WPC R? t|M~`;! MȩZu$#VXs %JB 9'u d$O-#͋nB1/c5̳)Nsy3!Z(B&/ɵ] ' 1đj,lTjЈR-BvKVrIC>+DZ:Ȣ) 9eRĶ}B罁0 4&:E});@ʡ3\))~ 'Y?$B04HREvk28$ߑߤ{8 =Fu6j3]{O}f&2af\>,]ῊZKZHIY7RT.lc`ЗDdx"2&v_խN\|=MBX]I h j "Zi_ Xɝ uE"ҭ]]4IUXHY "lIdڔ(b %\U@b 0 72*UN\ 0c 0w z  0 0Z 0 1  J 0N< 0> 0E 0D 1u& 72 1 72T 1 72 U<?^ {w4 m#b 0 B 0 D3h D- 0K ASf 0, 0D A(9 Z(Times New Roman (`$.8dd8     "("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(# 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.wpt(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#   h6CEIMQUY]aAutoList1""""""""i)1)a)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(# 3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)   hFCEIMQUY]aAutoList2""""""""i)1)a)"   hVCEIMQUY]aAutoList3""""""""i)1)a)"-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman) "q~)Cxk23|xUHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0     - -(|G2$ !.8Td d 8         0  ) d(|3$ !.8Td d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8Td d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Wdd d8     _  Wd88DXXdd 8  &S'[@ WdINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#Wd.#Ԉ    October18,2000Session 8 X8DXWd #WdXX8D#EDWARDM._TUGGLE_,JR.,ASEXECUTOROFTHEESTATEOF . MAXINEN._TUGGLE_v._AMISUB_Ԁ(_SFH_),INC.,d/b/aST.FRANCIS  < HOSPITALX8DXWd   J @@ ADirectAppealfromCircuitCourtforShelbyCounty  B @@No.93577T.D.TheHonorableKayS._Robilio_,Judge  ,  @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W199902444_COA_ԄR3CVFiledNovember21,2000   AV) ` dE<f` A g    XXXX8DPatientsuedhospitalforinjuriessustainedwhenshefellafterhospitalpersonnelfailedtorespond ` tohercallforassistancetogotothebathroom.Patientwenttothebathroomwithoutincidentand L thendecidedtobatheherfeetwhileshewasoutofbed.Patientfilledapanofwaterandsatina 8 chairbathingherfeetwhenthetelephonerang.Whenshegotuptoanswerthetelephoneacrossthe $t room,herwetfeetslippedonthefloor,andshefell,sustaininginjuries.Thetrialcourtgranted ` hospitalsummaryjudgment,andpatienthasappealed. L   #X8DXXX##WdXX8D#X8DXWd _Tenn.R.App.P._Ԁ3,AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed     #WdX8D#X8DX.WdW.FrankCrawford,P.J.,W.S.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichAlanE._Highers_, | J.andHollyKirby_Lillard_,J.,joined. f StephenR._Leffler_,Memphis,ForAppellant,EdwardM._Tuggle_,Jr. :!  DavidM.Cook,KarenL.Schlesinger,GregA._Ziskind_,Memphis,ForAppellee,_AMISUB_,Inc. #^"   OPINION #WdXX8D #X8DXWd $2 $ #WdXX8D #X8DXWd    Plaintiffappellant,Maxine_Tuggle_,suedthedefendant,_AMISUB_,Inc.,d/b/aSt.Francis &"& Hospital,forpersonalinjuriesallegedlysustainedwhileplaintiffwasapatientinthehospital. '"' Plaintiffappealedtheorderofthetrialcourtgrantingsummaryjudgmenttodefendant,andwhile (#( theappealwaspending,plaintiffdied.EdwardM._Tuggle_,Jr.,Executorofherestate,was t)$) substitutedaspartyplaintiffappellant. ^*%*   ThecomplaintallegesthatMs._Tuggle_,82yearsofage,wasadmittedasapatientatSt. 2,', FrancisHospitalinthelatenighthoursofFebruary8,1998,forapulmonaryproblem.The -l(- complaintallegesthatshewasassignedaroomandwasinstructedbythenursesinthehospitalto  refrainfrommovingabouttheroomwithouttheassistanceofhospitalpersonnel.Atapproximately  10:30a.m.onFebruary9,1998,Ms._Tuggle_Ԁneededassistanceingettingfromherbedtothe  bathroom.Sheallegedthatshenotifiedthepersonnelofherneedandthatafterwaitingforsome n periodoftimewithnoresponsetotheinitialrequest,sheonceagainrequestedassistanceandwaited X foranotherperiodoftime.Noonerespondedtohersecondrequest.Thecomplaintthenallegesin B  pertinentpart: , | 8  8`   11.Ms._Tuggle_Ԁeventuallycouldnolongerwaitforassistanceand  P proceededtothebathroomonherown.Onceshefinishedinthe  :  bathroom,shepouredwaterintoapan,proceededtoachairinthe  $  room,satinthechairandplacedherfeetinthewater.Herfeetwere   botheringherandthiswastheonlythingthatsheknewthatwould   relievethepain. ` x` x 8  8`   12.Asshesatwithherfeetinthewater,thetelephonerang.Ms. f  _Tuggle_Ԁrosetoanswerthetelephoneandherwetfeetslippedonthe P linoleumfloorofthehospitalroom.:` x` x 8  8`   13.Ms._Tuggle_Ԁfellbackwardsandsufferedacompoundfractureto ^ herleftshoulderandvariousotherinjuriestoherbodyasawhole.H` x` x Thecomplaintfurtherallegesthatthehospitalpersonnelfailedtousereasonablecareinresponding  toMs._Tuggle_srequestandthattheirnegligencewasthecauseofhersufferingtheallegedinjuries.    Defendantsanswerdeniedthematerialallegationsofthecomplaintastonegligenceonthe  partofthedefendantandjoinedissuethereon.Theanswerasanaffirmativedefensereliesuponthe t doctrineofcomparativefaultastotheactionsoftheplaintiff. ^   Thetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmenttodefendant,andplaintiffhasappealed.Theonly 2 issuepresentedforreviewiswhetherthetrialcourterredingrantingsummaryjudgmentto  l defendant. !V X8DXXX8D  #X8DXXX8Dm#X8DXXX8DAmotionforsummaryjudgmentshouldbegrantedwhenthe_movant_Ԁdemonstratesthatthere "*! arenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthatthemovingpartyisentitledtoajudgmentasamatter #" oflaw.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.04.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmentbearstheburdenof $# demonstratingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactexists. See_Bain_Ԁv.Wells ,936S.W.2d618,622 % $ (Tenn.1997).Onamotionforsummaryjudgment,thecourtmusttakethestrongestlegitimateview &!% oftheevidenceinfavorofthenonmovingparty,allowallreasonableinferencesinfavorofthat l'"& party,anddiscardallcountervailingevidence. Seeid. In Byrdv.Hall ,847S.W.2d208(Tenn. V(#' 1993),ourSupremeCourtstated: @)$( 8  8`   Onceitisshownbythemovingpartythatthereisnogenuineissue **z%) ofmaterialfact,thenonmovingpartymustthendemonstrate,by +d&* affidavitsordiscoverymaterials,thatthereisagenuine,materialfact +N'+ disputetowarrantatrial.Inthisregard,Rule56.05[nowRule56.06]  providesthatthenonmovingpartycannotsimplyrelyuponhis  pleadingsbutmustsetforthspecificfactsshowingthatthereisa  genuineissueofmaterialfactfortrial.#X8DXXX8D#X8DXXX8D8@N` x` x n  Id. at211(citationsomitted)(emphasisinoriginal). B   Summaryjudgmentisonlyappropriatewhenthefactsandthe  f legalconclusionsdrawnfromthefactsreasonablypermitonlyone  P conclusion. See_Carvell_Ԁv.Bottoms ,900S.W.2d23,26(Tenn.  :  1995).Sinceonlyquestionsoflawareinvolved,thereisno  $  presumptionofcorrectnessregardingatrialcourt'sgrantofsummary   judgment. See_Bain_ ,936S.W.2dat622.Therefore,ourreviewof   thetrialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgmentis denovo ontherecord   beforethisCourt. SeeWarrenv.EstateofKirk ,954S.W.2d722, |  723(Tenn.1997).#X8DXXX8D("#X8DXXX8D f ` x` x  #X8DXXX8DH&#XXXX8D  Forpurposesofsummaryjudgment,defendantconsidersthefactsundisputedasestablished : bythedepositiontestimonyofplaintiffandasupportingaffidavitfromherdaughter,Virginia_Ilardi_. &v Wequotefromtheplaintiffsbrief: b 8  8`    Maxine_Tuggle_,age82,sufferedfromchronicobstructive : pulmonarydisease,aconditionalsoknownasemphysema.On & February9,1998shewasadmittedtoSt.FrancisHospitalafter  complainingofbreathingdifficulties.Herdaughter,Virginia_Ilardi_,  broughtMs._Tuggle_Ԁtothehospital.Atthattime_Ilardi_Ԁcouldbarely  gethermothertothecar.Oncearrivingatthehospitalhermother  wasputinawheelchairandtransportedtoastretcherinthe r emergencyexamroomwheresheremainedforsixhoursandwas ^ thentakentoaprivateroomonastretcher.J` x` x 8  8`    WhenMs._Tuggle_Ԁwasadmitted,shewasinstructedbythe "!r nursesatSt.Francestonotgetoutofbedwithoutsomeones "^  assistance.Infact,shewastoldtorefrainfromgoingtothebathroom "J! oranythingelseunlesssomebodywaswithher.#6"` x` x 8  8`    Ms._Tuggle_Ԁwasadmittedtothehospitalandtakentoher %!$ roomsometimeaftermidnight.Shesleptthroughthenightand &!% awokethatnextmorningatapproximately6:00a.m.About10:30 '"& a.m.Ms._Tuggle_Ԁneededassistancegettingfromthebedtothe (#' bathroom.Shepressedtheappropriatebuttontosummonthenurse. n)$( Avoicecameontheintercomandaskedherwhatshewanted.She Z*%) repliedthatsheneededtogotothebathroomandneededtohave F+&* someonewithher.Thevoiceontheotherendoftheintercomsaid 2,'+  OKandMs._Tuggle_Ԁwaitedforapproximately15to20minutes.  Shecalledthenursesstationagain,toldthemsheneededtogotothe  bathroomandonceagainsheheardthereply OK.` x` x 8  8`    Afterfurtherwaitingshegaveuponanyassistancefromthe ` nursingstaffandwalkedonherowntothebathroom.Sheusedthe L  bathroomfacilities.Onherwayoutofthebathroomshepoured 8  waterinasmallbasinandcarriedittoachairsoshecouldsoakher $ t feet.Herfeethadbeenswellingandtheyfelttohertobestinging,  ` andshehopedthatthewatercouldgivehersomerelief. L ` x` x 8  8`    AsMs._Tuggle_Ԁsatinachairsoakingherfeet,thetelephone $  rang.Itwaslocatedfiveorsixfeetaway.Shestoodtoanswerthe   telephone,herwetfeetslippedonthelinoleumandshefell,   sustainingacompoundfracturetoherleftshoulder. ` x` x 8  8`    Ms._Tuggle_Ԁlayonthefloorwithaboneprotrudingfromher p leftshoulderandbloodpouringontothefloor.Shescreamedfor \ help.Apparentlysomeoneheardhershoutsandsixorsevenpeople H respondedbyenteringtheroom.Oneofthosepresentwasan 4 orthopaedicsurgeon,Dr.Moffett.Dr.Moffett jammed[thebone]  p backdownintoplaceand,ofcourse,Iwasclimbinguphisarmand  \ holleringthewholetime.H` x` x 8  8`    ` x` x   Appellantassertsthatthehospitalassumedadutyofactingwithreasonablecare,andwhen   thenursesinstructedMs._Tuggle_Ԁnottoleavethebedwithoutassistance,theyassumedadutyto   respondtohercallsandassistherasneeded.Theappellantfurtherassertsthatitisreasonableto  inferthatifthenurseshadrespondedtohercallforassistance,Ms._Tuggle_Ԁcouldhavetoldthemthat  herfeetwerehurting.Theycouldthenhaveassistedherwithtreatingherfootconditionwithout  placingheracrosstheroomfromthetelephone. l   Defendant,ontheotherhand,assertsthatinassumingadutytorespondtoassistMs._Tuggle_ D! tothebathroom,itisnotforeseeablethatshewouldundertaketosoakherfeetandthenwithwetfeet 0"  getuptoansweratelephoneacrosstheroomonalinoleumfloor. #l!   Anegligenceclaimrequiresaplaintifftoprovethefollowingelements:(1)adutyofcare $D # owedbythedefendanttotheplaintiff;(2)conductbythedefendantfallingbelowthestandardof %0!$ careamountingtoabreachoftheduty;(3)aninjuryorloss;(4)causationinfact;and(5)proximate &"% causation. SeeRicev._Sabir_ ,979S.W.2d305,308(Tenn.1998). '#&   Thegeneralruleisthatahospitalmustexercisesuchreasonablecaretowardapatientasthe )$( knownconditionmayrequire,theextentandcharacterofwhichdependsuponthecircumstancesof |*%) eachcase. See_Keeton_Ԁv.MauryCountyHospital ,713S.W.2d314,316(Tenn.Ct.App.1986); h+&*  _Spivey_Ԁv.St.ThomasHospital ,31Tenn.App.12,211S.W.2d450,455(1947).Intheinstantcase,  thehospitalpersonnelobviouslyinstructedMs._Tuggle_Ԁnottogetoutofbedwithoutassistance  becauseofherseverepulmonarydeficiency.Asomewhatsimilarsituationexistedin _Keeton_Ԁv.  MauryCountyHospital,supra .In _Keeton_ ,the79yearoldplaintiffwasadmittedtothehospital t withaprostatecondition.Thehospitalwasadviseduponadmissionthathehadabalanceproblem, ` orvertigo,andwouldneedhelpwhenhegotoutofbed.Afterundergoingprostatesurgery,hewas L  catheterizedseveraldays,andwhenthecatheterwasremovedbyhisphysician,oneofthenurses 8  fromthehospitalwaspresent.Theplaintiffatthattimeadvisedthenurseofhisvertigocondition $ t andthenecessityforassistanceifhegotofbed,andthenursespecificallyinstructedplaintifftocall  ` forhelpwhenhewasgettingoutofbed.Subsequently,theplaintiff,likeMs._Tuggle_,utilizedthe  L  callsystemseekingassistancetogotothebathroom.Anursecametothedoorandadvisedhimthat  8  anorderlywouldcome,butafterseveralattemptstogethelp,theplaintiffcalledhissontellinghim $  ofhisdistress,andthesonswifeinturncalledthehospitalswitchboardseekingtogethimsome   assistancebuttonoavail.Afterreceivingnoassistance,plaintiff,beinginsuchdistressthathefelt   thathewasabouttowetthebed,gotoutofbedtogotothebathroomandonhisreturntobedhelost   hisbalance,fellandbrokehiship.     ThisCourtheldthatthehospitalknewandcouldforeseethattheplaintiffmightsustaininjury \ ifheattemptedtogetupandgotothebathroomunassisted.Wepointedoutthathewasalucid, H mentallycompetentpatient,andwasingreatdistressbecauseofhisneedtourinate.Westated: 4 8  8`   Underthesecircumstances,wefeelthatthehospitalcouldreasonably  \ foreseethatifitdidnotprovidemeanstotakecareofthepatients H physicaldemands,thepatientwouldattempttotakecareofthem 4 himself.Theplaintiffscourseofactioninthiscasecouldhavebeen   reasonablyexpectedfromanaveragepatientandshouldhavebeen   foreseenbythehospital.` x` x  _Id. at_Ԁ318.We,therefore,reasonedthatthehospitalsinactionconstitutedafailureonthepartofthe  hospitaltousereasonableandordinarycareunderthecircumstances,andthisdirectlyand l proximatelycausedtheinjurytotheplaintiff.Westatedthatthehospitaldidnotexercisesuch X  reasonablecaretowardtheplaintiffashisknownconditionrequired. Seeid. at318. D!   IntheinstantcaseMs._Tuggle_Ԁwasnotinjuredbecauseshewasforcedtogetupbyphysical #l! demandsandnegotiateherwaytoandfromthebathroom.Althoughthehospitalhadadutyto $X" exercisereasonablecareunderthecircumstances,defendantassertsthatthismustbegaugedby $D # reasonable_foreseeability_Ԁbythehospital thatnotescortingMs._Tuggle_Ԁtotherestroomwouldresult %0!$ inherfillingapanwithwater,arrangingthepantosoakherfeet,extractingherfeetfromthewater, &"% andwalkingacrosstheroomwithoutdryingherfeettoanswerthetelephone. '#&   Inconsideringtheconceptofaspecificdutyowedwhenanentityischargedwiththeduty )$( ofexercisingreasonablecareunderthecircumstances,welooktotheguidanceofourSupremeCourt |*%) in Doev._Linder_ԀConst.Co.,Inc., 845S.W.2d173(Tenn.1992),wheretheCourtstated: h+&*  &S'[ & '& '  8  8`    Ifthedefendantsfailedtoexercisereasonablecareunderthe p circumstancesthentheybreachedtheirdutytotheplaintiffs.The \ termreasonablecaremustbegivenmeaninginrelationtothe H circumstances. McCormickv.Waters ,594S.W.2d385,387(Tenn. 4 1980).Ordinary,orreasonable,careistobeestimatedbytherisk   entailedthroughprobabledangersattendingtheparticularsituation   andistobecommensuratewiththeriskofinjury. Leachv._Asman_ ,  t 130Tenn.510,514,172_S.W._Ԁ303(1914).Theriskinvolvedisthat  ` whichisforeseeable;ariskisforeseeableifareasonablepersoncould  L  foreseetheprobabilityofitsoccurrenceorifthepersonwasonnotice  8  thatthelikelihoodofdangertothepartytowhomisowedadutyis  $  probable._Foreseeability_Ԁisthetestofnegligence.Iftheinjurywhich   occurredcouldnothavebeenreasonablyforeseen,thedutyofcare   doesnotarise,andeventhoughtheactofthedefendantinfactcaused l  theinjury,thereisnonegligenceandnoliability. See_Spivey_Ԁv.St. X  ThomasHospital ,31Tenn.App.12,211S.W.2d450,456(1948). D  [_T]he_Ԁplaintiffmustshowthattheinjurywasareasonably 0 foreseeableprobability,notjustaremotepossibility,andthatsome  actionwithinthe[defendants]powermoreprobablythannotwould  havepreventedtheinjury. _Tedder_ ,728S.W.2dat348. p _Foreseeability_Ԁmustbedeterminedasofthetimeoftheactsor \ omissionsclaimedtobenegligent.H` x` x     (Vx3   `    *0 h 0h(#h(#*0(#(#0p(#(#* p(#p(# 8  8`   Thepertinentquestioniswhethertherewasanyshowingfromwhich | itcanbesaidthatthedefendantsreasonablykneworshouldhave h knownoftheprobabilityofanoccurrencesuchastheonewhich T causedtheplaintiffsinjuries. _Corbitt_ ,496S.W.2dat918.@` x` x  Id. at178.     Inthiscase,asin _Keeton_ ,thehospitalpersonnelcouldeasilyforeseethatapatientindire !l! distressbecauseofacompellingneedtoexerciseabodilyfunction,wouldattempttogettothe "X" bathroom.However,atthispointthesimilarityto _Keeton_ ends.Ms._Tuggle_Ԁsuccessfullynegotiated #D # hertriptoandfromthebathroom,andindoingsodecidedonanotherendeavorsoakingherfeet. $0!$ Shedidnotcallthenursesstationorotherwiseseekassistanceforthisendeavor;thus,shewasnot %"% deniedassistance.TherewasnocompellingreasonforMs._Tuggle_Ԁtogetoutofbedtosoakherfeet, &#& norshouldthedefendantbechargedwith_foreseeability_Ԁthatshewouldattempttowalkbarefootwith x'#' wetfeetacrossthefloortoanswerthetelephone. d($(   Assumingforthepurposesofargumentthatplaintiffhasestablishedaduty,breachofduty, <*&* andinjury,thelasttwoelementsforsuchanaction,causeinfactandproximatecause,mustbe (+'+ established.In Snyderv._Ltg_._Lufttechnische_Ԁ_GMbh_ ,955S.W.2d252(Tenn.1997),ourSupreme ,(, Courtexplainedthedistinctionbetweencauseinfactandproximateorlegalcause.TheCourtsaid: -|)- Ї8  8`   Thedistinctionbetweencauseinfactandproximate,orlegal,cause  isnotmerelyanexerciseinsemantics.Thetermsarenot p interchangeable.Althoughbothcauseinfactandproximate,orlegal, \ causeareelementsofnegligencethattheplaintiffmustprove,they H areverydifferentconcepts. _Ridings_ ,914S.W.2dat83; _Kilpatrick_Ԁv. 4 Bryant ,868S.W.2d594,598(Tenn.1993).Causeinfactrefersto   thecauseandeffectrelationshipbetweenthedefendantstortious   conductandtheplaintiffsinjuryorloss.Thus,causeinfactdeals  t withthe butforconsequencesofanact.Thedefendantsconduct  ` isacauseoftheeventiftheeventwouldnothaveoccurredbutfor  L  thatconduct. _Kilpatrick_ ,868S.W.2dat598.Incontrast,proximate  8  cause,orlegalcause,concernsadeterminationofwhetherlegal  $  liabilityshouldbeimposedwherecauseinfacthasbeenestablished.    Id. Proximateorlegalcauseisapolicydecisionmadebythe   legislatureorthecourtstodenyliabilityforotherwiseactionable l  conductbasedonconsiderationsoflogic,commonsense,policy, X  precedentand ourmoreorlessinadequatelyexpressedideasofwhat D justicedemandsorofwhatisadministrativelypossibleand 0 convenient. _Bain_Ԁv.Wells ,936S.W.2d618,625(Tenn.1997);   Georgev.Alexander ,931S.W.2d517,521(Tenn.1996); _Kilpatrick_ ,  868S.W.2dat598; Smithv.Gore ,728S.W.2d738,749(Tenn. p 1987).\` x` x  Id. at256n.6. 4   Intheinstantcase,aspreviouslynoted,Ms._Tuggle_Ԁembarkeduponaendeavorofherown   withoutseekingtheassistanceofhospitalpersonnel,andMs._Tuggle_sactionresultedinherfall. | Thefailureofthehospitalpersonneltorespondtohercallforassistancetogotothebathroomdid h notcausehertoundertaketosoakherfeetandthenattempttowalkacrossthefloortoanswerthe T telephone. @   Accordingly,weaffirmtheorderofthetrialcourtgrantingsummaryjudgmenttodefendant.   Thecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessary.Costsof !  theappealareassessedtoappellant,EdwardM._Tuggle_,Jr.,andhissurety.#X8DXXX&##WdXX8D #X8DXWd !l!    `     h   __________________________________________ %"%    `     h   W.FRANKCRAWFORD,PRESIDINGJUDGE, &#&