ÿWPC  UhÎä·Ëg}ÎÅgˆg𵨼Ë|}¤í••?V‰bAzfݽÛaïoa(‡=ÿ*. =ÌP™ÔÁðªü ¾h‡}‹jFÆýoš‚ ãPU%í°‹œ ;÷µ{ÕnL¼ú×·ÉÁš‚€´àZ÷PT“jZ DÌ*Öp°É¤¼/†g€wуdTÌw þç•éj³Í_M~çÂPu“’q³ ÖDiàÉ¢Un&p¦dÆWpœ´‰WÑ€íiuU#Aá²³n’¼5·i»\1¿.¼…ëŽ Ðand€òòHolly€M.€Kirby,€J.óó,€joined.Ð ' w ÐÌRobert€D.€Flynn,Memphis,€TN;€Steele€B.€Windle,€III,€David€Hill€Bashford,€Charlotte,€NC,€forÐ ù!I! ÐAppellantÐ â"2" ÐÌCarl€K.€Wyatt,€Tim€Edwards,€Memphis,€TN,€for€AppelleesÐ ´$ $ ÐÓE ÓÌò òÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINIONó óÔ#†¼‚q»XXÛt #ÔÔ‡XÛX»¼‚qÔÐ Ö-&).ý ЇòòóóÔ#†¼‚q»XXÛo #ÔÔ‡XÛX»¼‚qÔÓ  Óò òÔ‡X1®XXXÛÔà@ûûìàFacts€and€Procedural€Historyó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àThe€facts€of€this€case,€gathered€from€the€pleadings€of€the€proceedings€below,׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€are€as€follows.€Ð ƒÓ ÐVickery€Transportation,€Inc.€(ð ðVickeryðð)€and€Grammer€Industries,€Inc.€(ð ðGrammerðð€or€collectivelyÐ l¼ Ðwith€Vickery,€ð ðAppelleesðð)€are€two€corporations€organized€under€the€laws€of€Ohio€and€Indiana,Ð U¥ Ðrespectively.€€Appellees€are€in€the€business€of€transporting€hazardous€waste€materials.€€Vickery€wasÐ > Ž Ðcontacted€about€the€transportation€of€hazardous€waste€materials€from€Helena,€Arkansas,€to€Vickery,Ð ' w ÐOhio.€€On€May€21,€2002,€while€transporting€the€waste€materials€on€Interstate€40,€the€driver€of€theÐ  ` ÐVickery€truck€pulled€over€in€Haywood€County,€Tennessee.€Ð ù I ÐÌà  àAfter€pulling€over,€the€driver€of€the€truck€noticed€that€the€hazardous€waste€materials€wereÐ Ë   Ðbeginning€to€react,€causing€the€chemicals€to€spill€out€of€the€truck€and€on€the€ground.€€VickeryÐ ´  Ðcontacted€a€company€named€Spill€Center€(ð ðSpill€Centerðð),€who€maintains€a€list€of€companies€thatÐ í  Ðspecialize€in€hazardous€waste€material€clean„ups.€€HEPACO,€Inc.€(ð ðHEPACOðð€or€ð ðAppellantðð)Ð †Ö  Ðappeared€on€Spill€Centerððs€list€and€had€an€outdated€service€agreement€with€a€schedule€of€chargesÐ o¿  Ðon€file€with€Spill€Center.€€As€a€result,€Spill€Center€contacted€Appellant€and€requested€its€servicesÐ X¨  Ðto€clean€up€the€hazardous€waste€materials€leaking€from€Vickeryððs€truck.€Ð A‘ ÐÌà  àAt€approximately€11:15€p.m.,€Mark€Cooley€(ð ðCooleyðð),€a€terminal€manager€for€Vickery,Ð c Ðcontacted€a€representative€at€HEPACO,€inquiring€about€the€possibility€of€beginning€a€clean„upÐ üL Ðoperation.€€Subsequently,€on€May€22,€2002,€Cooley€was€advised€by€another€HEPACO€representativeÐ å5 Ðthat,€although€a€clean„up€team€was€almost€at€the€spill€site,€Cooley,€or€another€Vickery€representative,Ð Î Ðwas€required€to€execute€HEPACOððs€Blanket€Rapid€Response€Services€Agreement€(ð ðAgreementðð)Ð · Ðbefore€HEPACO€performed€any€work.€€On€May€22,€2002,€at€12:18€a.m.,€HEPACO€faxed€a€copy€ofÐ  ð Ðthe€Agreement€to€Cooley,€who€executed€the€Agreement.€€After€Cooley€signed€the€Agreement,Ð ‰Ù ÐHEPACO€began€work€on€the€clean„up€operation.€€During€this€delay€in€the€HEPACO€teamððs€arrival,Ð r Ðrepresentatives€with€the€fire€department€and€the€Tennessee€Emergency€Management€AgencyÐ [« Ð(ð ðTEMAðð)€insisted€that€someone€immediately€arrive€on€the€site€to€assess€and€control€the€hazardousÐ D” Ðwaste€material€spill.€€After€HEPACO€commenced€the€clean„up€operation,€Vickery€believed€thatÐ -} ÐHEPACOððs€methodology€was€unsound€and€unsafe.€€Therefore,€after€HEPACO€refused€VickeryððsÐ f Ðrequest€for€an€indemnity€agreement,€Vickery€terminated€the€Agreement€with€HEPACO.€Ð ÿO ÐÌà  àOn€September€19,€2002,€Appellant€filed€a€demand€for€arbitration,€pursuant€to€the€provisionsÐ Ñ!!  Ðof€the€Agreement€signed€by€Cooley,€against€Vickery€for€breach€of€contract.€€On€October€4,€2002,Ð º" ! ÐAppellees€filed€a€complaint€for€declaratory€judgment€in€the€Haywood€County€Chancery€Court,Ð £#ó" Ðseeking€a€declaration€that€the€Agreement€is€unenforceable€as€a€contract€of€adhesion€or€a€product€ofÐ Œ$Ü# Ðduress.€€Appellant€filed€a€motion€to€stay€litigation€pending€arbitration,€and,€in€response,€AppelleesÐ u%Å $ Ðfiled€a€motion€to€stay€arbitration€and€compel€litigation.€€After€a€hearing€on€March€27,€2003,€the€trialÐ ^&®!% Ðâ âcourt€issued€an€order€granting€Appelleesðð€motion€to€stay€arbitration€and€compel€litigation€andÐ G'—"& Ðdenying€Appellantððs€motion€to€stay€litigation€pending€arbitration.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€Appellant€timely€appealed€toÐ ° Ðâ âthis€Court€and€presents€the€following€issues,€as€we€perceive€them,׃ Ó×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€for€our€review:Ð ™é ÐÌÓ€ (5h83ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà  àÝ‚3£NÝÔ25hÔÚ  ÚIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝWhether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€determined€that€the€Appellees€were€subjectedÐ k» Ðto€duress€or€economic€duress€such€that€the€Agreement€and€the€arbitration€clause€wereÐ T¤ Ðinvalid;€and݃3£N‡ÝŒÐ= ` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà  àÝ‚3£ÿÝÔ25hÔÚ  ÚIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝWhether€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€determined€that€the€Agreement€betweenÐ & v ÐAppellant€and€Appellees€was€a€contract€of€adhesion€and€that€the€arbitration€clauseÐ  _ Ðwas€unenforceable.݃3£ÿ8 ÝŒÐø H` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌFor€the€following€reasons,€we€reverse€the€decision€of€the€trial€court€and€remand€for€any€furtherÐ Ê   Ðproceedings.Ð ³  ÐÌÓ  Óò òStandard€of€Reviewó óÐ …Õ  ÐÌÓ  Óà  àOur€review€of€a€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€in€a€civil€action€without€a€jury€is€òòde€novoóó€uponÐ X¨  Ðthe€record,€affording€the€trial€court€a€presumption€of€correctness€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÐ A‘ Ðotherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€When€a€trial€court€makes€no€findings€of€fact,€ð ðthere€is€nothingÐ *z Ðin€[the]€record€upon€which€the€presumption€of€correctness€contained€in€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d)€canÐ c Ðattach.ðð€€òòKelly€v.€Kellyóó,€679€S.W.2d€458,€460€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€Therefore,€our€review,€for€suchÐ üL Ðscenario,€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€given€to€the€trial€court.€€òòIdóó.€Ð å5 ÐAll€questions€of€law€are€reviewed€by€this€Court€òòde€novoóó€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€givenÐ Î Ðto€the€trial€court.€€òòUnion€Carbide€Corp.€v.€Huddlestonóó,€854€S.W.2d€87,€91€(Tenn.€1993).Ð · ÐÌÓ  Óò òDuressó óÐ ‰Ù ÐÌÓ  Óà  àAppellant€first€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€invalidated€the€arbitration€clause€onÐ \¬ Ðthe€basis€that€such€clause€was€agreed€to€under€duress€or€economic€duress.€€Specifically,€AppellantÐ E• Ðasserts€that,€because€it€was€not€responsible€for€the€spilling€of€hazardous€waste€materials€andÐ .~ ÐAppellees€had€other€companies€available€for€a€clean„up€operation,€Appellees€should€not€be€able€toÐ g Ðdefend€against€enforcement€of€the€Agreement€on€the€basis€of€duress€or€economic€duress.Ð  P ÐÌà  àð ðððDuressðð€may€be€defined€as€an€unlawful€restraint,€intimidation,€or€compulsion€of€anotherÐ Ò!"  Ðto€such€an€extent€and€degree€as€to€induce€such€other€person€to€do€or€perform€some€act€which€he€isÐ »" ! Ðnot€legally€bound€to€do,€contrary€to€his€will€and€inclination.ðð€€òòJohnson€v.€Fordóó,€245€S.W.€531,€538Ð ¤#ô" Ð(Tenn.€1922)€(quoting€òòFirst€Natððl€Bank€v.€Sargeantóó,€91€N.W.€595,€601€(Neb.€1902)).€€Duress€ð ðððexistsÐ ° Ðwhen€one,€by€the€unlawful€act€of€another,€is€induced€to€make€a€contract€or€perform€some€other€actÐ ™é Ðunder€circumstances€which€deprives€him€of€the€exercise€of€free€will.ðððð€òòIdóó.€(quoting€òòSargeantóó,€91Ð ‚Ò ÐN.W.€at€601€(quoting€òòHackley€v.€Headleyóó,€8€N.W.€511,€512„13€(Mich.€1881))).€€This€Court€hasÐ k» Ðadopted€the€following€definition€for€ð ðeconomic€duressðð:Ð T¤ ÐÌÓ XÓà0  à[I]mposition,€oppression,€undue€influence,€or€the€taking€of€undue€advantage€of€theÐ & v Ðbusiness€or€financial€stress€or€extreme€necessities€or€weaknesses€of€another;€theÐ  _ Ðtheory€under€which€relief€is€granted€being€that€the€party€profiting€thereby€hasÐ ø H Ðreceived€money,€property€or€other€advantage,€which€in€equity€and€good€conscienceÐ á 1  Ðhe€ought€not€to€be€permitted€to€retain.ÐÊ  Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ XÆ,ÓòòCrocker€v.€Schneideróó,€683€S.W.2d€335,€338„39€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984)€(quoting€òòJohnsonóó,€245€S.W.Ð œì  Ðat€539€(quoting€òòRees€v.€Schmitsóó,€164€Ill.€App.€250,€258€(Ill.€App.€Ct.€1911)));€òòMoman€v.€Waldenóó,€719Ð …Õ  ÐS.W.2d€531,€534€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986).€€Ð n¾  ÐÌà  àThough€this€case€concerned€the€clean„up€of€hazardous€waste€materials,€after€our€review€ofÐ @ Ðthe€record,€we€cannot€say€that€Appellees€proved€the€existence€of€duress€or€economic€duress.€€In€theÐ )y Ðinstant€case,€Appellees€argue€that€Appellant€subjected€Appellees€to€duress€when€Appellant€waitedÐ b Ðuntil€right€before€beginning€the€clean„up€operation€to€notify€Appellees€that€the€Agreement€wouldÐ ûK Ðneed€to€be€executed€before€Appellant€began€work.€€This€action,€coupled€with€the€exigentÐ ä4 Ðcircumstances€intrinsic€to€a€hazardous€waste€material€spill,€Appellees€argue,€resulted€in€theÐ Í ÐAgreement€being€a€product€of€duress€or€economic€duress.€€We€disagree.€€Appellantððs€insisting€onÐ ¶ Ðthe€execution€of€a€contract€for€services€before€beginning€an€operation€is€not€unlawful,€wrongful,€orÐ Ÿï Ðcoercive.€€òòSee€Flynt€Engððg€Co.€v.€Coxóó,€99€S.W.3d€99€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002).€€From€the€record,€itÐ ˆØ Ðappears€that€such€operation€was€rather€involved€and€required€a€great€deal€of€time€and€resources.€Ð qÁ ÐAppellees€have€mistaken€prudence€for€coercion.€€Additionally,€we€note€that€Appellant€was€notÐ Zª Ðresponsible€for€the€spill€of€hazardous€waste€materials.€€òòSeeóó€28€Samuel€Williston,€òòTreatise€on€the€LawÐ C“ Ðof€Contractsóó€ðð€71:23,€at€522„23€(Richard€A.€Lord€ed.,€4th€ed.€2003)€(stating€that€ð ð[i]t€is€not€duressÐ ,| Ðor€undue€influence€when€a€party€is€constrained€to€enter€into€a€transaction€by€mere€vexation€andÐ e Ðannoyance€or€by€the€pressure€or€force€of€circumstances€for€which€the€other€party€is€notÐ þN Ðresponsibleðð).€€We€believe€the€insistence€on€executing€a€contract€for€services€alone€is€not€takingÐ ç 7 Ðundue€advantage€of€any€extreme€necessity€or€weakness€of€Appelleesðð€position.€€òòSee€Flynt€Engððg€Co.Ð Ð!   Ðv.€Coxóó,€99€S.W.3d€99€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2002)òòóó.€€Because€we€hold€that€Appellees€failed€to€prove€theÐ ¹" ! Ðexistence€of€duress€or€economic€duress,€we€must€reverse€the€decision€of€the€trial€court,€stayingÐ ¢#ò" Ðarbitration€and€compelling€litigation.Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌÓ  Óò òÌÌÌContract€of€Adhesionó óÐ )k$( ÐÌÓ  Óà  àNext,€Appellant€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€determined€that€the€arbitration€clauseÐ î*>&* Ðwas€unenforceable€for€being€a€contract€of€adhesion.€€For€this€analysis,€we€must€determine€(1)Ð ×+''+ Ðwhether€the€Agreement€is€a€contract€of€adhesion,€and€(2)€if€so,€whether€the€Agreement€containsÐ ° Ðunconscionable€or€oppressive€terms€to€render€the€arbitration€clause€unenforceable.€€òòBuraczynski€v.Ð ™é ÐEyringóó,€919€S.W.2d€314,€320€(Tenn.€1996).€€In€òòBuraczynski€v.€Eyringóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÐ ‚Ò Ðadopted€the€following€definition€for€a€contract€of€adhesion:Ð k» ÐÌÓ XÓà0  à[A]€standardized€contract€form€offered€to€consumers€of€goods€and€services€onÐ =  Ðessentially€a€ð ðtake€it€or€leave€itðð€basis,€without€affording€the€consumer€a€realisticÐ & v Ðopportunity€to€bargain€and€under€such€conditions€that€the€consumer€cannot€obtain€theÐ  _ Ðdesired€product€or€service€except€by€acquiescing€to€the€form€of€the€contract.Ðø HÐ Ð  ÐÌÓ X&<ÓòòIdóó.€(quoting€Blackððs€Law€Dictionary€40€(6th€ed.€1990);€citing€òòBroemmer€v.€Abortion€Servs.€ofÐ Ê   ÐPhoenix,€Ltd.óó,€840€P.2d€1013€(Ariz.€1992)).€€Ð ³  ÐÌà  àAfter€our€review€of€the€record,€we€cannot€say€that€the€contract€at€issue€was€a€contract€ofÐ …Õ  Ðadhesion.€€Though€the€evidence€in€the€record€shows€that€Appellant€would€not€commence€work€untilÐ n¾  Ðthe€contract€was€signed€(i.e.€on€a€ð ðtake€it€or€leave€itðð€basis)€and€counsel€for€Appellant€admitted€thatÐ W§  Ðthe€contract€was€a€standard€form€contract,€the€Agreement€was€not€a€contract€of€adhesion.€€In€hisÐ @ Ðaffidavit,€Cooley€states€that€attempts€were€made€to€acquire€the€services€of€a€clean€up€team€at€DuÐ )y ÐPont.€€Additionally,€Cooley€and€Thomas€Moses€(ð ðMosesðð),€president€of€Spill€Center,€stated€thatÐ b ÐSpill€Center€maintained,€in€Mosesðð€words,€a€ð ðcomputer€data€base€with€a€number€of€contractors,€whoÐ ûK Ðspecialize€in€providing€services€to€transportation€companies€in€the€event€of€a€hazardous€materialsÐ ä4 Ðrelease.ðð€€(TR€vol.€1,€p.€60,€72).€€Though€Appellees€argue€that€the€conditions€were€such€that€actionÐ Í Ðwas€required€immediately€and€that€there€was€no€time€to€wait€for€another€clean„up€team€to€arrive,€theÐ ¶ Ðonly€evidence€of€such€conditions€are€the€conclusory€statements€by€Cooley€and€Moses,€who€were€notÐ Ÿï Ðpresent€at€the€accident€scene.€€After€reviewing€the€record,€we€cannot€say€that€the€AppelleesÐ ˆØ Ðsufficiently€proved€that€the€Agreement€was€a€contract€of€adhesion€because€there€is€insufficientÐ qÁ Ðevidence€that€Appellees€had€no€alternative€to€executing€the€Agreement.€€Therefore,€we€reverse€theÐ Zª Ðorder€of€the€trial€court€on€this€basis.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð C“ ÐÌÓ  Óò òÌÌÌÌÌÌÌConclusionó óÐ {%Ë $ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€reverse€the€order€of€the€trial€court,€staying€arbitration€andÐ N'ž"& Ðâ âcompelling€litigation.€€We€remand€this€case€for€any€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€Ð 7(‡#' ÐCosts€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€Appellees,€Vickery€Transportation,€Inc.,€and€Grammer€Industries,Ð ° ÐInc.,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð ™é Ðâ âÔ#†XÛXXX1®ÿ #ÔÔ#†¼‚q»XXÛÑ #ÔÔ€XÛX»¼‚qÔÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð & v Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGE