˙WPC‚ .# ”U:Ÿ %Ų 0(ßb w@4Sgv 0J~ 0TČ 0^ 0hz 0râ 0|T 0†Đ 0V 1uæ 0d[U *ŋB)é AQ Æc 0D) 0@m 0D­ DCņ D/4 Bc B€ D3 AMĐ  v~1 v͝˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ, øđ AZ‹"Arial RegularX($ĄĄ- ų - ÜŨDŪ߂eāáEâã äĶ€îę‚_#t3|xî2 ˙˙0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ˙˙0Indent2ā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ˙˙0Indent3ā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ˙˙0Indent4ā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ˙˙0Indent5ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ˙˙0Indent6ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ˙˙0Indent7ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ˙˙0Indent8ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ˙˙?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ˙˙8Mac DefaultMac DefaultĶ ` °šXĶ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!"#$&Cū˙<< C˙˙ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$ĸĸŨ ƒ!ŨŨ  Ũ("˙˙$ŖŖŌ  ŌŌ  Ō($$””ō ōÚ  Ú1Ú  Úķ ķ7Border 1dd(('÷˙ dxd dü˙P Pd'''''˙˙dxd!#%Cū˙ << G˙˙ Ũ ƒ!ŨŅ  ŅŅ#€d#ŅÔ€ÔŨ  ŨŨ ƒ""ŨŨ  ŨÔ€ÔĶ  Ķō ōÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔĖĖAugust€12,€1998ĖĖCecil€W.€CrowsonĖAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôķ ķPtPtHHÚ(˙á˙âųFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃĐ ĐĐHHĐĐ  ĐĐ2ĐĐ˙˙¸æ$˙ĐĐHHĐĐĐĐĐĐĐĐ  ĐĐ ĐĐ ĐŅŅŅGenevaŅŅ ŅŅ € ŅŅ<Px–ČŅŌŌŌ443!#4ŌŌ$ *$ŌŌ$*$ŌŌ ˙KK ŌŌ  Geneva ŌŌ  Geneva ŌĶ.,ĶĶĶĶ6ĶĶ ĶßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŅGenevaŅŅ ŅŌ  h HD: Geneva ŌŌ  h HD: Geneva ŌŨ ƒ!ŨÔ . ÔÔ€ÔŨ  ŨŌ € ŌŌ „ ŌŅ  ŅŅ\R AØ'\қҀŅŅ7€_ĨXXdædČ7ŅŅ  ŅŅ  Ņō ōÔ€ŧÔĶ  ͜Ų€!ŲßR€*+%A1-j|ö˙ ` į `€€@˙Rß›Ū ŪĖā@ āIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĖā@ āAT€NASHVILLEķ ķÔ€XÔĖĖĖĖĖĖFREDDY€TIPTON,ā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āPlaintiff/Appellee,ā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āAppeal€No.Ėā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā ā01„A„01„9707„CH„00363ĖVS.ā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āFentress€ChanceryĖā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āNo.€92„121ĖROBERT€BURR,€Individually€andā ā)ā āā āā āā āā āā āĖBLUE€RIDGE€DRILLING€ANDā āā ā)ĖOPERATING€COMPANY,€INC.,ā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āDefendants/Appellants.ā āā ā)ĖĖĖā@ āAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€FENTRESS€COUNTYĖā@ āAT€JAMESTOWN,€TENNESSEEĖĖā@ āTHE€HONORABLE€BILLY€JOE€œWHITE,€CHANCELLOR›ĖĖĖĖĖMICHAEL€A.€WALKERĖP.€O.€Box€1780ĖJamestown,€Tennessee€38556Ėā āAttorney€for€Plaintiff/AppelleeĖĖRANDALL€A.€YORKĖP.€O.€Box€3549ĖCrossville,€Tennessee€38557„3549Ėā āAttorney€for€Defendants/AppellantsĖĖĖĖĖĖā@ āAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDĖā@ āAND€REMANDEDĖĖĖĖĖĖā āā āā āā āā āā āā āBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEĖĖĖCONCUR:ĖKOCH,€J.ĖCAIN,€J.ĖĖĶĶō ōÔ€„Ôōōā@ āO€P€I€N€I€O€Nķķķ ķÔ€XÔĖĖā āā āThe€Chancery€Court€of€Fentress€County€found€that€the€defendantĪRobert€Burr,€individually€and/or€as€president€of€Blue€Ridge€Drilling€and€OperatingĪCompany,€agreed€to€purchase€Freddy€Tiptonđđs€interest€in€a€drilling€rig€forĪ$50,000.€€The€court€gave€the€defendant€credit€for€a€partial€payment€of€$5,000€andĪrendered€judgment€for€$45,000€plus€prejudgment€interest€from€October€14,€1992.€ĪOn€appeal,€Mr.€Burr€contends€that€the€parties€never€had€a€meeting€of€the€minds,Īthat€Mr.€Tipton€did€not€have€an€interest€in€the€drilling€rig,€that€the€claim€is€barred€byĪthe€statute€of€frauds,€that€the€claim€cannot€be€asserted€against€him€individually,Īand€that€the€court€erred€in€awarding€prejudgment€interest.€€We€modify€the€datesĪon€which€prejudgment€interest€began€to€accrue.€€In€all€other€respects€we€affirm.ĖĖā@ āō ōI.ķ ķĖĖā āā āThe€chancery€courtđđs€judgment€recites€the€following:ĖĶĶā8 āā8 ā[T]his€court€finds€that€the€allegations€in€the€ComplaintĪare€true€and€that€the€Plaintiff€had€a€binding€contractĪwith€the€Defendant€individually€and/or€in€his€corporateĪcapacity€as€President€of€Blue€Ridge€Drilling€andĪOperating€Company,€Inc.,€and€that€the€Plaintiff€had€fullyĪcompleted€his€portion€of€the€contract€and€theĪDefendant€having€made€partial€performance€by€payingĪPlaintiff€$5,000.00€of€the€$50,000.00€dollar€agreedĪupon€purchase€price€for€Plaintiffđđs€equity€interest€andĪother€personal€property€and€that€the€Defendant(s)€shallĪpay€the€remaining€$45,000.00€dollars€due€and€owingĪto€the€Plaintiff€and€pre„judgment€interest€in€the€amountĪof€10%€per€annum€from€October€14,€1992€.€.€.€.ĖĖĖĖĶĶā āā āThe€appellantsđđ€first€three€issues€attack€the€courtđđs€findings€(1)€thatĪMr.€Tipton€had€an€interest€in€the€drilling€rig€and€(2)€that€he€struck€a€deal€with€Mr.ĪBurr€to€sell€that€interest€for€$50,000.ĖĖā āā āWe€find,€however,€that€the€record€fully€supports€the€chancellorđđsĪfindings.€€Mr.€Tipton€testified€that€he€and€Freddy€Allred€bought€the€equipmentĪtogether€to€engage€in€contract€drilling€in€Alabama.€€The€title€was€placed€in€theĪname€of€Mr.€Allred€and€his€wife,€d/b/a€Rainbow€Rentals,€but€Mr.€Tipton€signed€theĪnote€financing€the€equipment.€€Mr.€Tipton€had€the€drilling€contracts€in€AlabamaĪthrough€his€corporation,€Tennessee€Valley€Drilling€and€Completion,€and€he€tookÍthe€equipment€to€Alabama€to€fulfill€those€contracts.€€He€wired€the€proceeds€to€hisĪbank€in€Jamestown€and€gave€Mr.€Allred€the€right€to€draw€out€of€that€account.ĖĖā āā āWhen€the€Alabama€contracts€ran€out€Mr.€Tipton€moved€the€rig€backĪto€Jamestown€where€he€stored€the€equipment.€€Mr.€Allred€ceased€paying€theĪfinance€company€and€Mr.€Tipton€filed€suit€in€Fentress€County€for€an€accountingĪand€to€have€the€court€declare€his€interest€in€the€rig.€€He€also€found€a€potentialĪbuyer€in€Mr.€Burr.€€He€testified€that€Mr.€Burr€agreed€to€pay€him€$50,000€for€hisĪinterest€in€the€rig€and€some€other€equipment€that€belonged€to€Mr.€TiptonĪpersonally.ĖĖā āā āOn€October€14,€1992€Mr.€Burr€caused€Blue€Ridge€Drilling,€aĪcorporation€which€he€served€as€president,€to€pay€$5,000€to€Mr.€Tipton€personallyĪand€$10,000€to€Mr.€Tipton€to€be€placed€in€escrow€pending€completion€of€the€sale.€ĪBlue€Ridge€Drilling€took€control€of€the€equipment,€refinanced€it,€and€assumed€allĪownership€rights.€€Mr.€Allred€executed€the€sale€agreement€on€behalf€of€RainbowĪRentals.ĖĖā āā āMr.€Burr€denied€Mr.€Tiptonđđs€version€of€the€agreement.€€He€testifiedĪthat€he€bought€the€rig€from€Mr.€Allred€by€assuming€the€unpaid€balance€to€theĪfinance€company.ĖĖā āā āUnfortunately€for€Mr.€Burr€there€are€two€strikes€against€him€onĪappeal.€€The€first€is€Rule€13(d),€Tenn.€R.€App.€Proc.€which€raises€a€presumptionĪthat€the€chancellorđđs€findings€of€fact€are€correct€unless€the€evidenceĪpreponderates€against€them.€€The€second€is€the€rule€we€have€consistently€appliedĪwith€respect€to€the€trial€courtđđs€determination€of€witness€credibility.€€When€the€trialĪjudge€chooses€to€believe€one€witness€over€another€that€determination€is€bindingĪon€the€appellate€courts€unless€other€real€evidence€compels€a€contrary€conclusion.€ĪōōState€ex€rel.€Bolsinger€v.€Town€of€Madisonvilleķķ,€435€S.W.2d€803€(Tenn.€1968).ĖĖā āā āIn€his€oral€findings€from€the€bench,€the€chancellor€found€that€Mr.ĪTipton€had€an€equitable€interest€in€the€drilling€rig€and€that€interest€plus€Mr.ĪTiptonđđs€other€equipment€was€the€subject€of€the€agreement€with€Mr.€Burr.€€WeĪcannot€find€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€chancellorđđs€findings.ĖĖō ōā@ āIII.ķ ķĖĖā āā āMr.€Burr€also€raises€the€statute€of€frauds€as€a€defense.€€It€is€true€thatĪthe€agreement€with€Mr.€Tipton€was€oral€and€that€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€47„2„201Īrequires€contracts€for€the€sale€of€goods€for€more€than€$500€to€be€in€writing.€€ButĪsubsection€(3)(c)€of€that€statute€makes€an€oral€contract€enforceable€when€theĪgoods€have€been€received€and€accepted€by€the€buyer.€€As€we€have€seen,€Mr.ĪBurrđđs€company€took€the€goods€and€assumed€all€control€over€them.€€Mr.€BurrÍtestified€at€the€trial€that€his€company€had€paid€off€the€remaining€balance€owed€toĪthe€finance€company.€€Therefore,€the€statute€of€frauds€is€not€a€defense€to€thisĪcontract.ĖĖā0 āā āā@ āō ōIV.ķ ķĖĖā āā āMr.€Burr€also€asserts€that€the€judgment€should€be€modified€to€runĪagainst€the€corporation€only.€€We€are€satisfied,€however,€that€Mr.€TiptonđđsĪagreement€was€with€Mr.€Burr€individually.€€Mr.€Tiptonđđs€testimony€concerned€hisĪnegotiations€with€Mr.€Burr.€€The€corporation€did€not€surface€until€the€checks€wereĪdrawn€in€October€of€1992.€€The€deal€had€already€been€struck€by€then.€€Mr.€TiptonĪalso€testified€that€he€insisted€on€Mr.€Burrđđs€personal€obligation€if€the€sale€was€toĪbe€financed€because€he€was€afraid€to€accept€a€corporate€obligation.ĖĖā@ āō ōV.ķ ķĖĖā āā āThe€chancellor€gave€a€judgment€for€prejudgment€interest€fromĪOctober€14,€1992.€€Mr.€Burr€asserts€that€the€chancellor€erred€in€allowingĪprejudgment€interest€in€any€amount.ĖĖā āā āAccording€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€47„14„123€prejudgment€interestĪmay€be€awarded€as€an€element€of€damages,€according€to€principles€of€equity.€ÍThe€award€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€ōōOtis€v.€Cambridge€Mutual€FireĪIns.€Co.ķķ,€850€S.W.2d€439€(Tenn.€1992).€€Prejudgment€interest€is€proper€onĪliquidated€accounts,€ōōFarmers€Chem.€Assn.€v.€Maryland€Cas.€Co.ķķ,€421€F.2d€319Ī(6th€Cir.€1970),€and€may€be€computed€from€the€date€the€payments€become€due.€ĪōōProvident€Life€&€Accident€Ins.€Co.€v.€Fewķķ,€560€S.W.2d€407€(Tenn.€1978).ĖĖā āā āWe€are€satisfied€the€chancellor€acted€within€his€discretion€inĪallowing€prejudgment€interest.€€We€think,€however,€the€dates€it€began€to€accrueĪshould€be€changed€to€the€dates€when€the€proof€shows€the€remaining€$45,000Īwas€to€be€paid.€€Mr.€Tipton€testified€that€the€balance€was€to€be€paid€in€twoĪinstallments,€one€forty„five€days€after€closing€and€the€other€thirty€days€after€that.€ĪThose€dates€correspond€roughly€to€December€16,€1992€and€January€15,€1993.€ĪTherefore€prejudgment€interest€should€be€calculated€on€$22,500€from€DecemberĪ16,€1992€to€January€15,€1993€and€on€$45,000€thereafter€until€the€date€of€theĪjudgment€below.ĖĖā āā āThe€date€prejudgment€interest€began€to€accrue€is€modified€asĪindicated€herein.€€In€all€other€respects€the€judgment€is€affirmed.€€Remand€theĪcause€to€the€Chancery€Court€of€Fentress€County€for€further€proceedings.€€Tax€theĪcosts€on€appeal€to€the€appellants.Ėā āā āĖĖĶĶā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā____________________________Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā āBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEĖĖĖĖCONCUR:ĖĖĖĖĖ_____________________________ĖWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEĖĖĖĖĖ_____________________________ĖWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGEĖĮŅ  ŅÔ€ŧÔō ōā@ āœķ ķ›