ÿWPC ­Ä¯m¸@žØ®KžÉ®ŠbSIÚ’va(+üÏSgŸÎÖ ¥q<¹{¼àB¬).ôaû¨v§û!9+•ƒo*>cEK{>´¢c†¾4—‘=–bÝë4T/-ÞÿÙfX½`²Áç¸üá».ÈÑüòu “äðP0 +áùþÊyyAÃypAC3ûè€Üo÷2'óÇ7928P][Á•yÒP+žëTnŽûnà(îoU…®¬<ùŒ¿¡ðZ _{BzF¥×‰(§ •Ÿ¢²_ê²EÖéMÓõàr䟶CD‚¡u×í¬¦þ|5<¼o‹DP&4'[sKbÌȹxö„(g*¶…3þ6€§qß¼™š{˜5ÓI"ÈHˆ³¸p´D>­†S¨Ã`pÝoÜè¤àSn†GC­•c]´L1…E©³È‚”94Vʼ¾C|“ÐÊÅJPì‰TÀ¢þNtsaÑߟcµì~)#­õàŒCªBäè@Õ[nîþt~ùSâî¹€‡3þÑhâã³2k¡7NØñy` OåfïqÐyܼZ»½8[)Í­vAL}3”wÖkG¶Cy·ë ¡±ä_OIØ×!“#¤¬ÌúʽFd‡s l ë$±O©{Pb %\^ b 0ˆnUNöw(D4l€ zÒ Û mÝ #Éô N½ Æ ÆÑÆ—Æ]¤#NÇ 0DÉÉE                        b 0ë B 0¤ D5à D-ø 0K%% ASpÆÃ 0¤‰ 0D- A«q»QˆW/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularD{=ƒ.ê:i¢×+003|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.wpt ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK4ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 InmanRagleDugganLeveilleHagoodTarpy PLLCc]onsequentlyP]laintiffs I]tLoudonmovantBarbeeToney NCNBThrailkillM]ereC]ourts Keck JurMcMurrayFliteLethcoeSteioffDeptdeem[ed COAP.L.L.C.WilkersonServicewayMcMurryLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 šÝ ƒRv$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô© ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€While€in€the€present€case€we€have€assumed,€without€deciding,€that€a€conflict€of€interest€actually€existed,€ourÐ ° Ðholding€should€not€be€construed€to€mean€a€conflict€of€interest€never€can€provide€a€basis€for€relief€from€a€judgment€underÐ tÄ ÐRule€60.€€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2_$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôøò»»Ô d(|3u$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3u$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[%»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€[%»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼[%»»»ÔÑ8€XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î\ü[%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼[%»îî\ü #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAugust€18,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XX»¼[%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼[%»XXô#ÔJAMES€C.€WILKERSON,€òòet€al.óó€v.€PFC€GLOBAL€GROUP,€INC,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡XX»¼[%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òÔ#†¼[%»XX#ÔÔ€XX»¼[%ÔAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔBlountÔ_Ô€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€L„13286€€€€€€W.€Dale€Young,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌññFILEDññññññ€ññññññññ+ññññññññññ€OññññCTOBER€23,€Ô_Ôññññ200ññññ3ññññÔ_Ô€ññÐ ¾   Ðà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2003„00362„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CVÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` Aßó óÐ }Í  ÐÌÓ  ÓOn€May€3,€2002,€James€and€Judith€Wilkerson€(ð ðPlaintiffsðð)€filed€this€lawsuit€against€PFC€GlobalÐ xÈ  ÐGroup,€Inc.€(ð ðPFCðð)€claiming€PFC€had€defaulted€on€a€Promissory€Note.€€Plaintiffs€also€sued€DonÐ d´ Ðand€Brenda€Ô_ÔDorrisÔ_Ô€who€had€personally€guaranteed€PFCððs€debt€to€Plaintiffs.€€All€three€DefendantsÐ P  Ðwere€served€with€process€on€May€16,€2002,€and€their€attorneys€entered€an€appearance€on€DefendantsððÐ <Œ Ðbehalf€the€following€day.€€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€informed€defense€counsel€that€Plaintiffs€would€moveÐ (x Ðfor€a€default€judgment€if€an€answer€was€not€filed€by€September€6,€2002.€€When€no€answer€was€filedÐ d Ðby€that€date,€Plaintiffs€moved€for€and€were€granted€a€default€judgment.€€After€hearing€testimony€fromÐ P ÐPlaintiff€James€Wilkerson€regarding€the€amount€due€under€the€various€contracts,€the€Trial€CourtÐ ì< Ðgranted€Plaintiffs€a€judgment€against€each€Defendant€in€the€total€amount€of€$1,492,353.52,€plus€anÐ Ø( Ðadditional€$15,000€in€attorney€fees.€€Thereafter,€Defendants€filed€a€motion€to€have€the€defaultÐ Ä Ðjudgment€set€aside€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€60.€€After€a€hearing,€the€Trial€Court€determinedÐ ° ÐDefendants€were€not€entitled€to€relief€from€the€default€judgment.€€We€affirm.Ð œì Ðò òÌÌà@µ µ ìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theˆÐ `° Ðà@û û ìàCircuit€Court€Affirmed;€Case€Remanded.ó óˆÐ L œ ÐÌòòÌD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€J.,€óódelivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòCharles€D.€Susano,€Jr.,€J.,óóÐ #`" Ðand€òòWilliam€H.€Inman,€Sr.€J.,€óójoined.Ð ü#L# ÐÌÌC.€Allen€Ragle,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellants€PFC€Global€Group,€Inc.,€Leslie€DonÐ À&"& ÐÔ_ÔDorrisÔ_Ô,€and€Brenda€L.€Ô_ÔDorrisÔ_Ô.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÌÌDavid€R.€Duggan,€Ô_ÔMaryvilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellees€James€C.€Wilkerson€and€Judith€A.Ð p*À%* ÐWilkerson.Ð \+¬&+ ÐÐ  H,˜',ý ÐÔ_Ôà@66'ìàò òOPINIONˆÐ ° ÐÌà@ÛÛ%ìàòòBackgroundó óóóˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€owned€all€of€the€stock€of€Serviceway€Motor€Freight,€Inc.€(ð ðServicewayðð),Ð `° Ða€Tennessee€corporation€with€its€principal€place€of€business€in€Blount€County.€€Plaintiffs€sold€all€ofÐ L œ Ðtheir€stock€in€Serviceway€to€PFC€for€$2,287,900.€€PFC€agreed€to€pay€$787,900€at€closing€and€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðfinance€the€remaining€$1,500,000€through€Plaintiffs.€€The€sale€was€consummated€on€January€9,€2001,Ð $ t Ðwhen€Plaintiffs€and€PFC€entered€into€a€Purchase€and€Sale€Agreement.€€PFC€also€executed€aÐ  ` ÐPromissory€Note€for€the€$1.5€million€being€financed.€€The€principal€shareholders€of€PFC€wereÐ ü L  Ðdefendants€Leslie€Don€Dorris€(ð ðDon€Dorrisðð)€and€Brenda€L.€Dorris.€€On€the€date€of€the€sale,€Don€andÐ è 8  ÐBrenda€Dorris€each€executed€a€separate€Guaranty€which€personally€guaranteed€payment€of€the€$1.5Ð Ô$  Ðmillion€debt€being€financed€by€PFC.€€Ð À  ЀÌà  àà ` àOn€May€3,€2002,€Plaintiffs€filed€a€complaint€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Blount€CountyÐ ˜è  Ðclaiming€PFC€had€defaulted€on€the€Promissory€Note.€€Plaintiffs€also€sued€Don€and€Brenda€DorrisÐ „Ô  Ðon€their€personal€guarantees.€€All€three€Defendants€were€served€with€process€on€May€16,€2002.€€TheÐ pÀ Ðnext€day,€attorneys€Edward€Cox€(ð ðCoxðð)€and€Thomas€Leveille€(ð ðLeveilleðð)€of€the€Knoxville€law€firmÐ \¬ ÐHagood,€Tarpy€&€Cox,€P.L.L.C.,€filed€a€Notice€of€Appearance€on€behalf€of€all€three€Defendants.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€May€28,€2002,€attorney€Leveille€sent€a€letter€to€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€stating,€amongÐ  p Ðother€things,€that€an€answer€and€counterclaim€were€being€prepared€on€Defendantsðð€behalf.€€LeveilleÐ  \ Ðalso€set€forth€Defendantsðð€position€on€several€matters€and€invited€discussion€on€these€issues.€Ð øH ÐLeveille€ended€the€letter€by€stating:€ð ðIf€we€do€not€hear€from€you,€we€will€proceed€with€the€filing€ofÐ ä4 Ðour€Answer€and€Counter„Complaint.ðð€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€some€point€in€time€after€Plaintiffsðð€stock€in€Serviceway€was€purchased€by€PFC,Ð ¨ø ÐServiceway€filed€for€bankruptcy€under€Chapter€11.€€The€record€on€appeal€does€not€establish€exactlyÐ ”ä Ðwhen€this€filing€occurred.€€Serviceway€was€represented€in€the€bankruptcy€proceeding€by€attorneyÐ €Ð ÐLynn€Tarpy€(ð ðTarpyðð),€also€from€Hagood,€Tarpy€&€Cox,€P.L.L.C.€€Thus,€two€attorneys€from€Hagood,Ð l¼ ÐTarpy€&€Cox,€P.L.L.C.,€were€representing€Defendants€in€the€present€state€court€lawsuit,€and€a€thirdÐ X ¨ Ðattorney€from€that€same€law€firm€was€representing€Serviceway€in€the€bankruptcy€proceeding.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€August€19,€2002,€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€wrote€a€letter€to€Tarpy€enclosing€a€notice€ofÐ #l! Ðappearance€which€was€to€be€filed€in€the€Bankruptcy€Court€proceeding.€€With€regard€to€the€state€courtÐ $X" Ðlawsuit,€the€letter€stated:€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àI€am€writing€to€you€concerning€the€pending€state€court€action.€€As€isÐ Ì&"% Ðevident€on€the€face€of€the€pleadings,€and€as€I€noted€at€the€creditorsÐ ¸'#& Ðmeeting,€the€debtor€[Serviceway]€is€not€a€party€defendant€in€this€stateÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcourt€action.€€I€am€simply€trying€to€seek€a€judgment€against€PFCÐ )à$( ÐGlobal€Group,€Inc.€and€the€individual€guarantors.€€Accordingly,€IÐ |*Ì%) Ðintend€to€proceed€with€this€case.€€I€would€ask€you€to€please€file€yourÐ h+¸&* ÐAnswer€in€behalf€of€the€defendants€by€September€6,€or€I€will€moveÐ ° Ðfor€a€default€judgment.Мì` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€no€answer€was€filed€in€the€state€court€lawsuit,€Plaintiffs€did€exactly€what€theyÐ tÄ Ðsaid€they€would€do€and€filed€a€Motion€for€Default€Judgment€on€September€19,€2002.€€PlaintiffsÐ `° Ðmoved€for€the€entry€of€a€default€judgment€against€all€three€Defendants€in€the€amount€ofÐ L œ Ð$1,439,354.46,€plus€interest€and€attorney€fees.€€Plaintiffs€maintained€they€were€entitled€to€a€defaultÐ 8 ˆ Ðjudgment€because€no€response€to€the€complaint€had€been€filed€and€over€four€months€had€lapsed€sinceÐ $ t ÐDefendants€were€served€with€process.€€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€filed€an€affidavit€in€support€of€the€motion.€Ð  ` ÐCox€and€Leveille€were€served€with€a€copy€of€the€Motion€for€Default€Judgment€as€well€as€a€NoticeÐ ü L  Ðinforming€them€that€this€motion€was€set€for€hearing€on€October€18,€2002.€€In€a€letter€dated€SeptemberÐ è 8  Ð18òòthóó€to€attorneys€Cox€and€Leveille€enclosing€the€motion€and€accompanying€notice,€Plaintiffsðð€counselÐ Ô$  Ðstated:€€ð ð[I]t€will€be€my€position,€although€I€have€not€yet€addressed€this€matter€in€the€Motion€and€willÐ À  Ðaddress€it€only€if€necessary,€that€your€firm€cannot€represent€these€Defendants€in€the€state€courtÐ ¬ü  Ðlitigation€given€the€representation€by€your€firm€of€Serviceway€ð8ð€in€its€bankruptcy€action.ðð€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffsðð€Motion€for€Default€Judgment€was€heard€by€the€Trial€Court€on€October€18,Ð pÀ Ðthe€date€shown€in€the€Notice€served€on€defense€counsel.€€At€the€time€of€the€hearing,€Defendants€stillÐ \¬ Ðhad€not€answered€or€otherwise€responded€to€the€complaint.€€Neither€attorneys€Cox€and€Leveille€norÐ H˜ ÐDefendants€were€present€at€the€hearing.€€At€the€hearing,€Plaintiff€James€Wilkerson€testified€underÐ 4„ Ðoath€regarding€the€amount€he€claimed€was€owed€under€the€contracts,€although€no€transcript€of€hisÐ  p Ðtestimony€is€contained€in€the€record.€€After€the€hearing€and€in€reliance€on€Wilkersonððs€unopposedÐ  \ Ðtestimony,€the€Trial€Court€entered€a€Judgment€which€provides€as€follows:Ð øH ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThis€cause€having€come€on€to€be€heard€the€18òòthóó€day€ofÐ Ð  ÐOctober,€2002€upon€Plaintiffsðð€Motion€for€Default€Judgment,Ð ¼  Ðsupporting€Affidavit€of€counsel€for€the€Plaintiffs,€Notice€to€theÐ ¨ø ÐDefendants,€and€testimony€in€open€court,€and€it€appearing€unto€theÐ ”ä ÐCourt€that€all€parties€were€given€notice€of€these€proceedings€and€wereÐ €Ð Ðproperly€before€the€Court,€and€that€the€Motion€is€well„taken€andÐ l¼ Ðshould€be€granted,€and€the€Court€further€finding:ÐX ¨` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à1.à  àThat€the€Defendants,€and€each€of€them,€were€servedÐ 0"€  Ðwith€process€in€this€cause€on€May€16,€2002;Ð#l!` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à2.à  àThat€the€Defendants,€and€each€of€them,€have€failed€toÐ ô$D # Ðfile€a€responsive€pleading€or€otherwise€defend€against€the€ComplaintÐ à%0!$ Ðfiled€against€them€in€this€cause€within€the€time€allowed€by€theÐ Ì&"% ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure;и'#&` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à3.à  àThat€Defendant,€PFC€Global€Group,€Inc.,€is€eight€(8)Ð )à$( Ðmonths€in€arrears€in€its€payments€under€the€promissory€note€at€issueÐ |*Ì%) Ðdated€January€9,€2001,€and€that€after€giving€all€just€credits€due€andÐ h+¸&* Ðowing€to€said€Defendant€for€any€payments€made,€the€balance€underÐ ° Ðsaid€promissory€note€due€and€owing€is€$1,492,353.42€includingÐ œì Ðinterest€accrued€through€October€18,€2002;ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à4.à  àDefendants,€Leslie€Don€Dorris€and€Brenda€L.€Dorris,Ð `° Ðeach€executed€a€personal€guarantee€of€said€indebtedness€byÐ L œ ÐGuaranties€dates€January€9,€2001;€and€Ð8 ˆ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à5.à  àThat€the€instruments€executed€by€Defendants€and€atÐ  ` Ðissue€in€this€cause€provide€for€attorney€fees€to€be€awarded€in€the€eventÐ ü L  Ðof€default€and€legal€action€to€collect€the€debt.ð8ðÐè 8 ` x` x ÐÌBased€on€these€findings,€the€Trial€Court€entered€judgment€against€Defendants,€ð ðand€each€of€themððÐ À  Ðin€the€amount€of€$1,492,353.42,€plus€an€additional€$15,000€in€attorney€fees.€€The€Judgment€wasÐ ¬ü  Ðentered€by€the€Trial€Court€on€October€21,€2002,€and€mailed€to€all€counsel€of€record.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àAlmost€one€month€later,€on€November€18,€2002,€Defendants€were€represented€by€newÐ pÀ Ðattorneys€who€entered€an€appearance€and€filed€a€Motion€to€Set€Aside€Judgment€or€to€Alter€or€AmendÐ \¬ Ðthe€Judgment.€€In€this€motion,€Defendants€claimed€Serviceway,€a€subsidiary€of€PFC,€had€ð ða€caseÐ H˜ Ðpending€under€Chapter€11€of€the€Bankruptcy€Code€ð8ð€and€it€was€through€this€bankruptcy€that€theÐ 4„ Ðdebt€Plaintiffs€allege€is€owed€was€to€be€paid.ðð€€Defendants€claimed€Don€Dorris€was€present€inÐ  p ÐBankruptcy€Court€on€October€17,€2002,€attending€a€hearing€on€whether€Servicewayððs€Chapter€11Ð  \ Ðfiling€for€reorganization€would€be€converted€to€a€Chapter€7€liquidation,€something€which€would€ruinÐ øH ÐDefendants€financially.€€It€was€further€argued€that€Don€and€Brenda€Dorris€had€been€devoting€all€ofÐ ä4 Ðtheir€ð ðtime€and€energiesðð€to€preparing€for€the€October€17€Bankruptcy€Court€hearing€and,Ð Ð  Ðð ð[c]onsequently,€they€were€not€focused€upon€the€hearing€on€October€18,€2002€in€this€Court.ðð€Ð ¼  ÐDefendants€further€stated€that€Plaintiff€James€Wilkerson€and€his€attorney€were€present€in€BankruptcyÐ ¨ø ÐCourt€on€October€17,€but€said€nothing€to€Don€Dorris€or€his€attorney€about€the€state€court€hearingÐ ”ä Ðscheduled€the€next€day.€€According€to€Defendants,€all€of€the€foregoing€amounted€to€understandableÐ €Ð Ðand€reasonable€inadvertence€and€excusable€neglect€authorizing€them€to€relief€from€the€judgment.€Ð l¼ ÐWhile€Defendants€admitted€they€were€indebted€to€Plaintiffs,€they€denied€it€was€for€the€amountÐ X ¨ Ðcontained€in€the€judgment€that€had€been€entered€against€them.€Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€responded€to€the€motion€to€set€aside€the€default€judgment€and€argued€whyÐ #l! Ðthey€believed€Defendants€were€not€entitled€to€any€relief€from€the€judgment.€€In€this€response,Ð $X" ÐPlaintiffsðð€counsel€related,€among€other€things,€the€following€discussion€he€had€with€Tarpy€whichÐ ô$D # Ðtook€place€after€the€Motion€for€Default€had€been€filed:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à7.à  àAfter€service€of€said€Motion€ð8ð€Tarpy€called€counselÐ ¸'#& Ðfor€Plaintiffs€and€stated,€first,€that€it€was€his€opinion€that€he€couldÐ ¤(ô#' Ðobtain€injunctive€relief€from€the€Bankruptcy€Court€staying€the€StateÐ )à$( ÐCourt€proceedings;€and,€second,€he€inquired€about€the€possibility€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðagreement€to€continue€the€hearing€scheduled€for€October€18,€2002€toÐ h+¸&* Ða€later€date,€in€part€predicated€upon€a€hearing€which,€at€that€time,€wasÐ ° Ðscheduled€for€October€17,€2002,€at€11:00€oððclock€A.M.,€in€the€UnitedÐ œì ÐStates€Bankruptcy€Court,€on€a€Motion€to€Convert€the€DebtorððsÐ ˆØ Ðbankruptcy€to€a€Chapter€7.ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àCounsel€for€Plaintiffs€responded€to€Mr.€Tarpy€that€he€hadÐ L œ Ðdiscussed€this€matter€thoroughly€with€John€Walker,€co„counsel€withÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€undersigned€in€the€bankruptcy€proceeding,€and€that€theÐ $ t Ðundersigned€was€confident€that€the€United€States€Bankruptcy€CourtÐ  ` Ðwould€not€stay€the€State€Court€proceedings,€and€further€stating€hisÐ ü L  Ðintention€to€proceed€with€the€hearing€on€October€18,€2002.€€WithÐ è 8  Ðrespect€to€the€latter,€specifically,€counsel€for€Plaintiffs€stated€that€heÐ Ô$  Ðsaw€no€reason€to€discuss€a€reset€of€the€hearing€in€the€State€CourtÐ À  Ðbeyond€October€18€given€that€the€hearing€date€already€followed€theÐ ¬ü  Ðbankruptcy€hearing€on€October€17.Иè ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à8.à  àNo€Answer€was€forthcoming,€and€no€proceedings€wereÐ pÀ Ðfiled€in€the€United€States€Bankruptcy€Court€to€attempt€to€stay€thisÐ \¬ ÐCourtððs€hearing€on€October€18,€2002.ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à9.à  àCounsel€for€Plaintiffs€never€heard€from€Mr.€Tarpy,€orÐ  p Ðhis€firm,€again.Ð \` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€December€5,€2002,€approximately€six€and€one„half€months€after€being€served€withÐ ä4 Ðprocess,€Defendants€filed€their€answer€to€the€complaint.€€In€their€answer,€Defendants€claimed€thatÐ Ð  Ðafter€the€sale€was€consummated,€they€discovered€certain€ð ðaffairs€were€not€as€they€understood€themÐ ¼  Ðto€be€at€the€timeðð€of€the€sale.€€More€specifically,€Defendants€claim€Mr.€Wilkerson€wrote€$64,000€inÐ ¨ø Ðchecks€out€of€Servicewayððs€account€which€were€made€payable€to€himself€or€a€related€entity,€therebyÐ ”ä Ðimproperly€depleting€Servicewayððs€bank€account.€€Defendants€also€claim€Plaintiffs€represented€toÐ €Ð Ðthem€that€Serviceway€had€$250,000€in€ð ðgoodðð€receivables,€but€in€fact€there€was€only€$227,000€inÐ l¼ Ðsuch€receivables.€€Defendants€also€claimed€the€vehicles€included€in€the€purchased€had€not€beenÐ X ¨ Ðsubject€to€regular€maintenance€and€several€trailers€were€five€years€older€than€Plaintiffs€hadÐ D!” Ðrepresented.€€Based€on€these€allegations,€Defendants€asserted€affirmative€defenses€of€waiver,Ð 0"€  Ðestoppel,€frustration€of€purpose,€fraud,€and€breach€of€contract.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àAlong€with€their€answer,€Defendants€filed€the€affidavit€of€Don€Dorris€who€attestedÐ ô$D # Ðto€the€accuracy€of€the€facts€and€defenses€set€forth€in€the€answer.€€Don€Dorris€also€claimed€neither€heÐ à%0!$ Ðnor€his€wife€received€a€notice€from€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€informing€them€of€the€ð ðproceedings€herein.ðð€Ð Ì&"% ÐDon€Dorris€then€stated:Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à9.à ¸ àPrior€to€the€filing€of€the€Motion€for€Default€herein,Ð )à$( ÐServiceway€filed€for€protection€under€Chapter€11€of€the€BankruptcyÐ |*Ì%) ÐCode.Ðh+¸&*` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð à10.à ¸ àIt€is€my€understanding€that€because€of€the€filing€of€the€CaseÐ ° Ðunder€Chapter€11€by€Mr.€Tarpy,€the€attorneys€who€filed€a€Notice€ofÐ œì ÐAppearance€on€behalf€of€me€and€the€other€defendants€in€this€caseÐ ˆØ Ðwould€not€be€able€to€represent€us€because€of€a€conflict€of€interest.ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à11.à ¸ àAt€the€meeting€of€the€creditors€in€the€Serviceway€bankruptcyÐ L œ Ðcase,€ð8ð€[counsel€for€Plaintiffs]€asked€me€if€I€believed€I€was€in€defaultÐ 8 ˆ Ðunder€the€purchase€agreement€and/or€note,€and€I€replied€that€I€did€notÐ $ t Ðbelieve€I€was€in€default.ð8ðÐ `` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendantsðð€answer€and€Don€Dorrisðð€affidavit€were€filed€the€day€before€the€hearingÐ è 8  Ðon€the€their€motion€to€set€aside€the€default€judgment.€€After€hearing€counselsðð€arguments€andÐ Ô$  Ðreviewing€the€facts€as€set€forth€above,€the€Trial€Court€discussed€the€various€grounds€for€relief€fromÐ À  Ða€judgment€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€60€then€concluded€as€follows:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhile€both€lawyers€have€made€thorough€and€good€arguments€to€thisÐ „Ô  Ðcourt€for€and€against€the€motion,€I€havenððt€heard€anything€that€fitsÐ pÀ Ðwithin€the€purview€of€the€rule.€€I€havenððt€heard€any€reason€why€thisÐ \¬ Ðwhole€case€wasnððt€responded€to€on€a€timely€basis€other€than€[it]€justÐ H˜ Ðdidnððt€get€looked€after.€€Thatððs€not€a€good€reason€to€set€aside€a€defaultÐ 4„ Ðjudgment€when€everybody€has€had€ample€opportunity€to€be€part€andÐ  p Ðparcel€of€the€whole€process.ð8ð€[P]laintiffs€have€rights€just€asÐ  \ Ðdefendants€have€rights,€and€they€have€a€right€to€have€things€resolvedÐ øH Ðand€their€lawsuits€complete.€€In€the€courtððs€opinion€the€defendantsÐ ä4 Ðwere€given€every€opportunity€to€do€that€and€for€whatever€their€reasonÐ Ð  Ðfailed€and€refused€to€do€so.€€And€so€for€all€of€those€reasons€the€courtÐ ¼  Ðrespectfully€overrules€the€motion€to€set€aside€the€judgment€ð8ð.Шø` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendants€appeal€raising€two€issues.€€First,€Defendants€claim€the€Trial€Court€erredÐ €Ð Ðwhen€it€refused€to€set€aside€the€default€judgment€because€the€default€judgment€was€obtained€throughÐ l¼ ÐDefendantsðð€mistake,€inadvertence€and/or€excusable€neglect.€€Second,€Defendantððs€claim€the€TrialÐ X ¨ ÐCourt€abused€its€discretion€by€failing€to€conduct€a€hearing€upon€a€Writ€of€Inquiry€to€determine€theÐ D!” Ðappropriate€amount€of€damages€due€Plaintiffs,€if€any.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà@))%ìàò òòòDiscussionó óóóˆÐ $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€factual€findings€of€the€Trial€Court€are€accorded€a€presumption€of€correctness,€andÐ à%0!$ Ðwe€will€not€overturn€those€factual€findings€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòSeeóóÐ Ì&"% ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòBogan€v.€Boganóó,€60€S.W.3d€721,€727€(Tenn.€2001).€€With€respect€to€legalÐ ¸'#& Ðissues,€our€review€is€conducted€ð ðunder€a€pure€òòde€novoóó€standard€of€review,€according€no€deferenceÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€the€conclusions€of€law€made€by€the€lower€courts.ðð€€òòSouthern€Constructors,€Inc.€v.€Loudon€CountyÐ )à$( Ðâ âBd.€Of€Educ.óó,€58€S.W.3d€706,€710€(Tenn.€2001).€€The€Trial€Courtððs€decision€to€deny€relief€underÐ |*Ì%) ÐRule€60.02€is€reviewed€under€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòDay€v.€Dayóó,€931€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð936,€939€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àà ` àThe€entry€of€a€default€judgment€is€governed€by€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€55.€€The€portions€ofÐ tÄ Ðthis€rule€which€are€pertinent€to€the€present€case€provide:Ð `° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àò ò55.01.€€Entry.€ð!ðó ó€€When€a€party€against€whom€a€judgment€forÐ 8 ˆ Ðaffirmative€relief€is€sought€has€failed€to€plead€or€otherwise€defend€asÐ ( x Ðprovided€by€these€rules€and€that€fact€is€made€to€appear€by€affidavit€orÐ  d Ðotherwise,€judgment€by€default€may€be€entered€as€follows:Ð P ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€party€entitled€to€a€judgment€by€default€shall€apply€to€theÐ Ø(  Ðcourt.€€All€parties€against€whom€a€default€judgment€is€sought€shall€beÐ Ä  Ðserved€with€a€written€notice€of€the€application€for€judgment€at€leastÐ °  Ðfive€days€before€the€hearing€on€the€application,€regardless€of€whetherÐ œì  Ðthe€party€has€made€an€appearance€in€the€action.ð8ð€€If,€in€order€toÐ ˆØ  Ðenable€the€court€to€enter€judgment€or€to€carry€it€into€effect,€it€isÐ tÄ Ðnecessary€to€take€an€account€or€to€determine€the€amount€of€damagesÐ `° Ðor€to€establish€the€truth€of€any€averment€by€evidence€or€to€make€anÐ Lœ Ðinvestigation€of€any€other€matter€the€court€may€conduct€such€hearingsÐ 8ˆ Ðor€order€such€references€as€it€deems€necessary€and€proper€and€shallÐ $t Ðaccord€a€right€of€trial€by€jury€to€the€parties€when€and€as€required€byÐ ` Ðany€statute.ÐüL` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àò ò55.02.€€Setting€Aside€Default.€ð!ðó ó€€For€good€cause€shown€the€courtÐ Ô$ Ðmay€set€aside€a€judgment€by€default€in€accordance€with€Rule€60.02.ÐÄ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendants€do€not€contend€the€Trial€Court€erred€when€it€entered€the€default€judgment.€Ð œì ÐRather,€they€contend€the€Trial€Court€erred€when€it€refused€to€set€aside€the€default€judgment€pursuantÐ ˆØ Ðto€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€60.02.€€Although€not€entirely€clear€from€the€record,€it€appears€Defendants€claimÐ tÄ Ðthey€are€entitled€to€relief€under€Rules€60.02(1)€and€(5),€which€provide€as€follows:Ð ` ° ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àOn€motion€and€upon€such€terms€as€are€just,€the€court€mayÐ 8"ˆ  Ðrelieve€a€party€or€the€party's€legal€representative€from€a€finalÐ $#t! Ðjudgment,€order€or€proceeding€for€the€following€reasons:€€(1)€mistake,Ð $`" Ðinadvertence,€surprise€or€excusable€neglect;€ð8ð€or€(5)€any€other€reasonÐ ü$L # Ðjustifying€relief€from€the€operation€of€the€judgment.€€The€motion€shallÐ è%8!$ Ðbe€made€within€a€reasonable€time,€and€for€reasons€(1)€and€(2)€notÐ Ô&$"% Ðmore€than€one€year€after€the€judgment,€order€or€proceeding€wasÐ À'#& Ðentered€or€taken.€€Ð¬(ü#'` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àUnder€Rule€60€"the€burden€is€on€the€movant€to€set€forth,€in€a€motion€or€petition€andÐ „*Ô%) Ðsupporting€affidavits,€facts€explaining€why€the€movant€was€justified€in€failing€to€avoid€the€mistake,Ð p+À&* Ðinadvertence,€surprise€or€neglect."€€òòTennessee€Depððt€of€Human€Services€v.€Barbeeóó,€689€S.W.2d€863,Ð ° Ð866€(Tenn.€1985)(quoting€òòTennessee€State€Bank€v.€Layóó,€609€S.W.2d€525€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1980)).€Ð œì ÐRule€60.02€is€not€for€use€by€a€party€merely€because€he€is€dissatisfied€with€the€results€of€the€case.€Ð ˆØ ÐòòToney€v.€Mueller€Co.óó,€810€S.W.2d€145,€146€(Tenn.€1991);€òòNCNB€National€Bank€of€North€CarolinaÐ tÄ Ðv.€Thrailkillóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€The€principle€of€finality€is€firmlyÐ `° Ðembedded€in€the€procedural€rules€and,€therefore,€Rule€60.02€is€an€escape€valve€that€should€not€beÐ L œ Ðeasily€opened.€€òòToney€v.€Mueller€Co.óó,€810€S.W.2d€145,€146€(Tenn.€1991);€òòNCNB€National€Bank€ofÐ 8 ˆ ÐNorth€Carolina€v.€Thrailkillóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€ð ð[M]ere€negligence€orÐ $ t Ðinattention€of€a€party€is€no€ground€for€vacating€a€judgment€against€him.€€Carelessness€is€notÐ  ` Ðsynonymous€with€excusable€neglect.ðð€€òòFood€Lion,€Inc.€v.€Washington€County€Beer€Bd.óó,€700€S.W.2dÐ ü L  Ð893,€896€(Tenn.€1985)(quoting€46€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòJudgmentsóó€ðð€718€(1969));€òòNCNB€National€Bank€ofÐ è 8  ÐNorth€Carolina€v.€Thrailkillóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àNotwithstanding€the€foregoing,€Tennessee€courts€have€construed€Rule€60.02€moreÐ ¬ü  Ðliberally€when€it€comes€to€granting€relief€from€a€default€judgment.€€As€observed€by€our€SupremeÐ ˜è  ÐCourt,€ð ð[C]ourts€often€apply€a€different€standard€when€faced€with€a€Rule€60€motion€in€regard€to€aÐ „Ô  Ðdefault€judgment.€€Unlike€ð8ð€[cases]€in€which€relief€from€a€final€judgment€after€a€hearing€wasÐ pÀ Ðdeemed€to€be€extraordinary€under€Rule€60,€Rule€60€is€construed€with€liberality€to€afford€relief€fromÐ \¬ Ða€default€judgment.ðð€€òòTennessee€Depððt€of€Human€Services€v.€Barbeeóó,€689€S.W.2d€863,€867€(Tenn.Ð H˜ Ð1985).€€Factors€to€consider€in€determining€whether€to€grant€relief€from€a€default€judgment€under€RuleÐ 4„ Ð60€include€whether€the€default€was€willful,€whether€the€defendant€has€a€meritorious€defense,€andÐ  p Ðwhether€any€prejudice€would€result€to€the€non„defaulting€party€if€relief€from€the€judgment€is€granted.€Ð  \ ÐòòIdóó.€at€866.€€If€there€is€reasonable€doubt€as€to€whether€to€set€aside€a€default€judgment€upon€properÐ øH Ðapplication,€a€trial€court€should€exercise€its€discretion€in€favor€of€granting€relief€from€the€judgment.€Ð ä4 ÐòòSeeóó€òòKeck€v.€Nationwide€Systems,€Inc.,óó€499€S.W.2d€266,€267€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1973).€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendants€rely€on€several€cases€where€the€reasons€supporting€a€partyððs€lack€ofÐ ¨ø Ðattendance€were€considered€sufficient€for€granting€relied€under€Rule€60.€€For€example,€in€òòBarbeeóó€theÐ ”ä ÐCourt€concluded€the€trial€court€did€not€err€when€it€set€aside€a€default€judgment€which€was€enteredÐ €Ð Ðafter€the€defendant€and€his€attorney€failed€to€appear€at€trial.€€In€reaching€this€conclusion,€the€CourtÐ l¼ Ðobserved€that€the€record€reflected€ð ðwhy€the€defendant€failed€to€appear€at€the€January€23,€1980,€trial.€Ð X ¨ ÐThis€case€was€set€for€trial€in€open€court€before€defense€counsel€entered€an€appearance€for€theÐ D!” Ðdefendant.€€No€order€setting€the€case€for€trial€was€entered.€€After€an€answer€was€filed,€the€clerk'sÐ 0"€  Ðoffice€failed€to€notify€defense€counsel€that€this€case€has€been€set€for€trial.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€867.€€òòSee€alsoóóÐ #l! ÐòòNelson€v.€Simpsonóó,€826€S.W.2d€483€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991)(Reversing€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€setÐ $X" Ðaside€a€default€judgment€when,€òòinter€aliaóó,€the€trial€court€heard€and€granted€the€plaintiffððs€motion€forÐ ô$D # Ðdefault€judgment€before€either€the€defendant€or€his€insurance€company€knew€it€had€been€filed€andÐ à%0!$ Ðafter€counsel€for€plaintiff€agreed€with€the€insurance€company€to€give€thirty€days€notice€beforeÐ Ì&"% Ðmoving€for€a€default€judgment.).€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€argue€this€case€involves€nothing€more€than€mere€inattention€by€defenseÐ )à$( Ðcounsel€which€is€not€a€proper€basis€for€granting€relief€from€the€judgment.€€Plaintiffs€rely€on€òòFoodÐ |*Ì%) ÐLion,€Inc.€v.€Washington€County€Beer€Boardóó,€700€S.W.2d€893€(Tenn.€1985),€where€the€TennesseeÐ h+¸&* ÐSupreme€Court€held€that€an€attorney€being€too€busy€was€ð ðno€groundðð€for€relief€under€Rule€60.€€òòIdóó.Ð ° Ðat€896.€€Citing€46€Am.€Jur.€2d€874„75€òòJudgmentsóó€ðð€718€(1969)€and€òòDudley€v.€Stilesóó,€142€Mont.€566,Ð œì Ð386€P.2d€342€(1963),€the€òòFood€Lionóó€Court€stated:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIt€has€been€declared€that€the€mere€negligence€or€inattention€of€a€partyÐ `° Ðis€no€ground€for€vacating€a€judgment€against€him.€€Carelessness€is€notÐ L œ Ðsynonymous€with€excusable€neglect.€€Mere€forgetfulness€of€a€party€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðan€action€is€not€a€sufficient€ground€for€vacating€or€setting€aside€aÐ $ t Ðjudgment€by€default.€€Parties€are€not€justified€in€neglecting€their€casesÐ  ` Ðmerely€because€of€the€stress€or€importance€of€their€own€privateÐ ü L  Ðbusiness€and€such€neglect€is€ordinarily€not€excusable.€Ðè 8 ` x` x ÐÌòòFood€Lionóó,€700€S.W.2d€at€896.€€The€Court€further€concluded€that€an€attorney€being€uncertain€howÐ À  Ðto€proceed€also€failed€to€satisfy€the€Rule€60€requirements,€and€if€ð ðthis€Court€were€to€hold€thatÐ ¬ü  Ðignorance€of€the€law€is€a€proper€ground€for€relief€under€Rule€60.02,€Tennessee€Rules€of€CivilÐ ˜è  ÐProcedure,€it€is€hard€to€conceive€how€any€judgment€could€be€safe€from€assault€on€that€ground.ðð€€òòIdóó.€Ð „Ô  ÐSimilarly,€in€òòBarber€&€McMurry,€Inc.€v.€Top„Flite€Development€Corp.óó,€720€S.W.2d€469€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð pÀ ÐApp.€1986),€this€Court€concluded€that€failure€of€a€partyððs€attorney€to€attend€trial€was€not€a€sufficientÐ \¬ Ðbasis€to€set€aside€a€judgment€when€the€lack€of€attendance€ð ðwas€due€to€the€counselððs€occupation€withÐ H˜ Ðother€professional€or€business€matters.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€471€(quoting€46€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòJudgmentsóó€ðð€728€at€p.Ð 4„ Ð884).€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€appeal,€Defendants€claim€that€the€conflict€of€interest€created€by€Tarpy€representingÐ øH ÐServiceway€in€the€Bankruptcy€Court€proceeding€prevented€Cox€and€Leveille€from€furtherÐ ä4 Ðrepresenting€Defendants,€thereby€leaving€Defendants€ð ðwithout€counsel€to€appear€on€their€behalf€inÐ Ð  Ðdefense€of€this€lawsuit.ðð€€While€it€is€not€at€all€certain€to€this€Court€from€the€record€before€it€that€suchÐ ¼  Ða€conflict€actually€existed,€we€will€proceed€with€our€review€as€if€such€a€conflict€did€exist.€€The€recordÐ ¨ø Ðas€it€exists€contains€no€affidavit€from€any€of€the€attorneys€from€Hagood,€Tarpy€&€Cox,€P.L.L.C.,€orÐ ”ä Ðanyone€else€explaining€why€any€conflict€of€interest€which€was€created€necessarily€excluded€theÐ €Ð Ðattorneys€in€the€state€court€action€from€continuing€their€representation,€as€opposed€to€excludingÐ l¼ ÐTarpy€from€his€representation€in€the€bankruptcy€proceeding.€€Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àà ` àAnother€glaring€omission€is€any€lack€of€evidence€as€to€when€Tarpy,€Cox€or€LeveilleÐ 0"€  Ðactually€discovered€the€conflict.€€We€do€know€that€the€conflict€of€interest€was€discussed€in€theÐ #l! ÐSeptember€18,€2002,€letter€from€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€to€Cox€and€Leveille.€€Thus,€Cox€and€LeveilleÐ $X" Ðwere€aware€of€the€conflict€no€later€than€the€day€on€which€they€received€this€letter,€although€theyÐ ô$D # Ðcertainly€could€have€known€of€the€conflict€well€before€this€time.€€The€hearing€on€the€motion€forÐ à%0!$ Ðdefault€was€conducted€a€full€month€after€the€letter€was€mailed.€€The€record€contains€no€explanationÐ Ì&"% Ðwhatsoever€as€to€why€nothing€was€done€during€this€time€to€inform€the€Trial€Court€of€the€existenceÐ ¸'#& Ðof€a€conflict€and€Defendantsðð€need€to€obtain€new€counsel€prior€to€filing€an€answer.€€Nothing€wasÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdone.€€Cox€and€Leveille€still€were€Defendantsðð€attorneys€at€the€time€of€the€hearing€on€PlaintiffsððÐ )à$( Ðâ âmotion€for€default.€€Therefore,€Defendants€were€not€without€counsel€up€to€and€through€the€hearingÐ |*Ì%) Ðon€the€motion€for€default.€€For€these€reasons,€we€reject€Defendantsðð€argument€that€the€conflict€ofÐ ° Ðinterest€formed€a€sufficient€basis€for€them€to€be€granted€relief€under€Rule€60.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àà ` àDefendants€also€argue€that€neither€Don€Dorris€nor€Brenda€Dorris€knew€that€a€motionÐ tÄ Ðfor€a€default€judgment€had€been€filed€against€them,€and€they€were€so€preoccupied€with€theÐ `° Ðbankruptcy€case€that€they€were€not€focused€on€the€state€court€action,€even€though€the€amount€ofÐ L œ Ðdamages€sought€against€them€personally€was€roughly€$1.5€million.€€Defendants€maintain€that€neitherÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€Trial€Court€nor€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€let€them€know€that€a€motion€for€default€had€been€filed€or€thatÐ $ t Ða€hearing€on€such€a€motion€had€been€set.€€To€the€extent€this€argument€can€be€taken€to€mean€thatÐ  ` ÐDefendants€should€have€been€provided€individual€notice€of€the€motion€for€default,€that€obligationÐ ü L  Ðobviously€fell€on€their€attorneys.€€No€fault€can€be€attributed€to€Plaintiffsðð€counsel€who€ethically€wasÐ è 8  Ðprohibited€from€having€any€direct€communication€of€this€nature€with€Defendants€who€wereÐ Ô$  Ðrepresented€by€counsel.€€The€record€contains€no€proof€establishing€that€the€attorneys€who€enteredÐ À  Ðtheir€appearance€on€Defendantsðð€behalf€did€not€receive€proper€notice€as€required€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.Ð ¬ü  ÐP.€55.€€In€fact,€the€record€establishes€just€the€opposite.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€only€reasonable€conclusion€to€be€drawn€from€the€evidence€presented€to€the€TrialÐ pÀ ÐCourt€and€this€Court€is€that€Defendants€and/or€their€attorneys,€for€whatever€reason,€simply€did€notÐ \¬ Ðdo€what€needed€to€be€done€and€file€an€answer€or€otherwise€respond€to€the€complaint.€€As€observedÐ H˜ Ðin€òòFood€Lionóó,€òòsupraóó,€ð ðmere€negligence€or€inattention€of€a€partyðð€is€not€a€proper€basis€for€relief€underÐ 4„ ÐRule€60.€€òòFood€Lionóó,€700€S.W.2d€at€896.€€If€we€were€to€grant€relief€under€these€circumstances,€thenÐ  p Ðevery€default€judgment€could€be€set€aside€because,€by€definition,€something€did€not€get€done€thatÐ  \ Ðneeded€to€be€done€or€a€default€judgment€would€not€have€been€entered€in€the€first€place.€€òòSeeóó€òòFoodÐ øH ÐLionóó,€700€S.W.2d€at€896€(If€ð ðthis€Court€were€to€hold€that€ignorance€of€the€law€is€a€proper€ground€forÐ ä4 Ðrelief€under€Rule€60.02,€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,€it€is€hard€to€conceive€how€anyÐ Ð  Ðjudgment€could€be€safe€from€assault€on€that€ground.ðð).€€Defendants€have€offered€nothing€to€supportÐ ¼  Ðtheir€claim€that€they€did€not€answer€or€otherwise€defend€this€lawsuit€because€of€ð ðmistake,Ð ¨ø Ðinadvertence,€surprise,€or€excusable€neglectðð€as€contemplated€by€Rule€60,€even€with€a€liberalÐ ”ä Ðinterpretation.€€We€conclude€the€Trial€Court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€when€it€refused€to€grantÐ €Ð ÐDefendants€relief€from€the€default€judgment€pursuant€to€Rule€60.02(1).€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àà ` àRule€60.02(5)€authorizes€relief€from€a€judgment€for€ð ðany€other€reason€justifying€reliefÐ D!” Ðfrom€the€operation€of€the€judgment.ðð€€Despite€its€broad€language,€Rule€60.02(5)€is€construedÐ 0"€  Ðnarrowly.€€òòFederated€Insurance€Co.€v.€Lethcoeóó,€18€S.W.3d€621,€625€(Tenn.€2000);€òòNCNB€NationalÐ #l! ÐBank€of€North€Carolina€v.€Thrailkillóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€154€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòSteioff€v.€Steioffóó,Ð $X" Ð833€S.W.2d€94,€97€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992).€€The€standards€of€Rule€60.02(5)€are€even€more€demandingÐ ô$D # Ðthan€those€applicable€to€the€other€grounds€for€Rule€60.02€relief.€€òòNCNB€National€Bank€of€NorthÐ à%0!$ ÐCarolina€v.€Thrailkillóó,€856€S.W.2d€150,€154€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993);€òòDuncan€v.€Duncanóó,€789€S.W.2dÐ Ì&"% Ð557,€564€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990)(citing€òòTenn.€Dept.€of€Human€Services€v.€Barbeeóó,€689€S.W.2d€863,Ð ¸'#& Ð866€(Tenn.€1985)).€€For€the€same€reasons€we€conclude€Defendants€were€not€entitled€to€relief€underÐ ° ÐRule€60.02(2),€we€likewise€conclude€they€are€not€entitled€to€relief€under€Rule€60.02(5),€and€the€TrialÐ œì ÐCourt€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€when€it€refused€to€grant€Defendants€relief€under€this€Rule.€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àDefendantsðð€final€issue€is€their€claim€that€the€Trial€Court€erred€by€not€conducting€aÐ `° Ðhearing€upon€a€Writ€of€Inquiry€to€determine€the€appropriate€amount€of€Plaintiffsðð€damages.€Ð L œ ÐDefendants€argue€no€ð ðsuch€hearing€on€damages€was€heldðð€and€a€judgment€was€entered€againstÐ 8 ˆ ÐDefendants€without€their€being€afforded€an€opportunity€ð ðto€obtain€an€accounting€of€the€claim,€or€toÐ $ t Ðexplain€or€deny€same.ðð€€Initially,€it€goes€without€saying€that€had€Defendants€and€their€attorneysÐ  ` Ðshown€up€at€the€hearing,€they€would€have€been€entitled€to€cross€examine€Mr.€Wilkerson.€€As€set€forthÐ ü L  Ðpreviously,€Rule€55.01€provides€that€a€trial€court€may€conduct€a€hearing€as€it€deems€ð ðnecessary€andÐ è 8  Ðproperðð€in€order€to€enable€it€to€determine€the€amount€of€damages.€€We€believe€the€Trial€Court€didÐ Ô$  Ðjust€that.€€A€hearing€was€conducted€after€the€default€judgment€was€granted€and€the€Trial€Court€heardÐ À  Ðsworn€testimony€from€plaintiff€James€Wilkerson.€€Moreover,€without€a€transcript€of€the€hearing,€weÐ ¬ü  Ðmust€conclusively€presume€the€evidence€justified€the€amount€of€the€judgment.€€òòSeeóó€òòCable€v.€LoweððsÐ ˜è  Ðof€Johnson€City,€Inc.óó,€No.€E2000„01075„COA„R3„CV,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€169€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð „Ô  ÐMar.€15,€2001),òòno€appl.€perm.€appeal€filedóó,€wherein€this€Court€affirmed€entry€of€a€default€judgmentÐ pÀ Ðfor€$50,000,€the€full€amount€requested€by€the€plaintiff€in€her€complaint.€€In€so€doing,€we€stated:Ð \¬ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àAs€to€the€third€issue€relative€to€the€damages€awarded,€we€haveÐ 4„ Ðneither€a€transcript€nor€a€statement€of€evidence€in€the€recordÐ  p Ðconcerning€the€hearing€conducted€to€assess€damages.€We€are,Ð  \ Ðtherefore,€unable€to€reach€the€merits€of€this€issue,€but€mustÐ øH Ðconclusively€presume€that€the€evidence€presented€justified€theÐ ä4 Ðjudgment€of€the€Trial€Court.€òòSee€In€re€Rockwell€v.€Arthuróó,€673Ð Ð  ÐS.W.2d€512€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983).м ` x` x ÐÌòòCableóó,€2001€Tenn.€App.€LEXIS€169,€at€*€7.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌ€à  àà ` àIn€the€present€case,€we€believe€the€Trial€Court€conducted€a€hearing€ð ðas€it€deem[ed]Ð l¼ Ðnecessary€and€properðð€in€order€to€ð ðdetermine€the€amount€of€damagesðð€to€which€Plaintiffs€wereÐ X ¨ Ðentitled.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€55.01.€€Since€we€must€presume€there€was€sufficient€evidence€toÐ D!” Ðsupport€the€amount€of€the€verdict,€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed€on€this€issue.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionó óóóˆÐ $X" ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€TrialÐ à%0!$ Ðâ âCourt€for€further€proceedings€as€are€necessary,€if€any,€consistent€with€this€Opinion,€and€for€collectionÐ Ì&"% ÐÔ& 8 Ôâ âof€the€costs€below.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellants€PFC€Global€Group,€Inc.,Ð ° ÐLeslie€Don€Dorris,€and€Brenda€L.€Dorris,€and€their€surety.Ð œì ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGEÔ'8 °æ¨Ô