ÿWPCÊ ¾ß}×2\¼Ó«âôö øR ºqâQ~äšüÐúÈÂ4Œ¦ÚG oVüc•Ãp•<}7V –”Â=ØM6åЋ°ÈÛ(¸4$ªOT µ™fvµ¹Ü¾©hÌÜ›¸ŽË¾„¢ž´Ní0@·„€×,Þ/‰ø²·Ápø·ê×óÝt£Z†%ÎüÄιõµCÑ âÖ0²ß¤ƒ§Ÿœìr3 Ä0§Þ Òü7Ú0ø4†ÙÕ­ßj©:¨²ñ(§s ^“Ï1’%«M8sf3OÌDËw¾ƒ~J!DaϺ w¼$£ä|¨Ì<í¤R{d”m1a‡Òzw.ä3~üb)µã œÕ· ¸Šu'¤žE‹—†qœÕR:Ðf5­.‚›ˆ¸BdoÞ†úó- ÂįP¤£-Í7ƒÉt`¶x84 lïäe™ÛyíµÑ ¯¬2l².ô“dî!–›}¥e²ˆòh´ÝoÐO}âTBŸ‘¶ÆÝZ­9åvß{ôê£××¢®¦&:ýˆ²OL©NÛ ?¬×¬o"ªLÔOÚüdg#($Âìf†oÐÍC›2Lu¥o‚ÀªÃé‚7ßÔ1‚ƒF§;Œ„R›bsD<ùcSÚÍL¨z M#ó¡#ú¹5Öÿ­êXÓ#Á %Ï ^ Õ 0ˆá UNi w· 4» zÏ ÒI  * m, C ÆK ÆÆ×ƹcN 0DEbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd 0ëllll BWW 0¤t D3 D-K 0Kxx A\ÃÆ 0¤å 0D‰ A«ÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍÍ D5x B­˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0» u&+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÑB+¢Ø+00 ˜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|x ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ¯Ý ƒR#l$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáuò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔPat€Quigley€was€at€the€time€President€of€Capitol.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2#l$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A}»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáuò»»Ô d(|3IY$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A}»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`Nþÿ<<Cÿÿ xdðƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3IY$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A}»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK€€€€)ûÿ!dxdxüÿP PdÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A}»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼A}»»»ÔÑ8€±XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îGìA}ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼A}»îîGì #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓNovember€9,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X±X»¼A}ÔÌò òÔ#†¼A}»XX±õ#ÔTANYA€TUCKER,€òòet€al.óó€v.€CAPITOL€RECORDS,€INC.Ô‡X±X»¼A}Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„2449„I€€€€€€Irvin€H.€Kilcrease,€Jr.,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2000„01765„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€September€6,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓIn€this€two€party€action,Ô#†¼A}»XX±n#ÔÔ‡X±X»¼A}Ô€the€trial€court€certified€three€partial€summary€judgment€orders€to€be€finalÐ xÈ  Ðjudgments€pursuant€to€Rule€54.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€Plaintiff€appeals,€andÐ d´ ÐDefendant€supports€the€appeal.€€Both€parties€assert€that€the€trial€courtððs€finality€designations€involveÐ P  Ðmultiple€claims€under€Rule€54.02.€€After€review,€we€find€that€the€dispute€between€these€two€partiesÐ <Œ Ðinvolves€a€single€claim€and€that€none€of€the€partial€summary€judgment€orders€entered€in€the€trialÐ (x Ðcourt€are€final€judgments€within€the€meaning€of€the€ð ðmultiple€claimsðð€provisions€of€Rule€54.02.€€ThisÐ d ÐCourt€is,€therefore,€without€jurisdiction€of€this€appeal.€€The€judgments€of€the€trial€court€are€vacated,Ð P Ðand€the€case€is€remanded€for€trial€on€the€merits.Ð ì< ÐÓÀÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgments€of€the€Chancery€Court€Ð Ä ÐVacated€and€Remanded€ó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼A}»àX±#ÔÔ‡X±X.¼A}ÔWilliam€B.€Cain,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€WòòILLIAMóó€C.€KòòOCHóó,€JòòRóó.,€J.€joined.€Ð ˆØ ÐòòóóPòòATRICIAóó€J.€CòòOTTRELLóó,€J.,€filed€a€concurring€opinion.Ð tÄ ÐÌJay€S.€Bowen€and€Amy€J.€Ô_ÔEverhartÔ_Ô,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Tanya€Tucker€andÐ L œ ÐTanya€Tucker,€Inc.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌAubrey€B.€Ô_ÔHarwellÔ_Ô,€Jr.€and€Gerald€D.€Ô_ÔNeenanÔ_Ô,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€CapitolÐ #`" ÐRecords,€Inc.Ð ü#L# ÐÌÓR Óò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼A}»XX± #ÔÔ‡X±X»¼A}ÔÐ Ô%$!% ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼A}»XX±W #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X±X»¼A}Ôà  àOn€August€12,€1998,€Tanya€Tucker€and€Tanya€Tucker,€Inc.,€Plaintiffs,€brought€suit€againstÐ ¬'ü"' ÐCapitol€Records,€Inc.,€Defendant.€€The€original€complaint€alleged€breach€of€contract€in€two€countsÐ ˜(è#( Ðand€sought€compensatory€damages,€attorney€fees€and€pre„judgment€interest,€along€with€a€trial€byÐ „)Ô$) Ðjury.€€The€complaint€asserted€that€Tanya€Tucker€is€a€renowned€singer/performer€and€recording€artistÐ p*À%* Ðand€that€Tanya€Tucker,€Inc.€entered€into€a€contract€with€Liberty€Records,€a€division€of€CapitolÐ \+¬&+ ÐRecords,€Inc.,€on€March€8,€1993.€€Under€to€the€terms€of€this€contract,€Tucker,€Inc.€was€to€provideÐ H,˜', Ðthe€exclusive€services€of€Tanya€Tucker€as€a€recording€artist€in€connection€with€the€production€ofÐ 4-„(-ý Ðrecords.€€It€is€further€alleged€that€Tanya€Tucker€had€been€a€Capitol€recording€artist€for€many€yearsÐ ° Ðand€had€achieved€worldwide€fame.€€The€March€8,€1993€contract€was€to€expire€on€October€31,€1997Ð œì Ðunless€Capitol€exercised€its€unconditional€option€to€extend€the€agreement€for€an€additional€two€yearÐ ˆØ Ðperiod.€€Capitol€did€exercise€its€option€and,€thus,€bound€Tucker€to€continue€to€record€exclusively€forÐ tÄ ÐCapitol€during€the€two€years€subsequent€to€October€31,€1997.Ð `° ÐÌà  àUnder€the€initial€term€of€the€contract,€Tucker€was€to€record€and€deliver€to€Capitol€a€minimumÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€three€LP„Masters€for€manufacture,€distribution,€promotion,€advertisement,€and€sale.€€The€originalÐ $ t Ðterm€expired€October€31,€1997,€and,€when€Capitol€exercised€its€first€option€to€extend€the€contractÐ  ` Ðfrom€November€1,€1997€through€October€31,€1999,€Tucker€became€obligated€to€record€and€deliverÐ ü L  Ðto€Capitol€a€minimum€of€two€additional€LP„Masters.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àThe€contract€contained€what€is€referred€to€as€a€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provision€that€states€in€pertinentÐ À  Ðpart:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àNotwithstanding€the€foregoing,€nothing€contained€in€this€Agreement€shall€obligateÐ „Ô  ÐLiberty€to€manufacture,€distribute,€promote,€advertise€or€sell€records€derived€fromÐ pÀ Ðmasters€recorded€hereunder,€or€to€have€Artist€in€fact€record€or€deliver€the€MinimumÐ \¬ ÐNumber€of€Masters€designated€in€the€OPTION€PERIODS€AND€MASTERÐ H˜ ÐSCHEDULE€for€any€period€hereunder.€€Liberty€shall€fulfill€its€entire€obligationÐ 4„ Ð(including€advance€payments,€if€any)€to€Artist€as€to€undelivered€masters€by€notifyingÐ  p ÐArtist€in€writing€not€to€record€and/or€deliver€the€particular€masters€and€by€paying€toÐ  \ ÐArtist€the€difference€between€(a)€the€amount€set€forth€in€Column€ð ðBðð€of€theÐ øH ÐApproved€Recording€Fund€Schedule€with€respect€to€such€LP„Master€and€(b)€theÐ ä4 Ðamount€of€the€actual€Recording€Costs,€inclusive€of€Producer€fees€and€advances,€forÐ Ð  Ðthe€immediately€preceding€LP„Master;€.€.€.€€€Ð¼ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ð ”ä ÐÌÓ  Ó€€€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€APPROVED€RECORDING€FUND€SCHEDULE€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð l¼ Ðóó€Ð X ¨ ÐÓšÓà8  àòòColumn€ð ðAððà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àColumn€ð ðBððà p àà È àà  àColumn€ð ðCððóóÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àFirst€LP„Master:à0Ð Ð àà0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ à$250,000.00à0pÀÐ ÀÐ àà0ÈpÐ pÐ àà0 ÈÐ ÈÐ à$500,000.00Ð#l! Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àSecond€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$250,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$500,000.00Ðô$D # (# (# ÐÌà  àThird€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$275,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$650,000.00ÐÌ&"% (# (# ÐÌà  àFourth€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$275,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$650,000.00Ф(ô#' (# (# ÐÌà  àFifth€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$300,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$750,000.00Ð|*Ì%) (# (# ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àSixth€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$300,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$750,000.00а (# (# ÐÌà  àSeventh€LP„Master,€if€any:à0 h àà0Àh(#h(#à$350,000.00à0pÀ(#À(#àà0Èp(#p(#àà0 È(#È(#à$800,000.00ÐˆØ (# (# ÐÌà  àSection€14(f)€of€the€contract€provides:€ð ðà8 @v àThe€term€ððLP„Masterðð€means€a€set€of€mastersÐ `° Ðsufficient€to€constitute€an€lp„disc.ððÐ L œ ÐÌà  àShortly€after€Capitol€exercised€its€first€option€to€extend€the€Tucker€contract€from€NovemberÐ $ t Ð1,€1997€through€October€31,€1999,€Tucker€asked€to€be€released€from€the€contract.€€On€November€21,Ð  ` Ð1997,€Capitol,€acting€through€its€Vice„President€of€Business€Affairs,€Ansel€L.€Davis,€responded€byÐ ü L  Ðletter:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€view€of€your€request,€we€wish€to€confirm€that€notwithstanding€our€exerciseÐ À  Ðof€the€option€to€extend€the€term€of€her€Agreement€into€the€first€option€period€(pleaseÐ ¬ü  Ðsee€my€letter€dated€September€24,€1997,€a€copy€of€which€is€attached€hereto€for€yourÐ ˜è  Ðimmediate€reference),€in€consideration€of€your€request,€we€have€agreed€that€we€willÐ „Ô  Ðnot€require,€nor€will€Tanya€Tucker€request,€to€record€and/or€deliver€any€further€LP„Ð pÀ ÐMasters€for€Capitol€Nashville€pursuant€to€the€Agreement,€unless€both€parties€agreeÐ \¬ Ðotherwise€hereafter€in€writing.€ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWe€acknowledge€that,€in€view€of€the€foregoing,€Tanya€Tucker€intends€to€seekÐ  p Ðto€enter€into€an€exclusive€artist€recording€agreement€with€another€label€and€we€willÐ  \ Ðnot€regard€such€action€on€her€part€as€being€in€any€way€in€breach€of€the€Agreement.€Ð øH ÐIn€addition,€Tanya€Tucker€waives€such€rights,€if€any,€as€she€may€have€pursuant€toÐ ä4 ÐParagraph€2.a.,€or€otherwise€regarding€the€so„called€ð ðpay€or€playðð€feature€of€theÐ Ð  ÐAgreement.м Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àAt€such€time€as€Tanya€Tucker€commences€to€negotiate€for€another€exclusiveÐ ”ä Ðartist€recording€agreement€with€another€label,€we€will€negotiate€in€good€faith€at€thatÐ €Ð Ðtime€an€appropriate€ð ðoverrideðð,€if€any,€with€respect€to€future€Ô_ÔphonorecordsÔ_Ô€on€thatÐ l¼ Ðnew€label,€consistent€with€industry€custom€and€practice.ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIf€you€have€any€questions€regarding€this€matter,€please€donððt€hesitate€toÐ 0"€  Ðcontact€me;€otherwise,€kindly€confirm€our€agreements€with€respect€to€the€foregoingÐ #l! Ðby€executing€a€copy€of€this€letter€and€returning€it€to€me€at€your€earliest€convenience.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌ€à  àAs€the€proposal€from€Capitol€to€terminate€the€contract€required€Tucker€to€forego€any€claimÐ à%0!$ Ðunder€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract,€she€declined€to€execute€the€proposed€terminationÐ Ì&"% Ðagreement.€€In€her€complaint€of€August€12,€1998,€Tucker€alleged€in€part:Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àà ` à18.à ¸ àRecently,€Tucker€recorded€a€song€to€be€included€on€a€record€albumÐ )à$( Ðwhich€is€to€be€released€by€another€record€label€as€a€tribute€to€Tammy€Ô_ÔWynetteÔ_Ô.€€SheÐ |*Ì%) Ðrecorded€the€track€as€a€memorial€to€Ms.€Ô_ÔWynetteÔ_Ô,€recently€deceased,€who€was€one€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðher€heroines.€€Although€Plaintiffs€believe€the€Agreement€no€longer€to€be€in€effectÐ ° Ðbecause€Defendantððs€breaches€have€released€Plaintiffs€from€their€obligations€underÐ œì Ðthe€Agreement,€were€the€Agreement€in€effect,€it€would€require€that€Tucker€obtainÐ ˆØ ÐDefendantððs€approval€in€order€to€release€such€a€performance€on€a€record€label€otherÐ tÄ Ðthan€that€of€Defendant.€€When€the€competing€record€company€sought€to€obtainÐ `° ÐCapitolððs€approval€to€include€Tuckerððs€performance,€however,€Quigley€expresslyÐ L œ Ðrefused€to€allow€the€use€of€Tanyaððs€performance€unless€she€would€waive€and€releaseÐ 8 ˆ Ðher€rights€under€the€Agreement,€as€well€as€releasing€all€other€claims€againstÐ $ t ÐDefendant.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àCapitol€denied€the€allegation€that€Quigley׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€refused€to€allow€Tucker€to€perform€relative€to€theÐ è 8  ÐTammy€Ô_ÔWynetteÔ_Ô€album.€€The€deposition€of€Pat€Quigley€asserted€that€Quigley€called€the€competingÐ Ô$  Ðrecord€company,€Asylum€Records€in€Nashville,€and€informed€them€that€Capitol€considered€theÐ À  Ðcontract€at€an€end€but€that€Tucker€was€insisting€the€contract€remained€in€effect€entitling€Tucker€toÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€ð ðpay€or€playðð€compensation.€€Capitol€took€the€position€that€Quigley€further€advised€Asylum€that,Ð ˜è  Ðif€Tuckerððs€contention€was€correct,€she€was€still€bound€to€Capitol€and€litigation€among€all€partiesÐ „Ô  Ðwould€be€likely€if€Asylum€released€the€Tammy€Ô_ÔWynetteÔ_Ô€recording.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àTucker€filed€a€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€on€her€claim€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playððÐ H˜ Ðprovision€of€the€contract.€€In€its€order€of€February€20,€2000€denying€this€motion,€the€trial€courtÐ 4„ Ðobserved,€ð ðThe€issue€before€the€Court€is€whether€Capitol€breached€the€ððpay€or€playðð€provision€inÐ  p ÐParagraph€2(a)€of€the€Exclusive€Recording€Agreement€(ððthe€Agreementðð)€between€Ms.€Tucker€andÐ  \ ÐCapitol.ððÐ øH ÐÌà  àAfter€reciting€the€execution€of€the€contract,€the€exercise€by€Capitol€of€the€first€option,€theÐ Ð  Ðrequest€by€Tucker€of€Capitol€to€be€relieved€of€the€contract,€and€the€letter€from€Ô_ÔAnselÔ_Ô€Davis€ofÐ ¼  ÐNovember€21,€1997,€the€trial€court€stated:Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€above€letter€(dated€November€21,€1997)€was€to€be€signed€by€Ms.€TuckerÐ €Ð Ðor€her€representative,€and€returned€to€Capitol.€€However,€Ms.€Tucker€never€returnedÐ l¼ Ðthe€letter€to€Capitol.€€Instead,€Ms.€Tucker€solicited€recording€contracts€from€otherÐ X ¨ Ðrecord€companies€using€the€November€21,€1997€letter€to€verify€that€she€had€theÐ D!” Ðpermission€of€Capitol€to€record€for€another€record€label.€€Thereafter,€Ms.€TuckerÐ 0"€  Ðrecorded€for€Asylum€Records,€without€prior€to€notice€to€Capitol.€€Now,€Ms.€TuckerÐ #l! Ðrejects€the€November€21,€1997€letter€on€the€basis€that€it€is€a€counter„offer.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€January€of€1998,€Ms.€Tuckerððs€representative€had€a€meeting€with€CapitolððsÐ à%0!$ ÐPresident€and€again€sought€Ms.€Tuckerððs€release€from€the€March€8,€1993€AgreementÐ Ì&"% Ðor€to€allow€Ms.€Tucker€to€record€and€release€an€album.€€Capitolððs€President€impliedÐ ¸'#& Ðâ âthat€Ms.€Tucker€was€no€longer€a€priority€for€Capitol€and€Ms.€Tucker€needed€to€be€onÐ ¤(ô#' Ðanother€record€label.€€Further,€he€stated€that€it€would€be€at€least€one(1)€year€beforeÐ ° Ðhe€would€consider€allowing€Ms.€Tucker€to€record€an€album.ÐœìÐ Ð  Ðâ âà  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€consideration€of€the€entire€record,€with€respect€to€plaintiffsðð€motion€forÐ `° Ðpartial€summary€judgment,€the€court€finds€that€genuine€issues€of€material€facts€existÐ L œ Ðas€to€whether€Ms.€Tucker€was€unconditionally€released€by€Capitol€from€the€MarchÐ 8 ˆ Ð8,€1993€Agreement,€including€Ms.€Tuckerððs€rights€under€paragraph€2(a),€the€ð ðPay€orÐ $ t ÐPlayðð€provision.Ð `Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àAccordingly,€plaintiffsðð€motion€for€partial€summary€judgment€is€denied.€€AllÐ è 8  Ðother€matters€are€reserved.à h àÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOn€October€29,€1999,€Capitol€filed€a€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€as€to€TuckerððsÐ ¬ü  Ðclaim€that€Capitol€breached€their€duty€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing,€which€was€followed€onÐ ˜è  ÐNovember€19,€1999€with€a€second€motion€for€partial€summary€judgment€seeking€to€have€the€trialÐ „Ô  Ðcourt€determine€the€amount€of€Tuckerððs€potential€recovery€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€claim.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àBy€order€of€January€25,€2000,€Capitolððs€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€on€the€claimÐ H˜ Ðfor€breach€of€the€duty€of€good€faith€and€fair€dealing€was€sustained€by€the€trial€court.€€On€that€sameÐ 4„ Ðdate,€the€motion€by€Capitol€for€partial€summary€judgment€as€to€the€amount€Tucker€could€recoverÐ  p Ðunder€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract€was€sustained€by€the€trial€court€in€an€orderÐ  \ Ðproviding€in€part:Ð øH ÐÌà8  àà ` à1.à ¸ àThere€is€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€with€respect€to€the€SecondÐ Ð  ÐMotion€For€Partial€Summary€Judgment€filed€by€Capitol€Records,€Inc.€on€NovemberÐ ¼  Ð19,€1999€and€Capitol€Records,€Inc.€is€entitled€to€summary€judgment€on€the€issuesÐ ¨ø Ðaddressed€in€that€Second€Motion€For€Partial€Summary€Judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à2.à ¸ àThe€Court€hereby€finds€that,€if€the€Plaintiffs€prove€that€they€areÐ l¼ Ðentitled€to€any€so„called€ð ðpay€or€playðð€payment€or€payments€pursuant€to€ParagraphÐ X ¨ Ð2(a)€of€the€Agreement€between€the€parties€that€is€the€subject€to€this€action:€theÐ D!” Ðamount€of€the€payment,€if€one€were€owed,€for€the€fourth€LP„Master€that€PlaintiffsÐ 0"€  Ðwere€scheduled€to€deliver€under€the€Agreement€would€be€$0.00;€and€the€amount€ofÐ #l! Ðthe€payment,€if€one€were€owed,€for€the€fifth€LP„Master€that€Plaintiffs€were€scheduledÐ $X" Ðto€deliver€under€the€Agreement€would€be€$16,187.59;€andÐô$D #Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à3.à ¸ àThe€issue€of€whether€Plaintiffs€are€entitled€to€any€so„called€ð ðpay€orÐ Ì&"% Ðplayðð€payment€or€payments€under€Paragraph€2(a)€of€the€Agreement€is€reservedÔ_Ô.Ô_Ôи'#&Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAlso,€on€January€25,€2000,€the€trial€court€granted€leave€to€Plaintiffs€to€amend€their€complaintÐ )à$( Ðâ âto€add€causes€of€action€for€(1)€fraudulent€misrepresentation,€(2)€common€law€intentional€interferenceÐ |*Ì%) Ðwith€business€relations,€(3)€common€law€interference€with€contract,€and€(4)€violation€of€TennesseeÐ ° ÐCode€Annotated€section€47„50„109.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àOn€February€25,€2000,€Capitol€filed€a€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€as€to€counts€IIIÐ tÄ Ðthrough€VI€of€Plaintiffððs€amended€complaint€seeking€dismissal€of€these€four€new€claims,€which€theÐ `° Ðtrial€court€granted€by€order€entered€May€11,€2000.€€This€order€provided€in€pertinent€part:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà ` à1.à ¸ àThe€Court€finds€that€this€is€an€appropriate€case€for€an€interlocutoryÐ $ t Ðappeal.€€Counsel€for€the€parties€have€agreed€that€an€interlocutory€appeal€of€thisÐ  ` ÐCourtððs€Orders€granting€the€Motions€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€filed€by€CapitolsÐ ü L  Ð(sic)€Records,€Inc.€is€appropriate,€and€that€it€should€be€accomplished€by€enteringÐ è 8  Ðthose€Orders€as€final€judgments€pursuant€to€Rule€54.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€ofÐ Ô$  ÐCivil€Procedure.ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à2.à ¸ àThis€Courtððs€Final€Order€granting€the€Motion€of€Defendant€CapitolÐ ˜è  ÐRecords,€Inc.€for€Summary€Judgment€on€Counts€III„VI€of€Plaintiffsðð€First€AmendedÐ „Ô  ÐComplaint€provides€that€it€is€being€entered€as€a€final€judgment€pursuant€to€Rule€54.02Ð pÀ Ðof€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€It€is€hereby€ORDERED€that€this€CourtððsÐ \¬ ÐOrder€entered€herein€on€January€25,€2000,€control€number€156777€(granting€theÐ H˜ ÐMotion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€filed€on€October€29,€1999€by€Capitol€Records,Ð 4„ ÐInc.€herein)€and€this€Courtððs€Order€entered€herein€on€January€25,€2000,€controlÐ  p Ðnumber€256778€(granting€the€Second€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment€filed€onÐ  \ ÐNovember€19,€1999€by€Capitol€Records,€Inc.€herein)€are€hereby€entered€as€finalÐ øH Ðjudgments€pursuant€to€Rule€54.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€as€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€date€of€entry€of€this€Order,€because€the€Court€hereby€expressly€determines€thatÐ Ð  Ðthere€is€no€just€reason€for€delay€in€entering€those€Orders€as€final€judgments€and€theÐ ¼  ÐCourt€hereby€expressly€directs€entry€of€judgment€on€each€of€those€Orders€as€finalÐ ¨ø Ðjudgments€of€this€Court€pursuant€to€Rule€54.02€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CivilÐ ”ä ÐProcedure.ЀÐÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à3.à ¸ àCounsel€for€the€parties€agree€that€the€trial€of€the€remaining€issues€inÐ X ¨ Ðthis€case€should€be€continued€indefinitely,€pending€resolution€of€the€interlocutoryÐ D!” Ðappeals.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€of€this€case,€which€was€scheduled€to€begin€onÐ 0"€  ÐNovember€27,€2000,€is€hereby€continued€indefinitely.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àBefore€reaching€the€issues€in€this€case,€we€must€first€determine€whether€we€have€jurisdictionÐ ô$D # Ðof€the€appeal.€€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€13(b)€provides:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àReview€generally€will€extend€only€to€those€issues€presented€for€review.€€TheÐ ¸'#& Ðappellate€court€shall€also€consider€whether€the€trial€and€appellate€court€haveÐ ¤(ô#' Ðjurisdiction€over€the€subject€matter,€whether€or€not€presented€for€review,€and€may€inÐ )à$( Ðâ âits€discretion€consider€other€issues€in€order,€among€other€reasons:€(1)€to€preventÐ |*Ì%) Ðneedless€litigation,€(2)€to€prevent€injury€to€the€interest€of€the€public,€and€(3)€toÐ ° Ðprevent€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.ÐœìÐ Ð  Ðâ âÌTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€3(a)€provides:Ð tÄ Ðà8  àIn€civil€actions€every€final€judgment€entered€by€a€trial€court€from€which€an€appeal€liesÐ `° Ðto€the€Supreme€Court€or€Court€of€Appeals€is€appealable€as€of€right.€€Except€asÐ L œ Ðotherwise€permitted€in€Rule€9€and€in€Rule€54.02€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,Ð 8 ˆ Ðif€multiple€parties€or€multiple€claims€for€relief€are€involved€in€an€action,€any€orderÐ $ t Ðthat€adjudicates€fewer€than€all€the€claims€or€the€rights€and€liabilities€of€fewer€than€allÐ  ` Ðthe€parties€is€not€enforceable€or€appealable€and€is€subject€to€revision€at€any€timeÐ ü L  Ðbefore€entry€of€a€final€judgment€adjudicating€all€the€claims,€rights,€and€liabilities€ofÐ è 8  Ðall€parties.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌFinally,€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€54.02€provides:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà ` àMultiple€Claims€for€Relief.€€„€„€When€more€than€one€claim€for€relief€is€presentÐ „Ô  Ðin€an€action,€whether€as€a€claim,€counterclaim,€cross„claim,€or€third€party€claim,€orÐ pÀ Ðwhen€multiple€parties€are€involved,€the€court,€whether€at€law€or€in€equity,€may€directÐ \¬ Ðthe€entry€of€a€final€judgment€as€to€one€or€more€but€fewer€than€all€of€the€claims€orÐ H˜ Ðparties€only€upon€an€express€determination€that€there€is€no€just€reason€for€delay€andÐ 4„ Ðupon€an€express€direction€for€the€entry€of€judgment.€€In€the€absence€of€suchÐ  p Ðdetermination€and€direction,€any€order€or€other€form€of€decision,€however€designated,Ð  \ Ðthat€adjudicates€fewer€than€all€the€claims€or€the€rights€and€liabilities€of€fewer€than€allÐ øH Ðthe€parties€shall€not€terminate€the€action€as€to€any€of€the€claims€or€parties,€and€theÐ ä4 Ðorder€or€other€form€of€decision€is€subject€to€revision€at€any€time€before€the€entry€ofÐ Ð  Ðthe€judgment€adjudicating€all€the€claims€and€the€rights€and€liabilities€of€all€theÐ ¼  Ðparties.€Ð¨øÐ Ð  ÐÌThis€rule€is€identical€to€Federal€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€54(b).€€Therefore,€the€opinions€of€federalÐ €Ð Ðcourts€are€persuasive€authority€in€construing€the€finality€provisions€of€the€rule.€€òòBowman€v.€Henardóó,Ð l¼ Ð547€S.W.2d€527,€530€(Tenn.€1977).Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€basis€for€appellate€jurisdiction€in€this€case€is€the€action€of€the€trial€court€reflected€by€itsÐ 0"€  ÐMay€11,€2000€order€whereby€the€trial€court€certified€that€its€orders€of€January€25,€2000,€grantingÐ #l! Ðpartial€judgment€to€Capitol€on€the€implied€covenant€of€good€faith€question€and€the€amountÐ $X" Ðrecoverable€by€Tucker€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract,€were€final€judgments€andÐ ô$D # Ðthat€its€order€of€May€11,€2000,€granting€partial€summary€judgment€to€Capitol€on€counts€III„VI€ofÐ à%0!$ ÐTuckerððs€amended€complaint,€was€a€final€judgment€under€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€54.02.€Ð Ì&"% ÐThe€court€expressly€determined€that€there€was€no€just€reason€for€delay€in€entering€these€orders€asÐ ¸'#& Ðfinal€judgments.€€As€this€is€not€a€multi„party€case,€appellate€jurisdiction€under€Rule€54.02€must€standÐ ¤(ô#' Ðor€fall€on€the€ð ðmore€than€one€claim€for€reliefðð€provision€of€this€rule.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àFor€reasons€articulated€by€the€Supreme€Court€of€Tennessee€in€òòBayberry€Associates€v.€Jonesóó,Ð ° Ðâ â783€S.W.2d€553€(Tenn.€1990)€and€by€the€United€States€Sixth€Circuit€Court€of€Appeals€in€òòGeneralÐ œì ÐAcquisition,€Inc.€v.€GenCorp,€Inc.óó,€23€F.3d€1022€(6òòthóó€Cir.€1994),€we€have€determined€that€neither€theÐ ˆØ Ðorders€of€January€25,€2000,€nor€the€May€11,€2000€order€of€the€trial€court,€are€final€within€theÐ tÄ Ðmeaning€of€Rule€54.02.€€Thus,€this€Court€is€without€jurisdiction€to€consider€this€appeal.Ð `° ÐÌà  àIn€its€order€of€April€20,€1999€overruling€Tuckerððs€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€Judgment,€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðtrial€court€found€that€ð ðgenuine€issues€of€material€facts€exist€as€to€whether€Ms.€Tucker€wasÐ $ t Ðunconditionally€released€by€Capitol€from€the€March€8,€1993€Agreement,€including€Ms.€TuckerððsÐ  ` Ðrights€under€paragraph€2(a),€the€ððpay€or€playðð€provision.ððÐ ü L  ÐÌà  àIn€its€order€of€January€25,€2000€sustaining€Capitolððs€Motion€for€Partial€Summary€JudgmentÐ Ô$  Ðas€to€the€amount€that€would€be€owed€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract,€the€trialÐ À  Ðcourt€held€that€ð ðthe€issue€of€whether€Plaintiffs€are€entitled€to€any€so„called€ððpay€or€playðð€payment€orÐ ¬ü  Ðpayments€under€paragraph€2(a)€of€the€Agreement€is€reserved.ððÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àBy€holding€that€ð ðgenuine€issues€of€material€facts€exist€as€to€whether€Ms.€Tucker€wasÐ pÀ Ðunconditionally€released€by€Capitol€from€the€May€8,€1993€Agreement,€including€Ms.€Tuckerððs€rightsÐ \¬ Ðunder€paragraph€2(a),€the€ððpay€or€playðð€provisionðð€the€trial€court€has€held€that€genuine€issues€ofÐ H˜ Ðmaterial€fact€exist€as€to€whether€or€not€the€contract€was€in€full€force€and€effect€after€Tuckerððs€failureÐ 4„ Ðto€accept€the€conditions€set€forth€in€the€Ansel€Davis€letter€of€November€21,€1997.€€The€resolutionÐ  p Ðof€every€other€issue€in€the€case€is€dependent€on€the€resolution€of€that€contract€issue.€€Tucker€cannotÐ  \ Ðclaim€the€continued€viability€of€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract€while€disavowing€herÐ øH Ðexclusive€commitment€to€record€for€Capitol.€€At€the€same€time,€Capitol€has€no€right€to€disavow€theÐ ä4 Ðð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract€and€use€the€exclusive€recording€commitment€to€block€TuckerÐ Ð  Ðfrom€recording€for€another€company.Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àð ðWhen€the€court€orders€a€contract€rescinded€at€the€instance€of€one€of€the€parties,€the€lawÐ ”ä Ðrequires€that€the€parties€be€put€in€statu€quo.€€The€court€will€not€grant€to€a€party€recission€of€so€muchÐ €Ð Ðof€a€contract€as€militates€against€his€interest€and€allow€him€to€retain€the€benefit€of€that€portion€whichÐ l¼ Ðinures€to€his€benefit€or€profit.ðð€€òòBaird€v.€McDaniel€Printing€Co.óó,€153€S.W.2d€135,€138€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð X ¨ ÐApp.€1941).€€This€Court€has€observed:€ð ðThe€basic€premise€behind€disallowing€a€party€to€affirm€inÐ D!” Ðpart€and€repudiate€in€part€is€that€one€should€not€be€able€to€ððaccept€the€benefits€on€the€one€hand€whileÐ 0"€  Ðhe€shirks€its€disadvantages€on€the€other.ðð€17A€Ô_ÔC.J.S.Ô_Ô€òòContractsóó€ðð€416€(1963).ðð€€òòJames€CableÐ #l! ÐPartners,€L.P.€v.€Jamestownóó,€818€S.W.2d€338,€344€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àIf€the€contract€is€in€effect,€Capitol€owes€Tucker€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcontract.€€At€the€same€time,€a€grant€of€summary€judgment€as€to€counts€III„VI€of€the€amendedÐ Ì&"% Ðcomplaint€of€Tucker€would€seem€justified€since€Capitol€would€have€the€right€under€the€exclusiveÐ ¸'#& Ðrecording€provisions€to€protect€its€contractual€rights.€€Conversely,€if€the€contract€is€not€in€effect,Ð ¤(ô#' ÐCapitol€owes€nothing€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions,€and€the€interference€by€Capitol€withÐ )à$( ÐTuckerððs€recording€for€the€Tammy€Wynette€album€for€Asylum€might€well€support€the€tort€allegationsÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€paragraph€III„VI€of€Tuckerððs€amended€Ô_Ôcomplaint,Ô_Ô€at€least€at€the€summary€judgment€stage.€€But,Ð h+¸&* Ðneither€of€the€parties€can€unilaterally€terminate€the€contract,€though€either€or€both€may€unilaterallyÐ ° Ðor€bi„laterally€breach€the€contract€and€suffer€the€resulting€consequences.€€Speaking€for€this€Court,Ð œì ÐJudge€Sam€Felts,€with€his€customary€incisiveness,€observed:€ð ðAs€it€takes€two€to€make€a€contract,€itÐ ˆØ Ðtakes€two€to€unmake€it.€€It€cannot€be€changed€or€ended€by€one€alone,€but€only€by€mutual€assent€ofÐ tÄ Ðboth€parties.ðð€€òòAkers€v.€J.B.€Sedberry,€Inc.óó,€286€S.W.2d€617,€620„21€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1955).Ð `° ÐÌà  àAs€there€were€genuine€material€fact€issues€as€to€whether€or€not€the€contract€remainedÐ 8 ˆ Ðeffective,€the€trial€judge€correctly€refused€to€grant€summary€judgment€on€the€contract€issue.€€TheÐ $ t Ðdifficulty€for€the€parties,€and€for€the€court,€is€that€the€remainder€of€the€issues€in€the€case€simplyÐ  ` Ðcannot€be€adjudicated€without€the€court€first€adjudicating€the€contract€question.€€Tennessee€Rule€ofÐ ü L  ÐCivil€Procedure€54.02€does€not€provide€a€ð ðfast€trackðð€alternative€to€Tennessee€Rule€of€AppellateÐ è 8  ÐProcedure€9.€€òòBayberry€Ô_ÔAssocsÔ_Ô.óó,€783€S.W.2d€553;€òòÔ_ÔMosierÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔMosierÔ_Ôóó,€1989€WL€22832€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð Ô$  ÐMar.€17,€1989);€òòWilliams€v.€New€York€Times€Broad.€Ô_ÔServsÔ_Ô.,€Inc.óó,€1988€WL€27257€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð À  ÐMar.€23,€1988);€òòGeneral€Acquisition,€óó23€F.3d€1022.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  à€€€€In€òòGeneral€Ô_ÔAcquistionÔ_Ô,€óóÔ_ÔGenCorpÔ_Ô€sought€recovery€from€Shearson€for€part€of€its€cost€ofÐ „Ô  Ðfending€off€General€Acquisitionððs€hostile€takeover€bid.€€The€district€court€refused€to€grant€ShearsonððsÐ pÀ Ðmotion€for€summary€judgment€on€the€question€of€liability€but€did€grant€partial€summary€judgmentÐ \¬ Ðto€Shearson€on€the€question€of€damages.€€After€appellate€proceedings€not€material€to€ourÐ H˜ Ðconsideration,€GenCorp,€on€remand,€moved€for€reconsideration€of€the€previous€orders€of€the€trialÐ 4„ Ðcourt,€and€Shearson€renewed€its€motion€for€summary€judgment.€€The€district€court€repeated€itsÐ  p Ðposition€that€liability€remained€in€dispute€but€that€certain€damages€would€not€be€recoverable.€€TheÐ  \ Ðdistrict€court€then€certified€its€order€for€interlocutory€review€as€a€final€judgment€under€Federal€RuleÐ øH Ðof€Civil€Procedure€54(b).Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àIn€reversing€the€order€of€the€district€court€and€finding€the€certification€under€Rule€54(b)€ofÐ ¼  Ðthe€Federal€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€to€be€in€error,€the€Court€of€Appeals€for€the€Sixth€CircuitÐ ¨ø Ðconstrued€Rule€54(b)€in€a€lucid€and€expositive€opinion.€€The€portion€of€the€opinion€dealing€with€theÐ ”ä Ðmultiple€claims€prerequisite€of€Rule€54(b)€is€so€clear€and€complete€that€we€will€not€attempt€toÐ €Ð Ðimprove€on€it.€€Said€the€court:Ð l¼ ÐÌà8  àà ` àLitigants€in€a€single€claim,€two€party€dispute€may€not€resort€to€Rule€54(b)€asÐ D!” Ða€basis€for€appellate€jurisdiction.€€òòSee€Liberty€Mutual,€supra,óó€424€U.S.€at€742„43,€96Ð 0"€  ÐS.Ct.€at€1205„06.€€By€its€own€terms,€Rule€54(b)€applies€only€to€actions€involvingÐ #l! Ðeither€multiple€parties€or€multiple€claims.€€In€a€case€such€as€this,€involving€only€twoÐ $X" Ðparties,€Rule€54(b)€certification€necessarily€depends€upon€the€presence€of€multipleÐ ô$D # Ðclaims.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€òòLiberty€Mutualóó,€the€Supreme€Court€found€it€unnecessary€to€delineateÐ ¸'#& Ðprecisely€ð ðwhat€constitutes€a€claim€for€reliefðð€under€Rule€54(b).€€424€U.S.€at€744€n.Ð ¤(ô#' Ð4,€96€S.Ct.€at€1206€n.€4.€€The€lack€of€any€ð ðgenerally€accepted€testðð€often€makes€theÐ )à$( Ðtask€of€ascertaining€whether€a€particular€action€presents€one€or€more€claims€aÐ |*Ì%) Ðformidable€one.€€Wright,€Miller€&€Kane€ðð€2657;€2A€Federal€Procedure€ðð€3:342€(ð ðTheÐ h+¸&* Ðquestion€of€what€constitutes€a€single€claim€for€relief€is€unsettled€and€the€courts€areÐ ° Ðreluctant€to€articulate€a€hard„and„fast€testðð);€6€Moore€ðð€54.33[2]€(ð ðWith€the€doctrineÐ œì Ðthus€in€ferment€it€is€difficult€to€state€any€reliable€litmus€for€identifying€a€distinctÐ ˆØ Ðððclaim€for€relief.ðð€ðð).ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àAlthough€not€acknowledged€by€either€party,€the€interpretation€of€Rule€54(b)ððsÐ L œ Ðmultiple€claims€prerequisite€is€not€a€question€of€first€impression€in€this€circuit.€€WeÐ 8 ˆ Ðdismissed€the€appeal€in€òòMcIntyre€v.€First€National€Bank€of€Cincinnatióó,€585€F.2d€190,Ð $ t Ð191€(6òòthóó€Cir.€1978),€after€determining€that€the€absence€of€multiple€claims€left€theÐ  ` Ðdistrict€court€without€ð ðauthority€to€enter€final€judgmentðð€under€Rule€54(b).€€TheÐ ü L  Ðplaintiff€in€òòMcIntyreóó€had€alleged€state€and€federal€causes€of€action€arising€out€of€theÐ è 8  Ðsame€events.€€Pursuant€to€the€district€judgeððs€instructions,€the€federal€causes€of€actionÐ Ô$  Ðwere€tried€in€their€entirety€prior€to€any€disposition€of€the€state€causes€of€action.€€AtÐ À  Ðthe€conclusion€of€the€first€phase€of€the€suit,€the€district€court€entered€judgment€for€theÐ ¬ü  Ðdefendant€on€the€federal€causes€of€action.€€The€district€court€then€certified€this€orderÐ ˜è  Ðfor€immediate€appeal€under€Rule€54(b),€even€though€the€state€causes€of€actionÐ „Ô  Ðremained€unresolved.€€In€dismissing€the€appeal,€we€concluded€that€the€state€andÐ pÀ Ðfederal€causes€of€action€should€be€considered€a€single€ð ðclaimðð€under€Rule€54(b),Ð \¬ Ðbecause€they€shared€a€common€factual€background.€€We€explained€that€ð ð[e]venÐ H˜ Ðthough€different€theories€of€liability€may€have€been€asserted,€the€concept€of€a€ððclaimððÐ 4„ Ðunder€Rule€54(b)€denotes€ððthe€aggregate€of€operative€facts€which€give€rise€to€a€rightÐ  p Ðenforceable€in€the€courts.ðð€ðð€òòId.óó€at€192€(citing€òòBackus€Plywood€Corp.€v.€CommercialÐ  \ ÐDecal,€Inc.óó,€317€F.2d€339,€341€(2d€Cir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€375€U.S.€879,€84€S.Ct.€146,€11Ð øH ÐL.Ed.2d€110€(1963));€òòGottesman€v.€General€Motors€Corp.óó,€401€F.2d€510,€512€(2dÐ ä4 ÐCir.€1968)€(applying€ð ðoperative€factsðð€test€to€determine€whether€multiple€claims€wereÐ Ð  Ðpresent);€òòCMAX,€Inc.€v.€Drewry€Photocolor€Corp.óó,€295€F.2d€695,€697€(9òòthóó€Cir.€1961)Ð ¼  Ð(same).€€òòSee€alsoóó€2A€Federal€Procedure€ðð€3:342€(ð ðAs€used€in€FRCP€54(b),€a€ððclaimððÐ ¨ø Ð.€.€.€is€the€aggregate€of€operative€facts€which€give€rise€to€the€claimantððs€legal€rights.ðð).ДäÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àUnder€the€òòMcIntyreóó€test,€Rule€54(b)€certification€was€improper€in€this€caseÐ l¼ Ðbecause€all€of€GenCorpððs€allegations€concern€a€single€ð ðaggregate€of€operative€facts,ððÐ X ¨ Ðand€therefore€constitute€a€single€claim€for€purposes€of€appellate€jurisdiction.€Ð D!” ÐGenCorp€accuses€Shearson€of€a€single€wrong€ð!ð€prompting€General€Acquisition€toÐ 0"€  Ðtarget€GenCorp,€and€all€of€GenCorpððs€rights€against€Shearson€arise€from€the€seriesÐ #l! Ðof€events€preceding€the€attempted€hostile€takeover.€€The€fact€that€GenCorp€seeks€toÐ $X" Ðrecover€two€types€of€damages€ð!ð€compensation€and€disgorgement€ð!ð€does€not€convertÐ ô$D # Ða€single€claim€into€multiple€claims.€€ð ð[W]hen€a€plaintiff€is€suing€to€vindicate€oneÐ à%0!$ Ðlegal€right€and€alleges€several€elements€of€damage,€only€one€claim€is€presented€andÐ Ì&"% Ð[Rule€54(b)]€does€not€apply.ðð€€Wright€Miller€&€Kane€ðð€2657.€€òòSee€Liberty€Mutualóó,Ð ¸'#& Ð424€U.S.€at€744€n.€4,€96€S.Ct.€at€1206€n.€4€(ð ðrecogniz[ing]€that€a€complaint€assertingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðonly€one€legal€right,€even€if€seeking€multiple€remedies€for€the€alleged€violation€ofÐ )à$( Ðthat€right,€states€a€single€claim€for€reliefðð).€€A€district€courtððs€rejection€of€one€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðseveral€requests€for€relief€arising€from€a€single€wrong€does€not€establish€appellateÐ h+¸&* Ðjurisdiction€under€Rule€54(b).€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Arizona€State€Carpenters€Pension€TrustÐ ° ÐFund€v.€Milleróó,€938€F.2d€1038,€1040€(9òòthóó€Cir.€1991)€(no€appeal€permitted€fromÐ œì Ðdismissal€of€punitive€damages€claim€where€compensatory€damages€claim€remainedÐ ˆØ Ðin€district€court);€òòMonument€Management€Ltd.€Partnership€I€v.€City€of€Pearlóó,€952Ð tÄ ÐF.2d€883,€885€(5òòthóó€Cir.€1992)€(no€appeal€permitted€from€dismissal€of€consequentialÐ `° Ðdamages€claims€where€inverse€condemnation€claim€remained€in€district€court).ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àRather€than€applying€our€circuitððs€òòMcIntyreóó€test,€the€parties€urge€this€court€toÐ $ t Ðadopt€a€ð ðrecoveriesðð€test€for€counting€the€number€of€claims€in€an€action.€€Under€theÐ  ` Ðrecoveries€test,€originally€formulated€in€òòRieser€v.€Baltimore€&€Ohio€R.R.€Co.óó,€224Ð ü L  ÐF.2d€198€(2d€Cir.€1955),€multiple€claims€have€been€stated€when€a€claimantððsÐ è 8  Ðð ðpossible€recoveries€are€more€than€one€in€number€and€not€mutually€exclusive.ðð€Ð Ô$  ÐWright,€Miller€&€Kane€ðð€2657.€€Conversely,€only€one€claim€has€been€stated€when€ð ðaÐ À  Ðclaimant€presents€a€number€of€legal€theories,€but€will€be€permitted€to€recover€only€onÐ ¬ü  Ðone€of€them.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€In€other€words,€only€one€claim€exists,€despite€multiple€theories€ofÐ ˜è  Ðrecovery,€when€the€ð ðbases€for€recovery€are€mutually€exclusive,€or€simply€presentedÐ „Ô  Ðin€the€alternative.ðð€€òòId.óó€€GenCorp€suggests€that€multiple€claims€are€present€in€this€caseÐ pÀ Ðunder€the€recoveries€test€because€it€seeks€to€recover€two€distinct€types€of€damagesÐ \¬ Ðfrom€Shearson.€€Taking€a€slightly€different€tack,€Shearson€suggests€that€multipleÐ H˜ Ðclaims€are€present€in€this€case€under€the€recoveries€test€because€GenCorp€includedÐ 4„ Ðthree€different€liability€theories€in€its€pleadings€ð!ð€breach€of€fiduciary€duty,€fraud,€andÐ  p Ðnegligence.Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWe€are€satisfied€that€this€case€involves€only€a€single€claim€under€both€theÐ ä4 ÐòòMcIntyreóó€test€and€the€recoveries€test.€€As€we€have€already€explained,€only€one€claimÐ Ð  Ðexists€under€the€òòMcIntyreóó€test€because€all€of€the€causes€of€action€arise€out€a€singleÐ ¼  Ðaggregate€of€operative€facts.€€This€case€also€involves€a€single€claim€under€theÐ ¨ø Ðrecoveries€test€because:€(1)€GenCorpððs€request€for€two€types€of€relief€does€notÐ ”ä Ðconstitute€more€than€a€single€claim€under€any€ð ðmultiple€claimsðð€test,€and€(2)Ð €Ð ÐGenCorpððs€three€theories€of€liability€are€in€fact€mutually€exclusive.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àAccording€to€GenCorp,€the€claim€for€compensatory€damages€should€beÐ D!” Ðconsidered€separate€from€the€claim€for€disgorgement€because€recovery€under€oneÐ 0"€  Ðtheory€would€not€preclude€recovery€under€the€other.€€But€the€Supreme€CourtððsÐ #l! Ðholding€in€òòLiberty€Mutualóó€refutes€any€notion€that€requests€for€various€forms€of€reliefÐ $X" Ðarising€from€a€single€breach€of€fiduciary€duty€generates€multiple€claims€for€purposesÐ ô$D # Ðof€Rule€54(b).€€424€U.S.€at€744€n.€4,€96€S.Ct.€at€1206€n.€4;€6€Moore€ðð€54.33[2]Ð à%0!$ Ð(interpreting€òòLiberty€Mutualóó€as€ð ðstat[ing]€categorically€that€an€action€seekingÐ Ì&"% Ðrecovery€for€a€single€injury€and€based€upon€a€single€theory€of€liability€does€notÐ ¸'#& Ðpresent€more€than€one€claim€for€relief€because€the€plaintiff€demands€several€types€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðreliefðð);€Wright,€Miller€&€Kane€ðð€2657;€2A€Federal€Procedure€ðð€3:342.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà8  àà ` àShearson€would€find€multiple€claims€in€this€case€because€Ô_ÔGenCorpÔ_Ôððs€threeÐ ° Ðâ âliability€theories€pursue€what€Shearson€characterizes€as€ð ðnon„exclusiveðð€recoveries.€Ð œì ÐWe€might€find€this€argument€more€persuasive€if€GenCorpððs€theories€of€liability€wereÐ ˆØ Ðin€fact€non„exclusive.€€But€the€standard€of€exclusivity€gauges€the€extent€to€which€aÐ tÄ Ðplaintiff€might€be€entitled€to€more€than€one€recovery.€€As€one€commentator€explains,Ð `° Ðwhere€ð ða€favorable€judgment€on€[one]€count€would€bar€a€favorable€judgment€onÐ L œ Ð[another]€count,ðð€those€counts€seek€ð ð€ððmutually€exclusiveðð€recoveries,€and€hence€doÐ 8 ˆ Ðnot€constitute€multiple€claims.ðð€€Note,€òòFederal€Rule€54(b):€The€Multiple€ClaimsÐ $ t ÐRequirementóó,€43€VòòAóó.L.RòòEVóó.€229,€236€(1957).€€Because€all€three€of€GenCorpððsÐ  ` Ðliability€theories€seek€to€redress€a€common€injury€ð!ð€the€cost€of€defending€against€theÐ ü L  Ðhostile€takeover€ð!ð€it€is€simply€not€true€that€GenCorp€could€recover€more€than€once.€Ð è 8  ÐTo€the€extent€that€GenCorp€prevails€on€any€one€of€these€theories,€it€could€not€returnÐ Ô$  Ðto€court€under€another€theory€in€pursuit€of€a€double€or€triple€recovery.€€òòSee€EckmanÐ À  Ðv.€Columbia€Oldsmobile,€Inc.óó,€65€Ohio€App.3d€719,€585€N.E.2d€451,€452„53€(1989)Ð ¬ü  Ð(prohibiting€duplicative€recovery€for€an€injury€which€had€been€ð ðcuredðð€by€an€earlierÐ ˜è  Ðaward€of€relief).€€From€this€perspective,€GenCorp€has€not€stated€multiple€claims€ð!ð€itÐ „Ô  Ðhas€offered€alternative€theories€in€pursuit€of€one€recovery.€€GenCorp€is€clearly€notÐ pÀ Ðentitled€to€the€kind€of€multiple€recoveries€which€constitute€multiple€claims€under€theÐ \¬ Ðrecoveries€test.€€The€absence€of€multiple€claims€or€parties€in€this€case€renders€theÐ H˜ Ðdistrict€court€powerless€to€certify€the€April€Order€for€immediate€appeal€under€RuleÐ 4„ Ð54(b).Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌòòGeneral€Acquisition,€óó23€F.3d€at€1027„1029.Ð øH ÐÌà  àUnder€the€òòMcIntyreóó€test,€Tucker€and€Capitol€present€a€single€ð ðaggregate€of€operative€facts.ðð€Ð Ð  ÐLikewise,€just€as€General€Acquisition€failed€the€alternative€ð ðrecoveriesðð€test€of€òòÔ_ÔRieserÔ_Ôóóòòóó,€so€the€partiesÐ ¼  Ðin€the€case€at€bar€fail€this€alternative€test.€€The€remedies€sought€are€ð ðmutually€exclusive.ððÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€entire€relationship€between€Tucker€and€Capitol€involves€a€single€aggregate€of€operativeÐ €Ð Ðfacts.€€Whether€this€aggregate€of€operative€facts,€when€delineated€by€the€trial€court€after€trial€on€theÐ l¼ Ðmerits,€established€breach€of€contract,€termination€of€contract,€alternative€tort€liability€or€no€liability,Ð X ¨ Ðthese€facts€establish€a€single€claim€for€the€purposes€of€appellate€jurisdiction€under€Tennessee€RuleÐ D!” Ðof€Civil€Procedure€54.02.€€It€is€equally€true€that,€under€the€ð ðrecoveriesðð€test,€the€types€of€relief€soughtÐ 0"€  Ðby€Tucker€do€not€constitute€more€than€a€single€claim,€and€the€two€theories€of€liability€(contract€andÐ #l! Ðtort)€are,€in€fact,€mutually€exclusive.€€Ô_ÔTuckerÔ_Ô€cannot€recover€both€in€breach€of€contract€and€in€tort.€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àSpecifically€addressing€the€certification€for€appellate€review€of€the€contract€provision€relativeÐ à%0!$ Ðto€the€amount€of€recovery€available€under€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€of€the€contract,€we€observeÐ Ì&"% Ðagain€from€òòGeneral€Acquisitionóó:€ð ðAppellate€review€of€a€question€of€damages€prior€to€anyÐ ¸'#& Ðdetermination€of€liability€puts€the€proverbial€cart€before€the€horse,€and€such€certifications€are€clearlyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðreversible€under€the€law€of€this€circuit.ðð€€òòGeneral€Acquisitionóó,€23€F.3d€at€1031.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àOn€the€record€before€us,€the€construction€by€the€trial€court€of€the€ð ðpay€or€playðð€provisions€ofÐ ° Ðâ âthe€contract€seems€highly€questionable.€€Likewise,€it€is€difficult€to€see€from€the€record€how€theÐ œì Ðcontract€was€ever€terminated.€€We€can,€however,€make€no€determination€as€to€any€of€these€issuesÐ ˆØ Ðsince€we€determine€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€is€without€jurisdiction€to€entertain€the€appeal€in€thisÐ tÄ Ðcase€for€lack€of€finality€of€the€judgment€under€Rule€54.02.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€only€way€this€court€could€entertain€this€appeal€is€by€the€method€suggested€but€rejectedÐ 8 ˆ Ðin€òòBayberry€Associatesóó,€wherein€the€Supreme€Court€observed:Ð $ t ÐÌà8  àà ` àUnless€an€appeal€from€an€interlocutory€order€is€provided€by€the€rules€or€byÐ ü L  Ðstatute,€appellate€courts€have€jurisdiction€over€final€judgments€only.€€òòAetna€CasualtyÐ è 8  Ð&€Surety€Co.€v.€Milleróó,€491€S.W.2d€85€(Tenn.€1973).€€Tennessee€Rule€of€AppellateÐ Ô$  ÐProcedure€2€authorizes€the€suspension€of€all€but€Tenn.€Rs.€Civ.€P.€4,€11€or€12.€Ð À  ÐTherefore,€we€find€no€bar€to€the€suspension€of€Rule€3(a).€€However,€there€must€be€aÐ ¬ü  Ðgood€reason€for€suspension€and€the€record€should€affirmatively€show€that€the€rule€hasÐ ˜è  Ðbeen€suspended.€€Here,€we€are€not€persuaded€that€there€is€good€reason,€nor€does€theÐ „Ô  Ðrecord€show€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€intended€to€suspend€Tenn.€R.€AppellateÐ pÀ ÐProcedure€P.€3(a).Ð\¬Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€trial€court€improperly€entered€a€final€judgment€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.Ð 4„ ÐP.€54.02,€and€the€Court€of€Appealsðð€opinion€in€òòBayberry€Associatesóó€should€beÐ  p Ðvacated.€€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌòòBayberry€Ô_ÔAssocsÔ_Ô.,óó€783€S.W.2d€at€559.€€We€are€not€persuaded€that€good€reason€exists€in€this€case€toÐ ä4 Ðjustify€suspension€of€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€3(a).Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€declaring€its€orders€to€be€final€orders€under€Ô_ÔT.R.C.P.Ô_Ô€54.02€Ð ¨ø Ðis€vacated,€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€trial.€€We€adjudicate€nothing€on€the€issues€of€law€or€fact€inÐ ”ä Ðthe€case€as€our€opinion€is€limited€to€the€erroneous€designation€of€the€trial€court€relative€to€finalityÐ €Ð Ðunder€Ô_ÔT.R.C.P.Ô_Ô€54.02.€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àCosts€of€the€appeal€are€assessed€equally€to€the€parties.€€Ð D!” ÐÌ€ÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ô$D # Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGE