†`j;†÷‘j†QÇ:åH9ÁÜ×gGõÐÌà ý½h¹Ïù?^*­¯0¼+úž!(¦üv2¼u†Т¸@Ù1P×S×-° b¯×RºÎp‘P¹¥'´¤+­îûk-Ù”’çîG-§¸£1¯l|œíP×5qø¦]Ûƒ¸ÜõÂ<Þ¨ëûœ7^1o‚·É€»²4™;î=m%ÖÓXwÃÄa.í`­ë‡› îS®íu­ÚÅÑ­Fb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ 0D™ ÆÝ Æ£ ÆiÆ/UNõNCÀ EEEtØ{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{bSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS 0ë[[[[ BFF 0¤c D5 D-< 0Ki i AS´ Æ! 0¤Í! 0Dq" A«µ"˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»„œd1Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular6hö001s02 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ¶ Ý ƒR`z$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô«|ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑÀÑÑÀâÔÑIn€support€of€her€claims€for€negligence€òòper€seóó,€Ms.€Ricketts€alleged€that€Defendants€violated€certain€sectionsÐ ° Ðof€the€Tennessee€Code,€including,€but€not€limited€to,€the€following:Ð qÁ ÐÌà8  àUpon€all€roadways€of€sufficient€width,€a€vehicle€shall€be€driven€upon€the€right€side€of€the€roadway€.Ð óC Ð.€.€.дРР ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€55„8„115(a).Ð 6 † ÐòòóóÌà8  àDrivers€of€vehicles€proceeding€in€opposite€directions€shall€pass€each€other€to€the€right,€and€uponÐ ¸  Ðroadways€having€width€for€not€more€than€one€(1)€line€of€traffic€in€each€direction,€each€driver€shall€giveÐ y É  Ðto€the€other€at€least€one„half€(ðð)€of€the€main„traveled€portion€of€the€roadway€as€nearly€as€possible.Ð: Š Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€ðð€55„8„116.òòóóÐ ¼  ÐÌà8  àNo€vehicle€shall€at€any€time€be€driven€to€the€left€side€of€the€roadway€under€the€following€conditions:Ð>Ž Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(1)€When€approaching€the€crest€of€a€grade€or€upon€a€curve€in€the€highway€where€the€driverððsÐ ÿO  Ðview€is€obstructed€within€three€hundred€feet€(300')€or€such€distance€as€to€create€a€hazard€in€the€eventÐ À  Ðanother€vehicle€might€approach€from€the€opposite€direction[.]ÐÑ Ð Ð  ÐòòÌIdóó.€ðð€55„8„120(a)(1).òòÐ S ÐÌóóà8  àWhenever€any€roadway€has€been€divided€into€two€(2)€or€more€clearly€marked€lanes€for€traffic,€theÐ …Õ Ðfollowing€rules,€in€addition€to€all€others€consistent€herewith,€shall€apply:ÐF–Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(1)€A€vehicle€shall€be€driven€as€nearly€as€practicable€entirely€within€a€single€lane[.]ÐWÐ Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€ðð€55„8„123.òòóóÐ ‰Ù ÐÐ Jš  Ðà8  àNo€vehicle€shall€be€turned€so€as€to€proceed€in€the€opposite€direction€upon€any€curve,€or€upon€theÐ ° Ðapproach€to€or€near€the€crest€of€a€grade,€where€such€vehicle€cannot€be€seen€by€the€driver€of€any€otherÐ qÁ Ðvehicle€approaching€from€either€direction€within€five€hundred€feet€(500').€Ð2‚Ð Ð  ÐÌòòIdóó.€ðð€55„8„141(a).Ð ´ Ð jÝ ƒR`z$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô«|ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€court€included€Tennessee€Pattern€Jury€Instruction,€Civil€15.11,€titled€òòAll€Instructions€Not€NecessarilyÐ ° ÐApplicableóó,€which€states€as€follows:Ð qÁ ÐÌà8  àThe€Court€has€given€you€various€rules€of€law€to€help€guide€you€to€a€just€and€lawful€verdict.€€WhetherÐ óC Ðsome€of€these€instructions€will€apply€will€depend€upon€what€you€decide€are€the€facts.€€The€CourtððsÐ ´ Ðinstructions€on€any€subject€[including€instructions€on€damages],€must€not€be€taken€by€you€to€indicateÐ uÅ Ðthe€Courtððs€opinion€of€the€facts€you€should€find€or€the€verdict€you€should€return.Ð6 †Ð Ð  ÐÌÔ_ÔT.P.I.Ô_Ôð"ð€Civil€15.11. ÎÔUSUS.,ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÓ  ÓÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÔ_Ô- ù-(|G2`z$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™i»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô«|ò»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€™i»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢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€¼™i»»»ÔÑ8€ÊwXXdé»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ò ò ìàÔ‡îd™iÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼™i»îîd #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  ÓSeptember€21,€2004€SessionÐ öF ÐÔ‡XÊwX»¼™iÔÌò òÔ#†¼™i»XXÊwõ#ÔMARSHA€RICKETTSòòóó€v.€SARA€M.€ROBINSON,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XÊwX»¼™iÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Weakley€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€3815€€€€€€William€B.€Acree,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<¦ ` AßÐ § ÷  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2004„00004„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€November€4,€2004Ð  ð  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<s` AßÐ tÄ  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡Xv¢XXXÊwÔThis€is€an€appeal€from€a€jury€verdict€finding€that€all€parties€involved€were€without€fault€in€anÐ l¼  Ðautomobile€accident.€€We€affirm.Ð U¥  ÐÔ#†XÊwXXXv¢†#ÔÔ#†¼™i»XXÊwr#ÔÔ‡XÊwX»¼™iÔÓzÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed;€andÐ 'w ÐRemandedó óÐ a ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼™i»àXÊw•#ÔÔ‡XÊwX.¼™iÔDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Crawford,€P.J.,€W.S.,óóÐ ä4 Ðand€òòAlan€E.€Highers,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Í ÐÌBruce€Conley,€Union€City,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Marsha€Ricketts.Ð Ÿï ÐÌKyle€C.€Atkins,€Humboldt,€for€the€appellee,€Sara€M.€Robinson.Ð qÁ ÐÌFred€N.€McLean,€Paris,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Larry€Pentecost.Ð C“ ÐÌÓSÓò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼™i»XXÊw‚#ÔÔ‡XÊwX»¼™iÔÐ e ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼™i»XXÊw¦#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÊwX»¼™iÔÔ‡Xv¢XXXÊwÔà@NNìàò òòòÓÓStatement€of€the€FactsˆÐ è 8  Ðóóó óÓ  ÓÓÓà  àOn€the€morning€of€December€18,€2000,€the€defendant,€Sara€Robinson€(ð ðMs.€Robinsonðð)Ð ¸"" Ðwas€traveling€south€on€Rock€Hill€Road,€near€Sharon,€Tennessee.€€The€road€was€covered€withÐ ¡#ñ# Ðsome€degree€of€snow€and€ice.€€As€Ms.€Robinson€was€driving€up€a€hillside€section€of€the€road,€herÐ Š$Ú$ Ðvan€began€to€lose€traction€and€slide.€€She€again€attempted€to€drive€up€the€hill,€but,€when€herÐ s%à % Ðefforts€failed,€she€decided€to€back€the€van€down€the€hill.€€The€van,€however,€continued€to€slide,Ð \&¬!& Ðbut€Ms.€Robinson€was€able€to€stop€the€van€half„way€down€the€hill.€Ð E'•"' ÐÌà  àWhile€Ms.€Robinson€was€stopped€half„way€up€the€incline,€the€defendant,€Larry€PentecostÐ )g$) Ð(ð ðMr.€Pentecostðð),€also€traveling€south€on€Rock€Hill€Road,€approached€Ms.€Robinsonððs€vehicleÐ *P%* Ðfrom€behind.€€As€Mr.€Pentecost€approached€the€scene,€he€stopped€his€telephone€truck,€set€outÐ é*9&+ Ðwarning€cones,€and€walked€up€the€hill€to€assist€Ms.€Robinson.€€Mr.€Pentecost€attempted€to€backÐ Ò+"', Ðthe€van€down€the€hill,€but€the€van€continued€to€slide.€€The€left€rear€of€the€van€began€to€slideÐ », (- Ðsideways€towards€the€centerline€of€the€road.€€Mr.€Pentecost€stopped€the€van€with€the€back€leftÐ ¤-ô(.ý Ðquarter€panel€coming€to€rest€approximately€one€and€one„half€feet€to€two€feet€into€the€northboundÐ ° Ðlane.€€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àShortly€afterwards,€the€plaintiff,€Marsha€Ricketts€(ð ðMs.€Rickettsðð),€traveling€north€onÐ k» ÐRock€Hill€Road,€crested€the€hill€and€saw€the€defendantððs€van€stopped€partially€crossing€theÐ T¤ Ðcenterline.€€To€avoid€colliding€with€Ms.€Robinsonððs€van,€Ms.€Ricketts€drove€her€sports€utilityÐ =  Ðvehicle€into€the€ditch€on€the€east€side€of€the€road.€€Ms.€Rickettsðð€vehicle€came€to€rest€in€the€ditchÐ & v Ðat€a€point€roughly€even€with€Ms.€Robinsonððs€van.€€Ms.€Ricketts€was€able€to€drive€her€vehicle€outÐ  _ Ðof€the€ditch.€€Mr.€Pentecost,€with€the€help€of€a€neighbor€near€the€scene,€physically€turned€Ms.Ð ø H ÐRobinsonððs€van€around,€directing€it€north,€and€Ms.€Robinson€drove€away.€€Ð á 1  ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòProcedural€HistoryÐ ³  Ðóóó óÓ  ÓÌà  àOn€December€14,€2001,€Ms.€Ricketts€filed€a€complaint€against€Ms.€Robinson€and€Mr.Ð „Ô  ÐPentecost€(collectively€ð ðDefendantsðð)€seeking€damages€for€injuries€resulting€from€the€accident.€Ð m½  ÐIn€her€complaint,€Ms.€Ricketts€alleged€that€Defendants€negligently€maintained€control€of€Ms.Ð V¦  ÐRobinsonððs€vehicle€and,€as€a€result€of€their€negligence,€proximately€caused€Ms.€RickettsððÐ ? Ðinjuries.€Ms.€Ricketts€based€her€claim€on€theories€of€common€law€negligence€and€statutoryÐ (x Ðnegligence€òòper€seóó.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рa Ðà  àThe€case€was€tried€before€a€jury.€€Prior€to€trial,€the€court€submitted€proposed€juryÐ ° Ðinstructions€to€the€parties.€€Ms.€Ricketts€filed€a€motion€seeking€to€modify€certain€instructions,Ð ™é Ðincluding€an€objection€to€an€ð ðunavoidable€accidentðð€charge€and€a€request€for€an€instruction€that€aÐ ‚Ò Ðmotorist€has€a€right€to€assume€that€a€roadway€will€be€clear.€€At€the€close€of€the€proof,€Ms.Ð k» ÐRicketts€moved€for€directed€verdict€on€the€issue€of€liability,€which€the€trial€court€denied.€€AfterÐ T¤ Ðhearing€all€the€evidence€and€being€instructed€by€the€judge€on€the€applicable€law,€the€juryÐ =  Ðreturned€a€verdict€attributing€zero€percent€(0%)€fault€to€all€the€parties.€€Ð & v ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòIssuesÐ ø H Ðó óóóÓ  ÓÌà  àMs.€Ricketts€appealed€and€has€presented€for€our€review€the€following€issues:Ð É   ÐÌà8  à(1)€à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€court€erred€in€not€granting€a€directed€verdict€on€the€issue€ofÐ ›ë  Ðliability€at€the€conclusion€of€the€evidence.Ð„Ô ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(2)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€instructing€the€jury,€as€requested€byÐ V¦  ÐDefendants,€on€the€issue€of€unavoidable€accident.Ð?` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(3)à0` Ð Ð àWhether€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€instruct€the€jury,€as€requested€byÐ a Ðthe€Plaintiff,€that€a€motorist€has€the€right€to€assume€that€her€passage€willÐ úJ Ðnot€be€blocked€with€the€illegal€placement€of€another€vehicle,€and€theÐ ã3 Ðmotorist€is€not€required€to€maintain€such€control€of€her€vehicle€as€to€stopÐ Ì Ðbefore€striking€an€obstruction€which€she€has€the€right€to€assume€will€notÐ µ Ðbe€there.Оî` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòLaw€and€AnalysisÐ pÀ ÐÌó óóó(1)€€òòTrial€Courtððs€Failure€to€Grant€Directed€VerdictóóÐ @ ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àWhen€deciding€a€motion€for€directed€verdict,€the€standard€the€trial€court€and€appellateÐ b Ðcourt€must€use€is€well€settled.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€stated€the€standard€as€follows:Ð ûK ÐÌà8  àIn€ruling€on€the€motion,€the€court€must€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€theÐ Í!  Ðevidence€in€favor€of€the€non„moving€party.€€In€other€words,€the€court€mustÐ ¶"! Ðremove€any€conflict€in€the€evidence€by€construing€it€in€the€light€most€favorable€toÐ Ÿ#ï" Ðthe€non„movant€and€discarding€all€countervailing€evidence.€€The€court€may€grantÐ ˆ$Ø# Ðthe€motion€only€if,€after€assessing€the€evidence€according€to€the€foregoingÐ ° Ðstandards,€it€determines€that€reasonable€minds€could€not€differ€as€to€theÐ ™é Ðconclusions€to€be€drawn€from€the€evidence.€€If€there€is€any€doubt€as€to€the€properÐ ‚Ò Ðconclusions€to€be€drawn€from€the€evidence,€the€motion€must€be€denied.Ðk»Ð Ð  ÐÌòòEaton€v.€McClainóó,€891€S.W.2d€587,€590€(Tenn.€1994)(citations€omitted).Ð =  ÐÌà  àFrom€the€record€in€this€case,€it€appears€that€the€evidence€was€clearly€susceptible€to€moreÐ  _ Ðthan€one€interpretation.€€At€trial,€the€jury€heard€controverted€evidence€regarding€the€orientationÐ ø H Ðand€position€of€the€van€in€the€roadway;€the€condition€of€the€roadway;€the€speed€of€Ms.€RickettsððÐ á 1  Ðvehicle;€the€distance€from€the€crest€of€the€hill€to€the€point€where€the€van€was€stopped;€and€theÐ Ê   Ðamount€of€roadway€clearance€between€the€van€and€the€ditch.€€Defendants€presented€testimonyÐ ³  Ðthat€Ms.€Ricketts€was€driving€at€a€speed€of€forty€to€forty„five€miles€per€hour€as€she€came€over€theÐ œì  Ðhill,€an€arguably€unreasonable€speed€based€upon€the€road€conditions.€€Defendants€testified€thatÐ …Õ  ÐMs.€Robinsonððs€van€was€only€extended€approximately€two€feet€across€the€centerline.€Ð n¾  ÐDefendants€further€testified€that€had€Ms.€Ricketts€been€driving€at€a€slower€speed,€she€could€haveÐ W§  Ðstopped€before€reaching€the€van€or€safely€driven€between€the€van€and€the€ditch.€€Viewing€theÐ @ Ðevidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€non„moving€party,€we€find€the€trial€court€did€not€err€inÐ )y Ðdenying€the€motion€for€a€directed€verdict.Ð b ÐÌÓ  Ó(2)€€òòUnavoidable€Accident€Jury€InstructionÐ ä4 ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àóóMs.€Ricketts€argues€on€appeal€that€she€was€prejudiced€by€the€trial€court€instructing€theÐ ´ Ðjury€on€the€unavoidable€accident€doctrine.€€As€part€of€its€entire€charge,€the€trial€court€instructedÐ í Ðthe€jury€as€follows:Ð †Ö ÐÌà8  àà ` àAn€unavoidable€or€inevitable€accident€is€such€an€occurrence€or€happeningÐ X¨ Ðthat€under€all€attending€circumstances€and€conditions€could€not€have€beenÐ A‘ Ðforeseen€or€anticipated€in€the€exercise€of€ordinary€care€as€the€proximate€cause€ofÐ *z Ðinjury€by€any€of€the€parties€concerned.€€In€other€words,€where€there€is€no€evidenceÐ c Ðthat€the€operator€of€the€motor€vehicle€was€negligent€in€any€way€or€that€he€couldÐ üL Ðhave€anticipated€the€result€of€an€accident,€the€accident€is€deemed€to€have€been€anÐ å 5 Ðunavoidable€or€inevitable€one.ÐÎ! Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€has€a€duty€to€instruct€the€jury€on€every€factual€issue€and€theory€of€the€caseÐ  #ð" Ðpresented€by€the€parties.€òò€Cole€v.€Woodsóó,€548€S.W.2d€640,€642€(Tenn.€1977);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòGrissom€v.Ð ‰$Ù# ÐMetro.€Govððt€of€Nashvilleóó,€817€S.W.2d€679,€685€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€òòóóWhether€a€juryÐ r% $ Ðinstruction€is€proper€is€a€mixed€question€of€law€and€fact,€ð ðdetermined€from€the€theories€of€theÐ [&«!% Ðparties,€the€evidence€in€the€record€and€the€law€applicable€thereto.ððòòóó€òò€Solomon€v.€First€Am.€NatððlÐ D'”"& ÐBank€of€Nashvilleóó,€774€S.W.2d€935,€940€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€We€have€stated€the€particularÐ -(}#' Ðstandard€we€use€to€examine€a€trial€courtððs€jury€charge€as€followsòòóó:Ð )f$( ÐÌà8  àWe€review€the€jury€charge€in€its€entirety€to€determine€whether€the€trial€judgeÐ è*8&* Ðcommitted€reversible€error.€€Jury€instructions€are€not€measured€against€theÐ Ñ+!'+ Ðstandard€of€perfection.€€€The€charge€will€not€be€invalidated€if€it€ð ðfairly€defines€theÐ ° Ðlegal€issues€involved€in€the€case€and€does€not€mislead€the€jury.ðð€€Furthermore,€aÐ ™é Ðparticular€instruction€must€be€considered€in€the€context€of€the€entire€charge.ЂÒÐ Ð  ÐÌòòCity€of€Johnson€City€v.€Outdoor€West,€Inc.óó,€947€S.W.2d€855,€858€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996)òòóóÐ T¤ Ð(citations€omitted).Ð =  ÐÌà  àTennessee€has€long€recognized€the€doctrine€of€unavoidable€accident.€òò€Nelson€v.Ð  _ ÐRichardsonóó,€626€S.W.2d€702€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981).€€An€unavoidable€accident€has€been€definedÐ ø H Ðas€an€event€that,€ð ðunder€all€attendant€circumstances€and€conditions,€could€not€have€been€foreseenÐ á 1  Ðor€anticipated€in€the€exercise€of€ordinary€care€as€the€proximate€cause€of€injury€by€any€of€theÐ Ê   Ðparties€concerned.ðð€€òòWhitaker€v.€Harmonóó,€879€S.W.2d€865,€870€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1994)(quotingÐ ³  Ð7A€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòAutomobiles€and€Highway€Traffic€óóðð€397,€at€607ð!ð08)).€€Since€the€adoption€ofÐ œì  Ðcomparative€fault€in€Tennessee,€however,€an€instruction€on€the€doctrine€of€unavoidable€accidentÐ …Õ  Ðhas€become,€in€large€part,€unnecessary.€€òòIdóó.€at€869.€€In€òòWhitakeróó,€this€Court€stated,€anÐ n¾  Ðð ðððunavoidable€accidentðð€in€its€simplest€terms€is€nothing€more€than€a€lack€of€negligence€on€theÐ W§  Ðpart€of€any€party.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Further,€the€òòWhitakeróó€court€stated,€an€ð ðadequate€instruction€onÐ @ Ðnegligence€alone€is€sufficient€and€an€ððunavoidable€accidentðð€charge€is€unnecessary€except€in,Ð )y Ðperhaps,€the€most€unusual€circumstance.ðð€€òòIdóó.Ð b ÐÌà  àAt€the€close€of€the€evidence,€the€trial€court€addressed€Ms.€Rickettsðð€objection€to€theÐ ä4 Ðproposed€unavoidable€accident€instruction.€€In€that€colloquy,€the€trial€judge€explained€that€heÐ Í Ðwas€going€to€charge€unavoidable€accident€because€ð ðit€look[ed]€like€to€[him]€from€hearing€theÐ ¶ Ðevidence€that€she€got€in€trouble€when€she€got€halfway€up€the€hill€and€couldnððt€go€up€or€down.ðð€€€Ð Ÿï ÐIn€addition€to€charging€unavoidable€accident,€the€trial€court€gave€the€jury€a€complete€instructionÐ ˆØ Ðon€the€legal€principles€of€negligence€and€comparative€fault.€€The€trial€court,€utilizing€theÐ qÁ ÐTennessee€Pattern€Jury€Instructions,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€instructed€the€jury€that€whether€certain€instructions€appliedÐ Zª Ðdepended€on€the€factual€conclusions€reached€by€the€jury.€€After€deliberating,€the€jury€returned€aÐ C“ Ðverdict€of€zero€percent€(0%)€fault€as€to€all€parties.€€Ð ,| ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€Ms.€Ricketts€argues€that€she€was€prejudiced€by€the€inclusion€of€theÐ þN Ðunavoidable€accident€instruction.€€She€argues€that€the€instruction€did€not€apply€to€the€facts€of€thisÐ ç 7 Ðcase€because€Ms.€Robinson€could€have€foreseen€or€anticipated€the€difficulties€she€experiencedÐ Ð!   Ðwhen€she€consciously€attempted€to€drive€up€the€hill€while€the€road€conditions€were€questionable.€Ð ¹" ! ÐMs.€Ricketts€further€argues€that€the€juryððs€verdict€of€zero€percent€(0%)€fault,€in€effect,€shows€thatÐ ¢#ò" Ðthe€jury€believed€the€accident€was€unavoidable€and€no€party€was€at€fault.€€The€juryððs€verdict€ofÐ ° Ðzero€percent€(0%)€fault€indicates€either€they€found€this€accident€to€be€unavoidable,€or,€just€asÐ ™é Ðeasily,€that€they€found€neither€party€carried€their€burden€of€proving€negligence€on€the€part€of€theÐ ‚Ò Ðother€party.€€This€Court,€however,€can€only€speculate€as€to€the€jury€membersðð€thought€processes.Ð k» ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€instructions€thoroughly€and€fairly€defined€the€legal€principles€respectingÐ =  Ðcomparative€fault.€€In€light€of€the€evidence€in€this€case€and€in€context€of€the€entire€charge,€weÐ & v Ðfind€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€instructing€the€jury€on€€the€unavoidable€accident€doctrine.Ð  _ ÐÌÓ  Ó(3)€€òòFailure€to€Instruct€Jury€that€Motorist€Ð á 1  Ðhas€Right€to€Assume€that€Passage€will€not€be€BlockedóóÓÓÐ Ê   ÐÓ  ÓÓÓà  àMs.€Ricketts€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€charge€the€jury€that€a€motoristÐ ˜è  Ðhas€a€right€to€assume€that€her€passage€will€not€be€blocked,€and€that€a€motorist€is€not€required€toÐ Ñ  Ðmaintain€such€control€of€her€vehicle€as€to€stop€before€striking€an€obstruction€which€she€has€aÐ jº  Ðright€to€assume€will€not€be€there.€€In€forming€her€proposed€instruction,€Ms.€Ricketts€relied€onÐ S£  Ðlanguage€excerpted€from€the€cases€of€òòBarr€v.€Charlieóó,€387€S.W.2d€614,€617€(Tenn.€1965)€andÐ <Œ ÐòòFontaine€v.€Mason€Dixon€Freight€Linesóó,€357€S.W.2d€631,€634€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1962)òòóó.€€It€isÐ %u Ðimportant€to€note€that€both€of€these€cases€were€contributory€negligence€cases€decided€beforeÐ ^ ÐTennesseeððs€adoption€of€comparative€fault.€€In€addressing€Ms.€Rickettsðð€proposed€specialÐ ÷G Ðinstruction,€the€trial€judge€stated€that€he€did€not€think€the€charge€was€proper.€€The€trial€courtÐ à0 Ðreasoned€that€the€jury€instructions€included€the€many€rules€of€the€road€regarding€a€motoristððsÐ É Ðright„of„way,€which€formed€a€basis€for€the€plaintiffððs€complaint.€€Ð ² ÐÌà  àIn€general,€a€trial€court€should€give€a€requested€jury€instruction€if€it€is€supported€by€theÐ „Ô Ðevidence,€embodies€the€partyððs€theory,€and€is€an€accurate€statement€of€the€law.€€òòTallent€v.€Foxóó,Ð m½ Ð141€S.W.2d€485,€497€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1940).€€Where€the€trial€court€fully€and€fairly€charges€theÐ V¦ Ðjury€on€the€applicable€law,€the€denial€of€a€special€request€for€an€additional€jury€instruction€willÐ ? Ðnot€be€reversed€on€appeal.€òò€Otis€v.€Cambridge€Mut.€Fire€Ins.€Co.óó,€850€S.W.2d€439,€445€(Tenn.Ð (x Ð1992).€€Without€determining€whether€the€proposed€instruction€in€this€case€was€a€correctÐ a Ðstatement€of€the€law,€we€find€the€trial€courtððs€charge,€read€as€a€whole,€fully€addressed€theÐ úJ Ðapplicable€law€controlling€this€issue€raised€by€Ms.€Ricketts.Ð ã 3 ÐÌÌÌÓ  Óò òòòConclusionÐ ‡$×# ÐÓ  Óóóó óÌà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€Ð X&¨!% ÐÌÌÌÌÌÐ Î+'+ Ðtaxed€against€the€appellant,€Ms.€Marsha€Ricketts,€and€her€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issueÐ ° Ðif€necessary.Ô#†XÊwXXXv¢/ #ÔÐ ™é Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ‚Ò Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGE