ÿWPCF ^~–CÕeÙ"•ÄËÃ0*…}jw˜?–à¨nÙ3•h„f’šFåJ‘çÑ lÊEà˜¢ÅÕo\Lñ—âÿ¨ª¹ið2é K†à¦‰ýõøÂM5kéÞŠKöÑ“*gê§€+r˜lÏweDOh§:½.%h( ¢hÊÖÈB_ç>€ñŸ^XT˜ÿÒIÝɽNä×;Uf¼àþÕ6¨Ô¡®=+øÌňìÙÅMz¢û%žãyÁoI2rD 2OR›°]P©'¦Æ´Ö=ìÆO­†â0ÝóŽîY|d-JÛ½ã÷¿–2°ùÈ9êóéÍžÙrúoÚ »rC½èböMtZ‡¿ýmç¯Ç{(ý ÑÁpwö¶û W6¡æ±Á‘϶azU32Ò T"IÛP°­ ÒS’›q$Ô?¸°YéF”à•ny´îò|×–:ó`4C€v]íRà;V˜¿êƒì¯Ôƃ¼¼?kÿjàAŸyÓdí$)õ‘èUi¼z£‡74Ô¼×ilÃýoF'í;¶?kƒi«LóºÅL¯;%Åf %”^ š 0ˆ¦UN.w |4†š z©Ò# õ m÷ #É Â× Æ™Æ_Æ%ÆëëN±±é³Eœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœœbžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžžž 0릦 0D‘‘ BÕÕ 0¤ò D5– D-Ë 0Køø ASCÆ– 0¤\ 0D A«DDDDWï»ð}l/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular=ƒ.b014c13|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK4ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0  RENAJerriInmanKinnardMadisonvilleAllimanPerrian C.FLoudonMullikinNat'l MgmtWeatherlyf]raudTellicoHensleyC.F.W.KlostermanA]ppellateBlueCrossBlueShieldPaschallLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ßÝ ƒR<ç$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô»%ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSince€this€was€a€non„jury€trial,€Defendants€should€have€moved€for€an€involuntary€dismissal€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.Ð ° ÐP.€41.02,€as€opposed€to€moving€for€a€directed€verdict€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€50.€€For€purposes€of€this€appeal,€we€willÐ tÄ Ðtreat€Defendantsðð€motion€as€a€motion€for€involuntary€dismissal€under€Rule€41.02.- ù-(|G2á$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Wå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôøò»»Ô(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó d(|3Œ$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Wå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Œ$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Wå»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK MÝ ƒRá$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôøò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€Oral€argument€was€heard€in€this€case€on€October€14,€2003,€in€Morristown€as€part€of€the€Courtððs€C.A.S.E.Ð ° Ð(ò òCó óourt€of€Appeals€ò òAó óffecting€ò òSó ótudent€ò òEó óducation)€project.Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Wå»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Wå»»»ÔÑ8€AXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î[WåÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼Wå»îî[ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€14,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XAX»¼WåÔÌò òÔ#†¼Wå»XXAõ#ÔRENA€THOMPSON€v.€CHARLES€HENSLEY,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XAX»¼WåÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òÔ#†¼Wå»XXAi#ÔÔ€XAX»¼WåÔAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Monroe€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€13632€€€€€€Jerri€S.€Bryant,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌññFILED€NOVEMBER€12,€2003ññÐ ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2003„00456„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` Aßó óÐ }Í  ÐÓ  ÓÌÌRena€Thompson€(ð ðPlaintiffðð)€filed€this€lawsuit€claiming€her€grandson,€Charles€Hensley,€and€his€wife,Ð d´ ÐKaren€Hensley€(collectively€ð ðDefendantsðð),€breached€an€oral€contract.€€Specifically,€Plaintiff€claimsÐ P  Ðshe€conveyed€her€house€and€real€property€to€Defendants€in€exchange€for€their€oral€promise€to€takeÐ <Œ Ðcare€of€her€and€allow€her€to€remain€living€in€the€house€with€them.€€Plaintiff€suffered€a€stroke€andÐ (x Ðwent€to€live€with€her€son,€Perrian€Hensley€(ð ðPlaintiffððs€sonðð€or€ð ðher€sonðð).€€After€living€with€her€sonÐ d Ðfor€approximately€one€year,€Plaintiff€wanted€to€return€to€her€house.€€When€she€was€not€allowed€toÐ P Ðreturn€to€her€house,€Plaintiff€sued€Defendants€for€specific€performance.€€The€Trial€Court€found€thereÐ ì< Ðwas€no€contract.€€Plaintiff€appeals.€€We€affirm.׃e×Ý ƒT#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð Ø( ÐÌÌò òà@µ µ ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theˆÐ œì Ðà@Œ Œ ìàChancery€Court€Affirmed;€Case€Remanded.ó óˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌòòÌD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€J.,€óódelivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.,óóÐ L œ Ðand€òòWilliam€H.€Inman,€Sr.€J.,€óójoined.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌÌJ.€Lewis€Kinnard,€Madisonville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant€Rena€Thompson.Ð ü#L# ÐÌÌPeter€Alliman,€Madisonville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellees€Charles€Hensley€and€Karen€Hensley.Ð À&"& ÐÌÐ  ˜(è#(ý ÐÔ_Ôà@66'ìàò òOPINIONˆÐ ° ÐÌà@ÛÛ%ìàòòBackgroundó óóóˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àThis€lawsuit€involves€a€claim€for€specific€performance€of€an€alleged€oral€contract.€Ð `° ÐPlaintiffððs€complaint€claims€she€deeded€her€house€and€surrounding€property€to€Defendants€inÐ L œ Ðexchange€for€their€agreement€to€take€care€of€her€and€to€allow€her€to€continue€residing€in€the€houseÐ 8 ˆ Ðwith€them.€€In€their€answer,€Defendants€denied€making€any€such€contractual€agreement€withÐ $ t ÐPlaintiff.€€When€Plaintiff€was€not€allowed€to€return€to€her€house€after€suffering€a€stroke,€she€sued€forÐ  ` Ðspecific€performance€of€the€alleged€oral€contract.€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffððs€son€was€the€first€witness€at€trial€and€testified€that€he€currently€resides€inÐ Ô$  ÐTellico€Plains€on€property€which€also€was€deeded€to€him€by€Plaintiff.€€Plaintiffððs€son€testified€thatÐ À  ÐPlaintiff€and€her€husband,€Plaintiffððs€sonððs€stepfather,€moved€to€Tennessee€in€1978€and€built€a€threeÐ ¬ü  Ðbedroom€house€on€the€property€currently€at€issue.€€Plaintiff€continued€to€live€in€this€house€after€herÐ ˜è  Ðhusband€passed€away€in€1981.€€Plaintiff€originally€owned€approximately€fifty€acres€of€land.€€PlaintiffÐ „Ô  Ðhad€discussions€with€her€son€about€his€moving€to€East€Tennessee€so€he€could€assist€her€with€keepingÐ pÀ Ðup€the€land,€which€he€eventually€did.€€In€1997,€Plaintiff€deeded€a€tract€of€land€to€her€son€and€aÐ \¬ Ðdifferent€tract€to€Defendants,€who€by€that€time€also€had€moved€to€Tennessee.€€Plaintiff€retainedÐ H˜ Ðpossession€of€her€house€and€the€surrounding€real€property.€€Plaintiffððs€son€retired€and€moved€ontoÐ 4„ Ðthe€land€which€Plaintiff€had€deeded€to€him,€and€he€eventually€built€a€house€there.€€According€toÐ  p ÐPlaintiffððs€son,€when€Defendants€first€moved€to€Tennessee€from€Ohio,€they€lived€with€Plaintiff€forÐ  \ Ðtwo€months.€€Defendants€then€moved€into€a€mobile€home€located€on€Plaintiffððs€land.€Ð øH ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffððs€son€testified€Plaintiff€has€had€four€strokes€and€lived€with€him€for€a€periodÐ Ð  Ðof€time€after€each€of€the€strokes.€€After€her€third€stroke,€Plaintiff€lived€with€her€son€for€a€period€ofÐ ¼  Ðtime€while€rehabilitating€and€then€began€to€express€a€desire€to€return€to€her€house.€€PlaintiffÐ ¨ø Ðeventually€returned€to€her€house.€€After€her€fourth€stroke,€Plaintiff€once€again€lived€with€her€son€afterÐ ”ä Ðbeing€released€from€the€hospital.€€Plaintiff€lived€with€her€son€for€approximately€one€year€and€thenÐ €Ð Ðbegan€to€ask€about€returning€to€her€house.€€Plaintiffððs€son€told€her€that€he€did€not€think€it€was€wiseÐ l¼ Ðfor€her€to€return€to€her€house€due€to€her€medical€condition.€€By€that€time,€Plaintiff€had€executed€aÐ X ¨ Ðthird€deed€which€conveyed€the€remaining€land€and€her€house€to€Defendants.€€Plaintiffððs€son€knewÐ D!” Ðthat€Plaintiff€had€deeded€her€remaining€property€to€Defendants.€€Plaintiff€told€her€son€that€she€wasÐ 0"€  Ðgoing€to€sign€the€house€over€to€Defendants€and€they€were€going€to€move€in€with€her.€€However,Ð #l! ÐPlaintiff€never€mentioned€any€details€surrounding€why€she€deeded€her€house€and€remaining€propertyÐ $X" Ðto€Defendants.€€Plaintiffððs€son€was€not€aware€of€any€agreement€between€Plaintiff€and€DefendantsÐ ô$D # Ðregarding€Plaintiffððs€being€able€to€live€in€the€house€or€her€long€term€care.€€Plaintiff€never€mentionedÐ à%0!$ Ðany€alleged€agreement€to€her€son€until€after€he€determined€that€Plaintiff€could€not€return€to€her€house.€Ð Ì&"% ÐPlaintiff€had€been€living€with€her€son€for€approximately€one€year€when€he€made€this€determination.€Ð ¸'#& ÐPlaintiffððs€son€testified€that€both€Plaintiff€and€his€mother„in„law€reside€with€him€and€his€wife.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐAlthough€Plaintiffððs€son€does€not€charge€Plaintiff€or€his€mother„in„law€any€rent,€they€each€ð ðdonateððÐ )à$( Ð$250.00€per€month.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àThe€next€witness€at€trial€was€Plaintiff.€€Plaintiff€testified€she€was€eighty„three€yearsÐ ° Ðold€and€has€one€son€and€one€grandson.€€Plaintiff€testified€Defendant€Karen€Hensley€had€expressedÐ œì Ða€concern€about€living€in€the€trailer€and€that€she€was€scared€when€it€stormed.€€According€to€Plaintiff,Ð ˆØ ÐKaren€Hensley€inquired€about€whether€her€family€could€move€in€with€Plaintiff.€€Plaintiff€agreed€thatÐ tÄ Ðthey€could.€€After€Defendants€moved€into€Plaintiffððs€house,€Plaintiff€told€Defendants€they€could€haveÐ `° Ðher€house€and€land€ð ðafter€Iððm€gone.ðð€€Plaintiff€testified€she€has€had€two€strokes.€€The€most€recentÐ L œ Ðtime€she€was€hospitalized€was€due€to€complications€from€medicine,€not€another€stroke.€€WhenÐ 8 ˆ ÐPlaintiffððs€son€was€taking€Plaintiff€home€from€the€hospital,€he€suggested€Plaintiff€stay€with€him€forÐ $ t Ða€few€days,€which€she€agreed€to€do.€€According€to€Plaintiff,€ð ðIððve€been€there€ever€since.ðð€€PlaintiffÐ  ` Ðtestified€she€and€her€husband€built€the€house€in€1978,€and€her€husband€passed€away€in€1981.€€WhenÐ ü L  ÐDefendants€came€to€live€with€Plaintiff,€they€did€not€pay€her€any€money,€ð ðnot€one€dime.ðð€€PlaintiffÐ è 8  Ðalso€testified€that€when€Defendants€moved€in,€they€agreed€to€ð ðtake€care€of€me€as€long€as€I€lived.ðð€Ð Ô$  ÐPlaintiff€testified€Karen€Hensley€told€her€ð ðIððll€see€to€it€personally€that€youððre€took€care€of€as€long€asÐ À  ÐI€live.ðð€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€cross„examination,€Plaintiff€identified€the€deed€and€her€signature€where€sheÐ „Ô  Ðconveyed€property€to€her€son€in€1997.€€However,€when€shown€the€deed€where€she€conveyed€propertyÐ pÀ Ðto€Defendants€in€1997,€Plaintiff€claimed€the€signature€on€the€deed€looked€like€her€signature,€but€sheÐ \¬ Ðdid€not€think€it€actually€was€her€signature.€€Plaintiff€later€testified€she€was€not€sure€if€it€was€herÐ H˜ Ðsignature€on€this€deed.€€Plaintiff€admitted€that€during€her€deposition€she€testified€that€it€definitely€wasÐ 4„ Ðnot€her€signature.€€At€trial,€Plaintiff€stated€she€never€conveyed€any€property€to€Defendants,€evenÐ  p Ðthough€her€complaint€states€that€she€deeded€two€tracts€of€property,€one€of€which€included€her€houseÐ  \ Ðand€surrounding€property,€to€Defendants.€€Plaintiff€specifically€denied€at€trial€conveying€her€houseÐ øH Ðto€Defendants.€€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àà ` àPortions€of€Karen€Hensleyððs€deposition€were€entered€into€evidence€at€trial.€€In€herÐ ¼  Ðdeposition,€Karen€Hensley€testified€she€never€entered€into€any€agreement€with€Plaintiff.€€AccordingÐ ¨ø Ðto€Karen€Hensley,€Plaintiff€called€both€Defendants€on€numerous€occasions€asking€them€to€move€inÐ ”ä Ðwith€her€because€she€could€not€move€back€into€her€home€unless€someone€was€with€her€twenty„fourÐ €Ð Ðhours€a€day.€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àPortions€of€Charles€Hensleyððs€deposition€also€were€read€into€evidence.€€In€hisÐ D!” Ðdeposition,€Charles€Hensley€testified€that€he€and€his€wife€originally€agreed€to€move€into€PlaintiffððsÐ 0"€  Ðhouse€so€Plaintiff€could€return€home.€€Thereafter,€Plaintiff€once€again€was€hospitalized.€€WhenÐ #l! ÐPlaintiff€was€released€from€the€hospital€the€last€time,€her€doctor€as€well€as€Plaintiffððs€son€would€notÐ $X" Ðlet€her€return€to€the€house€because€she€needed€twenty„four€hour€care.€€According€to€Charles€Hensley,Ð ô$D # Ðhe€and€his€wife€are€unable€to€provide€Plaintiff€with€the€necessary€twenty„four€hour€care€because€theyÐ à%0!$ Ðare€both€employed€outside€of€the€home.€€However,€Plaintiffððs€son€can€provide€the€needed€careÐ Ì&"% Ðbecause€he€is€retired.€€Charles€Hensley€testified€it€was€never€his€understanding€that€he€or€his€wifeÐ ¸'#& Ðwere€supposed€to€provide€life€time€care€for€Plaintiff€in€return€for€Plaintiffððs€deeding€them€herÐ ¤(ô#' Ðproperty.€€Charles€Hensley€maintained€both€he€and€his€wife€never€have€been€in€a€position€to€provideÐ )à$( Ðthis€type€of€care€because€they€are€both€employed.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àAfter€the€above€testimony€was€concluded,€Defendants€moved€for€a€directed€verdict.€Ð ° ÐThe€Trial€Court€dismissed€Plaintiffððs€claim,€stating€as€follows:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àParole€evidence€is€inadmissable€to€vary€the€deed.€€TheÐ tÄ Ðplaintiff€in€this€case€is€attempting€to€show€that€she€gave€the€deed€inÐ `° Ðexchange€for€services€to€be€rendered.€€In€order€to€do€that€she€has€toÐ L œ Ðprove€a€meeting€of€the€minds.€Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àFraud,€undue€influence€or€anything€of€that€nature€isÐ  ` Ðspecifically€not€proved€in€this€case.ð8ð€€This€deed€is€not€against€publicÐ ü L  Ðpolicy.€€Itððs€to€give€the€land€to€an€only€grandchild€or€the€child€of€anÐ è 8  Ðonly€son€ð8ð.ÐÔ$ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àPlaintiff€claims€that€there€has€been€a€wrong€and€asked€thisÐ ¬ü  ÐCourt€to€fix€[the€wrong]€in€equity.€€However,€plaintiff€participated€inÐ ˜è  Ðthe€wrong€and€forfeited€her€right€to€any€relief€since€she€could€haveÐ „Ô  Ðprotected€herself€by€placing€any€specific€restrictions€on€this€deed€andÐ pÀ Ðdid€not€do€so.€€So€even€looking€at€those€reasons€along€with€the€proofÐ \¬ Ðin€this€case,€there€was€no€outside€agreement€to€take€care€of€her,€andÐ H˜ Ðthe€Court€is€directing€a€verdict.׃×Ý ƒT#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð4„` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àAfter€the€trial,€Plaintiff€filed€a€motion€to€alter€or€amend€the€judgment€or€for€a€newÐ  \ Ðtrial.€€After€summarizing€the€proof€that€had€been€presented€at€trial,€Plaintiff€claimed€the€ð ðfacts€andÐ øH Ðcircumstances€show€all€the€necessities€of€an€implied€contract,€and€ð8ð€[this]€rule€should€have€beenÐ ä4 Ðapplied€by€the€Court€ð8ð.ðð€€The€Trial€Court€denied€the€motion,€and€Plaintiff€appeals€claiming€the€TrialÐ Ð  ÐCourt€erred€when€it€concluded€there€was€no€contract€between€the€parties.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà0  àà ° àà@))%ì(#(#àò òòòDiscussionóóó óˆÐ ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€a€motion€to€dismiss€is€made€at€the€close€of€a€plaintiffððs€proof€in€a€non-jury€case,Ð l¼ Ðthe€trial€court€must€impartially€weigh€the€evidence€as€though€it€were€making€findings€of€fact€andÐ X ¨ Ðconclusions€of€law€after€presentation€of€all€the€evidence.€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€41.02(2).€€If€aÐ D!” Ðplaintiff's€case€has€not€been€established€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€then€the€case€should€beÐ 0"€  Ðdismissed€if,€on€the€facts€found€and€the€applicable€law,€the€plaintiff€has€shown€no€right€to€relief.€€òòSeeóóÐ #l! ÐòòCity€of€Columbia€v.€C.F.W.€Constr.€Co.óó,€557€S.W.2d€734,€740€(Tenn.€1977);€òòAtkins€v.€Kirkpatrickóó,Ð $X" Ð823€S.W.2d€547,€552€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€The€standard€of€review€of€a€trial€court's€decision€toÐ ô$D # Ðgrant€a€Rule€41.02€involuntary€dismissal€is€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€òòAtkinsóó,€823Ð à%0!$ ÐS.W.2d€at€552.€€As€such,€the€factual€findings€of€a€trial€court€are€accorded€a€presumption€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðcorrectness,€and€we€will€not€overturn€those€factual€findings€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÐ ¸'#& Ðagainst€them.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòBogan€v.€Boganóó,€60€S.W.3d€721,€727€(Tenn.€2001).€€WithÐ ° Ðrespect€to€legal€issues,€our€review€is€conducted€ð ðunder€a€pure€òòde€novoóó€standard€of€review,€accordingÐ œì Ðno€deference€to€the€conclusions€of€law€made€by€the€lower€courts.ðð€€òòSouthern€Constructors,€Inc.€v.Ð ˆØ ÐLoudon€County€Bd.€Of€Educ.óó,€58€S.W.3d€706,€710€(Tenn.€2001).€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àIt€is€well€established€that€a€contract€can€be€express,€implied,€written,€or€oral,€ð ðbut€anÐ L œ Ðenforceable€contract€must€result€from€a€meeting€of€the€minds€in€mutual€assent€to€terms,€must€beÐ 8 ˆ Ðbased€upon€sufficient€consideration,€must€be€free€from€fraud€or€undue€influence,€not€against€publicÐ $ t Ðpolicy€and€must€be€sufficiently€definite€to€be€enforced.ðð€€òòKlosterman€Development€Corp.€v.€OutlawÐ  ` ÐAircraft€Sales,€Inc.óó,€102€S.W.3d€621,€635€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002).€€In€the€present€case,€the€Trial€CourtÐ ü L  Ðhad€the€ability€to€assess€the€demeanor€and€credibility€of€those€witnesses,€including€Plaintiff,€whoÐ è 8  Ðtestified€live€at€trial.€€The€Trial€Court€was€presented€with€conflicting€versions€of€whether€there€wasÐ Ô$  Ðan€oral€agreement€by€Defendants€to€allow€Plaintiff€to€remain€in€her€house€and€to€provide€her€careÐ À  Ðfor€the€remainder€of€her€life€in€return€for€conveyance€of€the€property.€€Defendants€denied€there€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðany€such€agreement.€€Plaintiff€insists€such€an€agreement€was€made,€although€her€testimony€wasÐ ˜è  Ðaltogether€inconsistent€with€her€pleadings€as€to€whether€or€not€she€actually€conveyed€the€propertyÐ „Ô  Ðto€Defendants.€€ð ðUnlike€this€Court,€the€trial€court€observed€the€manner€and€demeanor€of€theÐ pÀ Ðwitnesses€and€was€in€the€best€position€to€evaluate€their€credibility."€€òòUnion€Planters€Nat'l€Bank€v.Ð \¬ ÐIsland€Mgmt.€Auth.,€Incóó.,€43€S.W.3d€498,€502€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000).€€A€trial€court's€determinationsÐ H˜ Ðregarding€credibility€are€accorded€deference€by€this€Court.€€òòId.óó;òò€Davis€v.€Liberty€Mutual€Ins.€Co.óó,€38Ð 4„ ÐS.W.3d€560,€563€(Tenn.€2001).€€"[A]ppellate€courts€will€not€re-evaluate€a€trial€judge's€assessmentÐ  p Ðof€witness€credibility€absent€clear€and€convincing€evidence€to€the€contrary."€€òòWells€v.€Tennessee€Bd.Ð  \ Ðof€Regentsóó,€9€S.W.3d€779,€783€(Tenn.€1999).€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€at€the€outset€that€theÐ øH Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€does€not€weight€against€the€Trial€Courtððs€conclusion€that€ð ðthere€wasÐ ä4 Ðno€outside€agreement€[by€Defendants]€to€take€care€of€[Plaintiff]€ð8ð.ðð€€Since€there€was€noÐ Ð  Ðð ðagreementðð€by€Defendants€to€take€care€of€Plaintiff,€it€necessarily€follows€that€there€was€no€mutualÐ ¼  Ðassent€or€meeting€of€the€minds€regarding€the€terms€of€the€alleged€oral€contract.€€As€there€was€noÐ ¨ø Ðagreement€between€the€parties€to€the€terms,€the€Trial€Court€correctly€found€there€was€no€express€oralÐ ”ä Ðcontract€in€existence.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àTennessee€recognizes€ð ðtwo€distinct€types€of€implied€contracts;€namely,€contractsÐ X ¨ Ðimplied€in€fact€and€contracts€implied€in€law,€commonly€referred€to€as€quasi€contracts.ðð€€òòAngus€v.€CityÐ D!” Ðof€Jacksonóó,€968€S.W.2d€804,€808€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997)(quoting€òòPaschall's,€Inc.€v.€Dozieróó,€219Ð 0"€  ÐTenn.€45,€53„54,€407€S.W.2d€150,€154€(1966)).€€A€contract€implied€in€fact€is€ð ðone€that€ððarises€underÐ #l! Ðcircumstances€which€show€mutual€intent€or€assent€to€contract.ðððð€òòGivens€v.€Mullikinóó,€75€S.W.3d€383,Ð $X" Ð407€(Tenn.€2002)(quoting€òòAngusóó,€968€S.W.2d€at€808).€€However,€in€order€for€a€contract€implied€inÐ ô$D # Ðfact€to€be€enforceable,€it€must€be€supported€by€mutual€assent,€consideration,€and€lawful€purpose.€Ð à%0!$ ÐòòMullikinóó,€75€S.W.3d€at€407.€€An€express€oral€contract€and€a€contract€implied€in€fact€are€very€similarÐ Ì&"% Ðwith€the€primary€difference€between€them€being€the€manner€in€which€the€parties€manifest€theirÐ ¸'#& Ðassent.€€ð ðIn€an€express€contract,€the€parties€assent€to€the€terms€of€the€contract€by€means€of€words,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðwritings,€or€some€other€mode€of€expression.ð8ð€€In€a€contract€implied€in€fact,€the€conduct€of€theÐ )à$( Ðparties€and€the€surrounding€circumstances€show€mutual€assent€to€the€terms€of€the€contract.ðð€€òòRiverÐ |*Ì%) ÐPark€Hospital,€Inc.€v.€BlueCross€BlueShield€of€Tennessee,€Inc.óó,€No.€M2001„00288„COA„R3„CV,Ð h+¸&* Ð2002€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€723,€at€*33€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.€11,€2002),€òòappl.€perm.€appeal€deniedóó€Feb.Ð ° Ð18,€2003.€€Likewise,€we€find€nothing€in€the€record€before€us€that€would€preponderate€against€theÐ œì ÐTrial€Courtððs€finding€that€Defendants€did€not€agree€to€take€care€of€Plaintiff,€including€ð ðthe€conductÐ ˆØ Ðof€the€parties€and€the€surrounding€circumstances.ðð€€òòId.óó€€As€such,€there€also€was€no€contract€impliedÐ tÄ Ðin€fact.€€òòSeeóó€òòMullikinóó,€75€S.W.3d€at€407€(ð ðan€implied€contract€ððmust€result€from€a€meeting€of€theÐ `° Ðminds€of€the€parties€in€mutual€assent€to€the€terms,€[and]€must€be€based€upon€a€sufficientÐ L œ Ðconsideration,€free€from€fraud€or€undue€influence,€not€against€public€policy€and€sufficiently€definiteÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€be€enforcedðð")(quoting€òòJohnson€v.€Central€Nat'l€Ins.€Co.óó,€210€Tenn.€24,€34-35,€356€S.W.2d€277,Ð $ t Ð281€(1962)).€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€also€argues€that€there€was€a€contract€implied€in€law.€€As€observed€by€thisÐ è 8  ÐCourt€in€òòAngusóó:€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àContracts€implied€in€law€are€created€by€law€without€the€assent€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðparty€bound,€on€the€basis€that€they€are€dictated€by€reason€and€justice.€Ð ˜è  ÐòòWeatherly€v.€American€Agr.€Chem.€Co.óó,€16€Tenn.€App.€613,€65Ð „Ô  ÐS.W.2d€592€(1933).€€A€party€seeking€to€recover€on€an€implied€in€lawÐ pÀ Ðor€quasi€contract€theory€must€prove€the€following:Ð\¬` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà0¸ ` x` xàA€benefit€conferred€upon€the€defendant€by€the€plaintiff,Ð 4„ Ðappreciation€by€the€defendant€of€such€benefit,€and€acceptanceÐ  p Ðof€such€benefit€under€such€circumstances€that€it€would€beÐ  \ Ðinequitable€for€him€to€retain€the€benefit€without€payment€ofÐ øH Ðthe€value€thereof.Ðä4¸ x¸ x ÐÌòòAngusóó,€968€S.W.2d€at€808€(quoting€òòPaschall's,€Inc.€v.€Dozieróó,€219€Tenn.€45,€57,€407€S.W.2d€150,Ð ¼  Ð155€(1966)).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àCertainly,€Defendants€herein€were€conferred€a€benefit€by€Plaintiff.€€We€will€assumeÐ €Ð Ðthat€the€second€element,€i.e.€appreciation€by€Defendants€of€such€benefit,€likewise€has€been€met.€€TheÐ l¼ Ðquestion€then€becomes€whether€it€is€inequitable€under€the€circumstances€for€Defendants€to€retain€theÐ X ¨ Ðbenefit€without€payment€of€the€value€thereof.€€òòAngusóó,€968€S.W.2d€at€808.€€At€trial,€Plaintiff€deniedÐ D!” Ðever€conveying€any€property€to€Defendants.€€In€her€complaint,€however,€Plaintiff€claims€she€deededÐ 0"€  Ðher€house€to€Defendants€on€May€11,€1999.€€Plaintiff€never€has€alleged€that€the€conveyance€of€theÐ #l! Ðproperty€to€Defendants€should€be€set€aside€because€it€was€the€result€of€fraud,€undue€influence,€or€theÐ $X" Ðlike.€€It€is€implicit€in€the€Trial€Courtððs€opinion€that€it€found€there€was€a€valid€conveyance€of€theÐ ô$D # Ðproperty€at€issue,€as€evidenced€by€the€Trial€Courtððs€comments€that€ð ð[f]raud,€undue€influence€orÐ à%0!$ Ðanything€of€that€nature€is€specifically€not€proved€in€this€case.ð8ð€€This€deed€is€not€against€publicÐ Ì&"% Ðpolicy.€€Itððs€to€give€the€land€to€an€only€grandchild€or€the€child€of€an€only€son€ð8ð.ðð€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àTo€summarize:€€(1)€there€was€a€valid€conveyance€of€the€property€to€Defendants;€(2)Ð )à$( Ðthere€was€no€express€or€implied€in€fact€contract€by€Defendants€to€provide€long€term€care€to€PlaintiffÐ |*Ì%) Ðor€to€allow€her€to€remain€in€the€house;€(3)€Plaintiff€needs€twenty„four€hour€care;€(4)€Defendants€areÐ h+¸&* Ðnot€and€never€have€been€in€a€position€to€provide€that€care;€and€(5)€Plaintiff€is€residing€with€her€sonÐ ° Ðwho€can€and€does€provide€Plaintiff€the€necessary€care.€€In€light€of€the€foregoing,€we€are€unable€toÐ œì Ðconclude€that€under€these€particular€circumstances,€it€is€inequitable€for€Defendants€ð ðto€retain€theÐ ˆØ Ðbenefit€without€payment€of€the€value€thereof.ðð€€òòAngusóó,€968€S.W.2d€at€808.€€Therefore,€PlaintiffÐ tÄ Ðlikewise€has€failed€to€establish€an€oral€contract€implied€in€law.Ð `° ÐÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionó óóóˆÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€TrialÐ  ` ÐCourt€for€further€proceedings€as€are€necessary,€if€any,€consistent€with€this€Opinion,€and€for€collectionÐ ü L  Ðof€the€costs€below.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellant€Rena€Thompson€and€herÐ è 8  Ðsurety.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGEÐ 4„ Ð