ÿWPCÅ ZÎ1\tbªVL|ZvÐÛêSuk!±t¹còØäîj¼îµ)|E=hœ”ÞROŒÂïâχ]ÀüÊÔP‡@"ã­µˆ ô!ßv¦çþÄ3zç,¼‚¾ŽWsU,ê|‚3z:l©HÀ®¹NÿÓ‹ë'ÿ°½r%?Ѷ©H%ÍŠ©øÒÂ:/¬ù¥@ÏÑW6LøÄL0ÄÆ8³DãµWò˜¾Ó¿Nf)ã—sÓÚ’F3/æÀ5Ù2Mß'˜3ÑÈš,ßi%4¸í–†¬?©º&YS»þ\>HÎY'öWÊA#׿†ip½Ñݦ=Œ™ÐÌîóí²Bký ô&yw±G60õt!Éi1ößRšrB2FûY›9/o§ƒ8Ô—r‘K‹cLÖ²b­å@›IV€`¥ õ î ¢ù«ípféñÓÅÕùiáÈù!•Æ{¥ÚzŽŒ ICרÎ[ðG q\ t2’L'¨·i Åxjy’®’è®’Ý[Ÿ6®êŽ»ùØßùä3‹ôËúŠªP%^Mci[07þ“àgr‰ÍÖyÍ9«*‰ï½µ¨4à­ªo^V±{¾8 Îi5¾±sÆ6¦`àô¶;QóØ­—ëcj— ¬5 .äb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ Ð #ÁØ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë UN±Nÿ 1u 72vE¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨ 1‡ªª 1‡11111111111b¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸¸ 0ëÀÀÀÀ B«« 0¤È D5l D-¡ 0KÎÎ ASÆl 0¤2 0DÖ A«»£‚4)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularûr')Üž3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÈhH  Z‹6Times New Roman Regular3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(Ú½CEKQW]cioAutoList6A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(•hCEKQW]cioAutoList71.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.- ù-(|G2’÷$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¼»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôpÀò»»Ô d(|3Åø$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¼»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Åø$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¼»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ä»»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼iè»»»ÔÑ8€pDXXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î)ièÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼iè»îî) #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓMay€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X5¤X»¼ièÔÌò òÔ#†¼iè»XX5¤í#ÔRANDALL€D.€WEBBER,€JR.,€òòet€al.óó€v.€LESLIE€RICHARD€HUNT,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡X5¤X»¼ièÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Anderson€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€96LA0572€and€97LA0112€€€€€€James€B.€Scott,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌFILED€SEPTEMBER€20,€2000€Ð ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E1999„01909„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÌThe€question€presented€by€this€appeal€is€whether€an€automobile€insurance€policy€issued€by€StateÐ d´ ÐFarm€Mutual€Insurance€Company€provided€uninsured€motorist€coverage€of€50/100€thousand€dollarsÐ P  Ðor€25/50€thousand€dollars.€€The€Trial€Judge€sustained€the€Insurance€Companyððs€motion€for€summaryÐ <Œ Ðjudgment,€holding€that€the€25/50€thousand€dollars€was€applicable.€€We€vacate€the€judgment.Ð (x ÐÔ#†¼iè»XX5¤|#ÔÔ‡X5¤X»¼ièÔÌÓ¥ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Vacated€andÐ ì< ÐRemandedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼iè»àX5¤¢#ÔÔ‡X5¤X.¼ièÔHouston€M.€Ô_ÔGoddardÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHerschel€P.€Franksóó€andÐ ° ÐòòCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌRoger€L.€Ô_ÔRidenourÔ_Ô,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Randall€D.€Webber,€Sr.Ð tÄ ÐÌJames€S.€MacDonald,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee€State€Farm€Mutual€AutomobileÐ L œ ÐInsurance€Company.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÓ_ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼iè»XX5¤Ž#ÔÔ‡X5¤X»¼ièÔÐ #`" ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼iè»XX5¤ÿ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X5¤X»¼ièÔÌà  àà ` àThe€question€presented€by€this€appeal€is€whether€an€automobile€insurance€policyÐ Ô%$!% Ðissued€by€State€Farm€Mutual€Insurance€Company€provided€uninsured€motorist€coverage€of€50/100Ð À&"& Ðthousand€dollars€or€25/50€thousand€dollars.€Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€Trial€Court€sustained€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€filed€by€State€FarmÐ „)Ô$) Ðresulting€in€this€appeal,€wherein€the€Plaintiffs€insist€there€are€genuine€disputes€as€to€material€facts,Ð p*À%* Ðrendering€summary€judgment€inappropriate.€€State€Farm€raises€a€separate€issue,€contending€that€theÐ \+¬&+ ÐTrial€Court€should€have€dismissed€the€case€presently€on€appeal,€which€is€in€the€nature€of€aÐ H,˜', Ðdeclaratory€judgment€action,€because€of€a€previous€suit€filed€by€the€Plaintiffs€against€the€Estate€ofÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_ÔSusan€Seivers,€who€was€an€uninsured€motorist.€€State€Farm€Mutual,€the€Plaintiffs'€insurance€carrier,Ð ° Ðwas€served€by€process€in€accordance€with€the€applicable€statute.€€State€Farm€insists€that€its€motionÐ œì Ðto€dismiss€should€have€been€granted€under€the€doctrine€of€Former€Suit€Pending.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àA€recent€opinion€of€the€Supreme€Court€of€Tennessee,€òòStaples€v.€CBL€&€Associates,Ð `° ÐInc.óó,€15€S.W.3d€83,€89€(Tenn.€2000),€restates€the€standard€of€review€as€to€summary€judgments:Ð L œ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø àThe€standards€governing€the€assessment€of€evidence€in€the€summaryÐ $ t Ðjudgment€context€are€also€well€established.€€Courts€must€view€the€evidence€in€theÐ  ` Ðlight€most€favorable€to€the€nonmoving€party€and€must€also€draw€all€reasonableÐ ü L  Ðinferences€in€the€nonmoving€partyððs€favor.€€òòSee€Robinson€v.€Omeróó,€952€S.W.2dÐ è 8  Ðat€426;€òòByrd€v.€Hall,óó€847€S.W.2d€€at€210„11.€€Courts€should€grant€a€summaryÐ Ô$  Ðjudgment€only€when€both€the€facts€and€the€inferences€to€be€drawn€from€the€factsÐ À  Ðpermit€a€reasonable€person€to€reach€only€one€conclusion.€€òòSee€McCall€v.€Wilderóó,Ð ¬ü  Ð913€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.1995);€òòCarvell€v.€Bottomsóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,€26Ð ˜è  Ð(Tenn.1995).Ð „Ô  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àà ` àWe€shall€now€detail€the€material€facts€in€accordance€with€the€standard€hereinbeforeÐ \¬ Ðset€out.€€On€October€13,€1996,€Randall€D.€Webber,€Sr.,€and€his€son,€who€was€a€passenger€in€the€FordÐ H˜ ÐRanger€truck€being€operated€by€his€father,€were€seriously€injured€when€struck€by€an€automobileÐ 4„ Ðdriven€by€Nancy€Seivers,€who€was€uninsured.€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àIt€appears€that€in€about€1986€Mr.€Webberððs€mother„in„law,€Barbara€Southard,Ð øH Ðobtained€a€policy€to€cover€the€vehicle€Mr.€Webber€then€owned,€which€had€previously€beenÐ ä4 Ðuninsured.€€The€policy€that€issued€had€liability€limits€of€$25,000€per€person€and€$50,000€per€accidentÐ Ð  Ðfor€bodily€injury.€€At€that€time€Mrs.€Southard€signed€a€document€requesting€a€lower€limit,€whichÐ ¼  Ðinitially€was€$15,000€per€person€and€$30,000€per€accident.€€This€was€consistent€with€other€policiesÐ ¨ø Ðobtained€by€the€Southards€as€to€their€vehicles.€€The€limits€as€to€uninsured€motorist€had€increasedÐ ”ä Ðduring€the€ensuing€years€in€accordance€with€State€law€until€at€the€time€of€the€accident€the€minimumÐ €Ð Ðwas€as€heretofore€stated„„$25,000€„„€$50,000.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àThere€is€also€proof€that€Mr.€Webber€received€approximately€20€notices€from€StateÐ D!” ÐFarm€wherein€the€reduced€limits€as€to€uninsured€motorist€were€set€out.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àà ` àCounsel€for€State€Farm€attached€to€his€motion€for€summary€judgment€a€statement€ofÐ $X" Ðmaterial€facts€about€which€he€contends€there€is€no€genuine€issue€for€trial.€€We€list€all€thoseÐ ô$D # Ðstatements€which€were€agreed€to€in€whole€and€portions€of€those€which€were€agreed€to€in€part€byÐ à%0!$ Ðcounsel€for€the€Webbers:Ð Ì&"% ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø à1.€€€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Webber€met€one€another€in€high€school€and€moved€fromÐ ¤(ô#' ÐAnderson€County,€Tennessee€to€Atlanta,€Georgia€in€June,€1984€to€pursue€higherÐ )à$( Ðeducation.€€After€moving€to€Atlanta,€Georgia,€Lisa€S.€Webber€purchased€a€1965Ð |*Ì%) ÐFord€Fairlane€automobile.€€That€an€Application€For€State€Farm€AutomobileÐ h+¸&* ÐInsurance€was€completed€on€behalf€of€Lisa€Carol€Southard€(maiden€name€of€LisaÐ ° ÐS.€Webber)€and€signed€ð ðLisa€C.€Southardðð€on€8„17„84€by€Mrs.€Webberððs€mother,Ð œì ÐBarbara€Southard.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà Ø à2.€As€reflected€on€Exhibit€1€to€the€deposition€of€Mrs.€Webber,€rather€thanÐ `° Ðthe€$50,000/$100,000/$25,000€liability€limits€selected,€lower€limits€of€uninsuredÐ L œ Ðmotorist€coverage€were€selected€in€the€respective€amounts€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ð$15,000/$30,000/$10,000,€the€ð ðminimum€limitsðð€then€available€under€TennesseeÐ $ t Ðlaw.€€As€is€further€reflected€on€this€Application,€Lisa€Carol€Southard€received€aÐ  ` Ðð ðmulti„car€discountðð€as€a€result€of€making€application€through€her€parentsðð€carrier,Ð ü L  ÐState€Farm.Ð è 8  ÐÌà Ø à3.€€Lisa€S.€Webber€understood€from€essentially€the€time€she€obtained€StateÐ À  ÐFarm€coverage€in€1984€that€there€was€a€separate€policy€for€each€insured€vehicle,Ð ¬ü  Ðthat€the€term€of€each€State€Farm€policy€was€for€a€period€of€six€months,€and€thatÐ ˜è  Ðevery€six€months,€regardless€of€whether€payments€were€made€semiannually€orÐ „Ô  Ðmonthly,€a€statement€confirming€the€amount€of€the€various€coverages€was€sent€toÐ pÀ Ðits€insureds€via€State€Farm€and€received€by€Mrs.€Webber€and€her€husband.Ð \¬ ÐÌà Ø à4.€€Lisa€S.€Southard€and€Randall€D.€Webber,€Sr.,€were€married€onÐ 4„ ÐDecember€31,€1985€in€Atlanta,€Georgia.Ð  p ÐÌà Ø à5.€€There€exists€in€the€file€of€State€Farm€Agent€James€F.€Trent€of€OakÐ øH ÐRidge,€Tennessee€the€typewritten€document€with€handwritten€notations€madeÐ ä4 ÐExhibit€3€to€the€deposition€of€Lisa€S.€Webber.€€(See€Appendix€A)€Ð Ð  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àà ` àNo€one€who€testified€by€deposition€or€affidavit€could€be€certain€of€this€documentððsÐ ¨ø Ðorigin,€although€Ms.€Southard,€mother€of€Mrs.€Webber,€did€identify€the€printed€material€as€beingÐ ”ä Ðpenned€by€her.€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€principal€issue€in€the€Webbersðð€appeal€is€whether€using€the€standard€of€reviewÐ X ¨ Ðhereinbefore€noted,€Mrs.€Webberððs€mother€had€authority,€either€actual€or€ostensible,€to€sign€theÐ D!” Ðapplication€for€the€initial€policy€on€the€1968€Ford€Fairlane€and€the€rejection€of€standard€uninsuredÐ 0"€  Ðmotorist€coverage.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àWith€regard€to€Mrs.€Southardððs€authority,€her€testimony€by€deposition€was€ratherÐ ô$D # Ðinconclusive:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà Ø àA.€à0 0 à€No,€as€I€say,€Iððm€sure€I€was€directed€to€do€whatever€is€here.и'#&0 X 0 X  ÐÌà Ø àQ.€à0 0 àDirected€by€Lisa€and€Randy?Ð)à$(0 X 0 X  Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà Ø àA.€€à0 0 àI€would€say€so.€€I€donððt€think€I€would€have€ð!ð€I€wouldnððt€have€doneÐ ° Ðâ âthat€on€my€own€had€they€not€asked€me€to€do€it.€€And€again,€itÐ œì Ðmight€have€been€that€they€called€the€agentððs€office.€€Iððm€not€sure.€Ð ˆØ ÐI€donððt€recall.€€I€donððt€recall€this€at€all,€but€seeing€it,€I€know€thatÐ tÄ Ðthatððs€my€printing.Ð`°0 X 0 X  ÐÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àà ` àHowever,€this€testimony€by€her„„and€as€a€matter€of€fact€even€if€she€had€testifiedÐ 8 ˆ Ðunequivocally€that€Mr.€or€Mrs.€Webber€gave€her€such€authority„„would€be€unavailing€to€sustain€theÐ $ t Ðsummary€judgment€because€of€the€affidavit€filed€by€Mr.€Webber€and€the€deposition€of€Mrs.€Webber:Ð  ` ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°Òà@55ìàòòMr.€Webberððs€AffidavitóóˆÐ è 8  ÐÌÓ€ #(•h83Óà Ø à1.€€€€That€I€am€over€twenty„one€(21)€years€of€age,€am€competent€to€testify,Ð À  Ðand€am€familiar€with€the€facts€herein.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà Ø à2.€€€That€my€signature€is€not€contained€in€the€application€for€automobileÐ „Ô  Ðinsurance€with€State€Farm€dated€July€21,€1986.Ð pÀ ÐÌà Ø à3.€€€€€That€Barbara€S.€Southard€was€never€provided€permission€to€act€as€myÐ H˜ Ðlegal€representative€in€applying€for€automobile€insurance,€was€not€given€myÐ 4„ Ðpermission€to€sign€my€name€to€an€application€for€automobile€insurance€with€StateÐ  p ÐFarm€dated€July€21,€1986,€and€was€not€given€permission€to€act€on€my€behalf€forÐ  \ Ðany€of€my€legal€affairs.Ð øH ÐÌà@ÅÅìàòòMrs.€Webberððs€DepositionóóˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà Ø àQ.€€€Going€back€in€time€to€July€of€ðð86,€you€would€have€been€living€inÐ ¨ø ÐAtlanta€at€that€time,€is€that€right?Ð ”ä ÐÌà Ø àA.€€€€That€is€correct.Ð l¼ ÐÌà Ø àQ.€€€€€And€had€you€had€any€conversations€that€you€recall€with€your€motherÐ D!” Ðabout€transacting€insurance€business€on€your€behalf?Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓ€ !(Ú½88#Óà Ø àA.€€€€No.Ð $X" ÐÌÌÌÒ°€ÒÒ°€Òà  àà ` àIn€conclusion€as€to€the€Webbersðð€issue,€we€have€not€overlooked€the€evidence€that€theÐ ¸'#& ÐWebbers€received€some€20€semi„annual€statements€from€State€Farm,€which€showed€the€uninsuredÐ ¤(ô#' Ðmotorist€coverage€to€be€at€the€reduced€amount.€€However,€although€both€Mr.€and€Mrs.€WebberÐ )à$( Ðadmitted€receiving€the€statements,€they€denied€being€aware€that€€the€uninsured€motorist€coveragesÐ |*Ì%) Ðshown€thereon€was€less€than€the€liability€coverage.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àà ` àState€Farm€raises€as€an€issue€that€the€Trial€Court€was€in€error€in€not€sustaining€itsÐ ° Ðmotion€seeking€dismissal€of€this€case€under€the€doctrine€of€Former€Suit€Pending.€€The€former€suitÐ œì Ðwas€that€of€the€Webbers€against€the€Administrator€of€the€Estate€of€Susan€Seivers€in€which€State€FarmÐ ˆØ Ðwas€served€as€an€uninsured€motorist€carrier.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€case€of€òòYoung€v.€Kittrellóó,€833€S.W.2d€505,€508€€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992),€addressesÐ L œ Ðthe€subject€thusly:Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌÒ€°ÒÒ€°ÒThe€doctrine€is€not€applicable€unless€four€criteria€are€met:€€(1)€the€two€suits€mustÐ  ` Ðð ðinvolve€the€identical€subject€matter;ðð€€(2)€they€must€both€be€ð ðbetween€the€sameÐ ü L  Ðparties;ðð€€(3)€the€former€suit€must€still€be€pending;€€and€(4)€the€court€in€which€theÐ è 8  Ðformer€suit€is€pending€must€be€ð ða€court€in€this€state€having€jurisdiction€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðsubject€matter€and€the€parties.ðð€€òòCockburn€v.€Howard€Johnson,€Inc.óó,€215€Tenn.Ð À  Ð254,€256„257,€385€S.W.2d€101,€102€(1964)€(quoting€from€Higgins€&€Crownover,Ð ¬ü  ÐTennessee€Procedure€in€Law€Cases,€ðð€518(6).Ð ˜è  ÐÌÌÌÒ°€Òà  àà ` àAlthough€not€specifically€so€stating,€criterion€four€implies€that€the€two€suitsÐ H˜ Ðare€in€different€courts€because€if€they€were€in€the€same€court,€and€if€it€had€jurisdiction€toÐ 4„ Ðhear€the€first€case,€it€obviously€would€have€jurisdiction€to€hear€the€second.€Other€appellateÐ  p Ðcases,€some€of€which€do€not€specifically€refer€to€the€doctrine€of€Former€Suit€Pending,€makeÐ  \ Ðit€clear€there€must€be€two€separate€courts€involved€before€the€doctrine€comes€into€play.€Ð øH ÐòòKing€of€Clubs,€Inc.,€v.€Gibbonsóó,€9€S.W.3d€796€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999);€òòState€v.€Hazzardóó,Ð ä4 Ð743€S.W.2d€938€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€€€òòWilson€v.€Granthamóó,€739€S.W.2d€776€(Tenn.Ð Ð  ÐCt.€App.€1986).Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€the€tort€case€the€complaint€seeking€damages€against€the€Administrator€ofÐ ”ä ÐMs.€Seiversðð€Estate€is€captioned€as€follows:Ð €Ð ÐÌÒ€°Òà@g g ìàòòIN€THE€SEVENTH€JUDICIAL€DISTRICT€FOR€THE€STATE€OF€à@@»»&ìàóóˆÐ X ¨ Ðà@»»&ìàòòTENNESSEEˆÐ D!” ÐÌà@""!ìàóó(Circuit€Division)ˆÐ #l! ÐÌÒ°€Òà  àà ` àThe€complaint€for€declaratory€judgment€was€captioned€exactly€like€the€firstÐ ô$D # Ðcase.€€Thus,€we€have€only€one€court€involved„„the€Seventh€Judicial€District€of€Tennessee.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€accordingly€conclude€that€the€Trial€Court€under€such€circumstances€hasÐ ¸'#& Ðdiscretion€to€set€the€order€in€which€the€cases€will€be€tried,€or€even€to€consolidate€them.€€InÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€case€at€bar€we€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€and€that€the€Trial€Court€employed€a€moreÐ )à$( Ðorderly€process€in€first€determining€the€question€presented€in€the€declaratory€judgmentÐ |*Ì%) Ðaction€case€rather€than€the€tort€action.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àà ` àFor€the€foregoing€reasons€we€vacate€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€andÐ ° Ðremand€the€case€to€the€Trial€Court€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€Ð œì ÐCosts€of€appeal€are€adjudged€against€State€Farm.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àÌà  àà0 ` àà0¸ ` X ` X àà0¸ X ¸ X àà0hX X à_________________________________________ÐL œhX hX  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àHOUSTON€M.€GODDARD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌ