WPC Q <.7IR;S=I|Bߡ㜥$lG S]L0. 6wDgDLɘ᫿͌L۽eyUô/ @%*Beu,/nZ<@6RGc؉%Vx[)&uL!pLwuB& @O0B(p-o(!y4Xh7`&S w}bDS ͆!bd=`I+CgH@JW*(ŨNj7[+]ܵ!B?/p^'RX?Q@*OFS?`͸a*gܰJ&Ezm. e,0նt> B#Ӽ< oܓGB3/^ d^c:5Kl C+}{XOuďI` j{db#\ %% UN+ 0y UN ^ O w[ z_  4   m   s9NEb 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K AS. 0G 0D A/\\IB01S01\CLERK1NAS,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular|.  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.wptk.:i+003|xULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 WITHERSPOONLoughry COALillardBowhanNanniePearlieCarnellPritchardSneed- -(|G2&$ !.8_dXXd8         0    d(|3p$ !.8_dXXd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3p$ !.8_dXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Cdd8     _  C8XXdd8  @ X<CINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#CX< #Ԉ &   November6,2002Session L XXC #CXX#NANNIESNEEDv.THEESTATEOFMARIEBRIGHTWITHERSPOON, J DECEASED,JAMESMORTON,SENIOR,etal.XXC   ^ @@ DirectAppealfromtheProbateCourtforRutherfordCounty  ^ @@NoTrialCourtNumber,HonorableDavidLoughry,Judge  J @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200200237_COA_ԄR3CVFiledApril28,_2003_   AV) ` dE<` A      XXXXThisappealinvolvesaclaimfiledagainstanestateforpersonalservicesrenderedtoadecedent.The  lowercourtgrantedtheestatesmotiontodismiss,findingthattheclaimwastimebarred,the x claimanthadreceivedcompensationforherservices,andtherewasnoevidenceof fraud,tort, d deceit,orconcealment.Thepartiesraisemultipleissuesonappeal.Forthefollowingreasons,we P affirm.#XXXX##CXX#XXC <  Tenn.R.App.P.3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheProbateCourtAffirmed  d   #CXo#XX.CAlanE._Highers_,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidR.Farmer,J.,andHolly < KirbyLillard,J.,joined. ( BrianO.Bowhan,Nashville,TN,forAppellant  JoshA.McCreary,Murfreesboro,TN,forAppellee  ! OPINION #CXXP#XXC `!  #CXX #XXC  XXXX@FactsandProceduralHistory  8#"   NannieSneed( Ms.Sneed)andMarieBrightWitherspoon( Ms.Witherspoonor %` $  Decedent)werelongtimefriendsandneighbors,theirrelationshipspanningsomethirtyyears. %L!% BeginninginOctober1994,Ms.SneedagreedtohelpcareforMs.Witherspoonfor$250.00per &8"& month.Ms.SneedwasalsoallowedtoliveinonesideofanearbyduplexownedbyDecedentfor '$#' $250.00permonthinrent.Atsomelaterpoint,thecompensationof$250.00permonthwasreduced ($( to$200.00permonthandMs.Sneedwaspermittedtoliveinbothsidesoftheduplexwithno )$) increaseinrent. *%*   From1994untilDecedentsdeathonDecember9,2000,Ms.SneedassistedtheDecedent p,', withvarioushouseholdtasks.TheapparentagreementbetweenthepartieswasthatMs.Sneed \-(- _wouldreceive$250permonth,subsequentlyreducedto$200permonth,andoccupytheduplexat  areducedrateinexchangeforassistingDecedent.Asfurthercompensation,Ms.Sneedwasunder  theimpressionthatshewastoreceivetheduplexshewasstayinginuponDecedentsdeath.Ms.  Sneedtestified,however,thattherewasneverawrittencontracttoconveythehouse.Insupportof t herassertionthatshewastoreceivethehouse,Ms.SneedofferedthetestimonyofMs.Pearlie ` MartinwhotestifiedthattheDecedenttoldherthatMs.Sneedwastoreceivethehouse.Ms.Sneed L  alsoofferedthetestimonyofMs.CarnellBingham,whotestifiedthatMs.Witherspoontoldherthat 8  Ms.Sneed wasgoingtogetthathousewhenshesgone,andNannie[sic]donthaveanythingto $ t worryabout.  `    `    InaccordancewithTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection302306(a),noticetocreditorswas  8  publishedinTheDailyNewsJournalbeginningonDecember28,2000.Ms.Sneedalsotestifiedthat $  shewasawarethatMs.Witherspoonhaddied,thatGraceWitherspoonhadbecameexecutrixofthe   estateandthattheestatewasopeninRutherfordCounty.     AfterDecedentsdeath,Ms.Sneednoticeda forsalesigninfrontoftheduplex.   Concernedthattheduplexwouldnotgotoher,Ms.SneedcalledMs.GraceWitherspoon,an p executrixoftheestate.ThesignwastemporarilyremovedafterMs.Sneedscall,buttheduplexwas \ eventuallysold.  H   Ms.SneedfiledherfirstclaimagainsttheEstatefor$189,106.00plusinterestonAugust17,  p 2001.Becausetheduplexhadalreadybeensold,Ms.Sneedaskedformoneydamagestorepresent  \ the reasonablevalueofservicesrendered.ThisclaimwasdismissedonOctober22,2001by H OrderoftheProbateCourt.ThedismissalwasbasedonthecourtsfindingthatMs.Sneedhadnot 4 filedherclaimwithinthetimeperiodprescribedbyTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsections302306   and302307.Thisclaimisnotnowbeforethiscourtasnoappealwastaken. x      Ms.SneedfiledhersecondclaimbaseduponthesamesetoffactsonNovember14,2001.  Ms.Sneedallegedtortandfraudandfurtherallegedthattherewasacontracttodeedahouseat  death.Ms.Sneedagainbelievedshewasentitledtoanamountofmoneyfor reasonablevalueof l services. `     X    AhearingwasheldonthesecondclaimonDecember19,2001.AtthecloseofMs.Sneeds 0"  proof,thelowercourtgrantedtheEstatesMotiontoDismiss,dismissingtheclaimwithprejudice. #l! ThecourtfoundthatMs.SneeddidnottimelyfileherclaimpursuanttoTennesseeCodeAnnotated $X" sections302306and302307.Thecourtfurtherfoundthe$250.00permonth,whichwas $D # subsequentlyreducedto$200.00permonth,andtheabilitytooccupytheduplexatareducedrent %0!$ werebothcompensationfortheservicesrenderedbyMs.Sneed.Thecourtalsoheldthattherewas &"% noevidenceofdeceit,concealment,fraudortort,thattherewasnowrittendocumentevidencinga '#& contracttoconveyrealproperty,andthattherewasnoevidenceofanyagreementwherebyMs. (#' SneedwastoreceiveanythingatDecedentsdeath.Ms.Sneednowappealsthedecisionofthelower )$( courtandraisesthefollowingissues.  |*%)   h+&*    Issues   H  I.0 ` WhetherMs.Sneedreceivedsufficientnoticeoftheadministrationoftheestate  underTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsections302306and302307suchthatherclaim t shouldhavebeentimebarred.`` (#` (#   II.0 ` WhetherthepromisemadebyDecedenttoconveytheduplextoMs.Sneedwas 8  enforceable.$ t` (#` (#   III.0 ` WhetherMs.Sneedisentitledtomoneydamagesduetothefactthattheduplexhad  L  beensold. 8 ` (#` (#   IV.0 ` Ifentitledtomoneydamages,whatshouldthemeasureofsuchdamagesbe. ` (#` (#   StandardofReview    }"  Wereviewthetrialcourtsconclusionsoflaw underapuredenovostandardofreview, \ accordingnodeferencetotheconclusionsoflawmadebythelowercourts.Kendrickv.Shoemake, H No.E200001318SCR11CV,2002Tenn.LEXIS489,at*6(Tenn.Nov.1,2002)(citingS. 4 Constructors,Inc.v.LoudonCountyBd.ofEduc.,58S.W.3d706,710(Tenn.2001)).Withrespect  p tothetrialcourtsfindingsoffact,ourreviewisdenovouponthetrialcourtsrecord,accompanied  \ byapresumptionofcorrectnessunlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Tenn.R. H App.P.13(d). 4    LawandAnalysis    %    Inherfirstargument,Ms.Sneedassertsthatneitherofherclaimsshouldhavebeentime  barredbecauseshedidnotreceivesufficientnoticeunderTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection302  306.Specifically,Ms.SneedassertsthatshewasaknowncreditorwithinthemeaningofTennessee l CodeAnnotatedsection302306(e).Ms.Sneedfurtherassertsthatasaknowncreditorshewas X  entitledtoactualnoticeoftheadministrationoftheestateandbecauseshedidnotreceivesuch D! notice,sheisautomaticallyentitledtofileherclaimwithinoneyearfromthedateofDecedents 0"  death.Thus,Ms.Sneedclaimsthatneitherherfirstclaim,filedonAugust17,2001,norhersecond #l! claim,filedonNovember14,2001,shouldbetimebarred. $X"   WewillnotaddressanyargumentsregardingMs.Sneedsfirstclaimasnoappealwasfiled %0!$ anditisthusnotbeforethisCourt.AstoMs.Sneedsargumentthathersecondclaimshouldnot &"% betimebarredbecauseofherstatusasanknowncreditor,Ms.Sneedraisesthisissueforthefirst '#& timeonappeal.The burdenofproofonanyissueastowhetheracreditorwasknowntoor (#' reasonablyascertainablebythepersonalrepresentative...shallbeuponthecreditorclaiming )$( entitlementtosuchactualnotice.Tenn.CodeAnn.302307(a)(2);seealso211Pritchardon |*%) theLawofWillsandAdministrationofEstates786.Inthecasesubjudice,Ms.Sneedfiled h+&* herclaimoutsidethefourmonthperiodprescribedinTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection302  306)anddidnotallegeatanypointduringtrialthatshewasaknowncreditorentitledtoactual  notice. Sincethisissuewasnotraisedinthetrialcourtitcannotberaisedforthefirsttimeon  appeal.Cobblev.Cobble,790S.W.2d279,283(Tenn.Ct.App.1989)(citingMoranv.Cityof t Knoxville,600S.W.2d725(Tenn.Ct.App.1979)andcasescitedtherein). `   Becausetheclaimwasnottimelyfiled,thetrialcourtshouldnothaveentertainedtheclaim. 8  Withnoexplanationintherecord,wecanonlysurmisewhythetrialcourtconductedahearingon $ t thematter.Inherclaim,fieldNovember17,2001,Ms.Sneedallegedthatshewasentitledto  ` $189,106.00baseduponacontracttodeedhouseatdeathandalsoallegedfraudandtort.We  L  presumethatthetrialcourtproceededwiththismatterduetothebroadallegationoffraud.Atthe  8  conclusionoftheproof,thetrialcourtfoundthattherewas noevidencepresentedoffraud,tort, $  deceit,orconcealmentasallegedintheNovember14,2001claim.Wefindthattheevidencedoes   notpreponderateagainstthisfinding.Becausetheclaimwasnottimelyfiledandtherewasno   evidenceoffraud,thetrialcourtcorrectlydismissedMs.Sneedsclaim.     Despitehearingthelatefiledclaim,thetrialcourtsfindingthatthecaseshouldbedismissed p isthecorrectresult. SufficeittosaythatthisCourtwillaffirmadecreecorrectinresult,but \ renderedupondifferent,incomplete,orerroneousgrounds.ContinentalCasualtyCo.v.Smith,720 H S.W.2d48,50(Tenn.1986)(citingHopkinsv.Hopkins,572S.W.2d639,641(Tenn.1978)). 4 Havingfoundthatthetrialcourtcorrectlyheldthattheclaimwasnottimelyfiledandthattherewas  p noevidenceoffraud,wefindit unnecessarytodiscusstheothergroundsuponwhichthetrialcourt  \ baseditsruling.Seeid. H   Conclusion    6  Accordingly,weaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissaloftheaction.Wefindthatthedisposition  ofthefirstissuerendersunnecessaryanydiscussionofMs.Sneedsthreeremainingissues.In  addition,Ms.Sneedaskedthatshebepermittedtopursueherclaimsoffraudanddeceitandaclaim  forpunitivedamages.Thisrequestisrespectfullydenied.CostsonappealtaxedtotheAppellant, l NannieSneed,andhersurety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. x   X     `      ` ̀#XXXX ##CXXj #XXC &"%    `     h     ___________________________________ |*%)    `     h     ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE