ÿWPCÈ ¡X÷¸ùÃÅaKÅcKñ×zß¶GE‹—‹Ó¾c®å¦¼±5¬a¥Ä7Ãí--O¸’+>DÞŶõ\$¨ôq¢r³éÍX.+Gá{äHD:•H¾Ïˆ _×».‚Ìþ'´Áy°$¦˜ñfŠe,›iGº ÁÎN×C5¯5EöÅP.ä0¦”×›ý»Ó<š"UJ½Ì’£NÍüåaN»ÀÆ šª˜ Q8¿[ß©:!AeUùzøŸ41’ ¶ŠªóÍ6Ð2ÎõtÕ€ [í¬Z~!Á„nøãj9ŠŸP–ª¨nà Í:-I)s’¶!yÝ&k™ÝX&ÄZY&|ýX{<¡8ˆ°IùÁYŽpóú³ü®Ul³VÒ{òb¨‹y×#O : †Q¡àY³Tn“¶¥5ŠŸê0Ìl%e4§ —©û¬A« Ï ]ÎÓßµœuðüØmŒ0T­.3ÄêéSƸ£&؆ò’ÍOW&›\I+µ­MÈ®Zú 6šˆ/ijû>þ4?ý¾JŠog…;ƒœ@ÑÈÎK Õ½7Š6°ûþíœÏ³x´w_¬RU|ÓoîÑên팧{‰Ì!h<’4ê8tþVä©ê þºb(ïÈ!ßï¾B€|¾¼Šqb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ ™ Æ¡ Æg Æ-ÆóóN¹¹¹E»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»b½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½ 0ëÅÅÅÅ B°° 0¤Í D3q D-¤ 0KÑÑ ASÆo 0¤5 0DÙ A«˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»!Š/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularqdj/ê:i¢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|xÿU‹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- ù-(|G2¤$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^M»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôãò»»Ô d(|3‰Z$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^M»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‰Z$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^M»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€^M»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼^M»»»ÔÑ8€ñXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îGt^MÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼^M»îîGt#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓOctober€7,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XñX»¼^MÔÌò òÔ#†¼^M»XXñ#ÔKENNEDY€WOODSòòóó€v.€METROPOLITAN€GOVERNMENTÐ úJ ÐOF€NASHVILLE€AND€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÔ‡XñX»¼^MÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€01„91„I€€€€€€Irvin€H.€Ô_ÔKilcreaseÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€ChancellorÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2001„03143„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€10,€2003ó óÔ#†¼^M»XXñ­#ÔÔ‡XñX»¼^MÔò ò€Ð ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€case€involves€an€Administrative€Procedures€Act€appeal€from€the€chancery€courtððs€determinationÐ ŒÜ Ðof€Appellantððs€Petition€for€Judicial€Review.€€The€petition€sought€review€of€the€Civil€ServiceÐ xÈ ÐCommissionððs€final€order€affirming€Appellantððs€termination€for€violation€of€the€Metro€Nashville€FireÐ d´ ÐDepartmentððs€Zero„Tolerance€Policy€on€Substance€Abuse.€€We€affirm€the€order€of€the€trial€court.Ð P  ÐÓ&ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Ð (x ÐAffirmed€and€Remandedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼^M»àXñ“#ÔÔ‡XñX.¼^MÔWilliam€B.€Cain,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€WòòILLIAMóó€C.€KòòOCHóó,€JòòRóó.,€P.J.,€M.S.,òòóóÐ ì< Ðand€òòóóFòòRANKóó€G.€CòòLEMENTóó,€JòòRóó.,€J.,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌKennedy€Woods,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€Pro€Se.Ð ° ÐÌDaniel€W.€Ô_ÔChampneyÔ_Ô,€John€L.€Kennedy,€and€Ann€OððConnell,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,Ð ˆØ ÐMetropolitan€Government€of€Nashville€and€Davidson€County.Ð t Ä ÐÓ·ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼^M»XXñæ#ÔÔ‡XñX»¼^MÔÐ L"œ! ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼^M»XXñT #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XñX»¼^MÔà  àIn€1997,€pursuant€to€the€authority€granted€in€the€Metro€Charter,€the€Commission€implementedÐ $$t# Ða€substance€abuse€policy.€€This€policy€provided€disciplinary€measures€and€drug€testing€methods€forÐ %` $ Ðpersonnel€of€the€Government€of€Metro€Nashville€and€Davidson€County.€€In€1998,€the€MetropolitanÐ ü%L!% ÐFire€Department€adopted€a€ð ðzero„tolerance€policyðð€which€provided€the€following€specificÐ è&8"& Ðinformation€concerning€illegal€controlled€substances:Ð Ô'$#' ÐÌà8  àI.à0` Ð Ð àAll€members€are€prohibited€from€the€possession€and/or€use€of€illegalÐ ¬)ü$) Ðcontrolled€substances€whether€on€or€off€duty.€€THERE€SHALL€BE€NOÐ ˜*è%* ÐALLOWANCE€FOR€THE€USE€OF€ILLEGAL€DRUGS.Є+Ô&+` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8  àII.à0` Ð Ð àMembers€are€prohibited€from€using€alcohol€or€any€legal€drug€in€a€manner€thatÐ p,À', Ðmight€interfere€with€the€proper€performance€of€duties.Ð#\-¬(-` Ð ` Ð ý  #ÐÔ_Ôà8  àIII.à0` Ð Ð àMembers€are€prohibited€from€using€legal€medication€in€an€illegal€manner.а` Ð ` Ð  Ðà8  àIV.à0` Ð Ð àAll€members€must€notify€the€Director€Chief€of€any€alcohol€related€convictionÐ œì Ðor€any€drug€statute€conviction€occurring€in€the€workplace€within€five€(5)€workÐ ˆØ Ðdays€after€the€conviction€(re:€€Drug€„€Free€Workplace€Act€of€1988).ÐtÄ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà  àPursuant€to€these€two€administrative€policies,€Aegis€Laboratories€conducted€random€drugÐ L œ Ðscreening€of€a€group€of€employees€including€the€appellant,€Kennedy€Woods.€€Mr.€Woodsðð€testÐ 8 ˆ Ðreturned€a€positive€result.€€For€this€reason€the€fire€department,€after€conducting€a€disciplinaryÐ $ t Ðhearing,€terminated€Mr.€Woods.€€Mr.€Woods€then€appealed€the€termination€to€the€Civil€ServiceÐ  ` ÐCommission,€which€affirmed€that€disciplinary€action.€€Mr.€Woods€then€petitioned€the€chancery€courtÐ ü L  Ðseeking€judicial€review€of€the€Commissionððs€action.€€The€chancellor€affirmed€the€termination€andÐ è 8  Ðdismissed€the€petition,€entering€the€following€findings€of€fact:Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€Court€adopts€the€Findings€of€Fact€of€the€Administrative€Law€Judge€inÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€August€16,€2000€order€which€are€summarized€as€follows:à0 Ð Ð àÐ˜è  Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à1.à ¸ àThe€Petitioner€was€employed€with€the€Nashville€Fire€Department€asÐ „Ô  Ða€Firefighter€until€his€discharge€on€February€1,€1999.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)ÐpÀÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à2.à ¸ àThe€Civil€Service€Commission€approved€Policy€6.1„11€on€August€1,Ð \¬ Ð1997.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à3.à ¸ àOn€September€10,€1997,€Petitioner€received€training€and€signed€anÐ 4„ ÐAcknowledgment€of€Receipt€and€Understanding€of€the€Metropolitan€GovernmentÐ  p ÐSubstance€Abuse€policy€(6.1„11).€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à4.à ¸ àThe€Nashville€Fire€Department€adopted€Policy€6.1„11€on€NovemberÐ øH Ð1,€1997.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)Ðä4Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à5.à ¸ àOn€July€1,€1998,€Petitioner€signed€a€statement€that€he€received€a€copyÐ Ð  Ðof€the€Department€Substance€abuse€Procedures€and€guidelines.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)м Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à6.à ¸ àOn€January€21,€1999,€Petitioner€participate[d]€in€a€random€drug€test,Ð ¨ø Ðpursuant€to€the€Department€Substance€Abuse€Procedures€and€Guidelines€and€theÐ ”ä ÐMetropolitan€Government€Substance€abuse€policy€(6.1„11).€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à7.à ¸ àOn€January€26,€1999€the€Department€was€notified€by€its€contractÐ l¼ Ðindependent€laboratory€that€Petitioner€had€tested€positive€for€an€illegal€controlledÐ X ¨ Ðsubstance.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€242)ÐD!”Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à8.à ¸ àOn€January€28,€1999,€Petitioner€was€notified€that€charges€were€filedÐ 0"€  Ðagainst€him€for€violation€of€Policy€6.1„11.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€243)Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à9.à ¸ àA€hearing€on€the€charges€was€set€for€February€1,€1999.€€(Vol.€I,€p.Ð $X" Ð243).Ðô$D #Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à10.à ¸ àOn€February€1,€1999,€the€Department€notified€Petitioner€that€he€wasÐ à%0!$ Ðterminated€for€violation€of€Policy€6.1„11.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€243)ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à11.à0¸ Ð Ð àOn€February€11,€1999,€Petitioner€appealed.€€(Vol.€I,€p.€243)и'#&¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà  àFrom€this€order€Mr.€Woods€appeals,€arguing€as€error€the€refusal€of€the€chancery€court€to€findÐ )à$( Ðâ âthat€the€Department€and€Civil€Service€Commission€acted€arbitrarily€and€capriciously€in€adopting€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðzero„tolerance€policy€and€that€his€termination€was€unsupported€by€material€and€substantial€evidenceÐ ° Ðand€otherwise€arbitrary.€€òòSee€óóTenn.Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„322.Ð œì Ðâ âÌI.òòà0  àóóSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWÐtÄ(#(# ÐÌà  àThe€chancery€court€and€this€Court€must€conform€to€the€same€standard€of€review,€that€set€outÐ L œ Ðin€section€4„5„322(h)€of€the€Tennessee€Code:€€(òòC.F.€Industries€v.€Tenn.€Pub.€Serv.€Comm.óó,€599Ð 8 ˆ ÐS.W.2d€536,€540€(Tenn.1980)).Ð $ t ÐÌà8  à(h)à ` àThe€court€may€affirm€the€decision€of€the€agency€or€remand€the€case€for€furtherÐ ü L  Ðproceedings.€€The€court€may€reverse€or€modify€the€decision€if€the€rights€of€theÐ è 8  Ðpetitioner€have€been€prejudiced€because€the€administrative€findings,€inferences,Ð Ô$  Ðconclusions€or€decisions€are:ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(1)à0` Ð Ð àIn€violation€of€constitutional€or€statutory€provisions;€Ð˜è ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(2)à0` Ð Ð àIn€excess€of€the€statutory€authority€of€the€agency;ÐpÀ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(3)à0` Ð Ð àMade€upon€unlawful€procedure;ÐH˜` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8  à(4)à ` àArbitrary€or€capricious€or€characterized€by€abuse€of€discretion€or€clearlyÐ  p Ðunwarranted€exercise€of€discretion;€orÐ \Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à(5)à ` àUnsupported€by€evidence€which€is€both€substantial€and€material€in€the€lightÐ ä4 Ðof€the€entire€record.ÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àIn€determining€the€substantiality€of€evidence,€the€court€shall€take€into€accountÐ ¨ø Ðwhatever€in€the€record€fairly€detracts€from€its€weight,€but€the€court€shall€notÐ ”ä Ðsubstitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€the€agency€as€to€the€weight€of€the€evidence€onÐ €Ð Ðquestions€of€fact.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„322(h)(2001).€€òòSee€also€Sanifill€of€Tennessee,€Inc.€v.€Tennessee€Solid€WasteÐ D!” ÐControl€Boardóó,€907€S.W.2d€807,€809€(Tenn.1995).Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àWhile€we€may€consider€evidence€that€detracts€from€the€weight€of€other€evidence€in€theÐ $X" Ðrecord,€this€Court€may€not€substitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€the€agency€concerning€that€weight.€€òòSeeÐ ô$D # ÐGluck€v.€Civil€Service€Commissionóó,€15€S.W.3d€486,€490€(Tenn.Ct.App.2000);€òòsee€also€Pace€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐGarbage€Disposal€Dist.óó,€54€Tenn.App.€263,€266,€390€S.W.2d€461,€463€(1965).€€Although€the€phraseÐ Ì&"% Ðis€not€clearly€defined€in€the€statute,€substantial€and€material€evidence€is€understood€to€requireÐ ¸'#& Ðsomething€less€than€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€and€more€than€a€scintilla€or€glimmer.€€òòSeeÐ ¤(ô#' ÐGluckóó,€15€S.W.3d€at€490€(quoting€òòWayne€County€v.€Tennessee€Solid€Waste€Disposal€Control€Bd.óó,Ð )à$( Ð756€S.W.2d€274,€280€(1988).€€Furthermore,€in€situations€where€the€administrative€agency€and€trialÐ |*Ì%) Ðcourt€enter€concurrent€findings€of€fact,€those€findings€are€conclusive€upon€this€Court.€€òòSee€C.F.Ð h+¸&* ÐIndustries€v.€Tennessee€Public€Service€Commððnóó,€599€S.W.2d€536,€540€(Tenn.1980).€€NonethelessÐ ° Ðan€agencyððs€decision€supported€with€substantial€and€material€evidence,€may€still€be€arbitrary€andÐ œì Ðcapricious€if€caused€by€a€ð ðclear€error€in€judgment.ðð€€òòSee€Jackson€Mobilphone€Co.,€Inc.€v.€TennesseeÐ ˆØ ÐPublic€Service€Commððnóó,€876€S.W.2d€106,€110€(Tenn.Ct.App.1993).Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àMr.€Woodsðð€challengeòò€óóto€his€termination€rests€primarily€upon€the€administrative€agencyððsÐ L œ Ðconsideration€of€his€random€drug€test,€and€secondarily€upon€his€claims€regarding€the€arbitrary€andÐ 8 ˆ Ðcapricious€nature€of€the€fire€departmentððs€implementation€of€a€ð ðzero„tolerance€policyðð€in€light€of€theÐ $ t Ðexisting€substance€abuse€policy€adopted€by€the€Civil€Service€Commission.Ð  ` ÐÌII.à0  àCHAIN€OF€CUSTODY:€€APPELLANTððS€RANDOM€DRUG€TEST€Ðè 8 (#(# Ðà  àÌà  àMr.€Woods€argues€that€the€Commission€should€have€excluded€the€drug€test€results€due€to€anÐ À  Ðalleged€failure€on€the€part€of€the€Commission€and€Aegis€Labs€to€properly€account€for€the€chain€ofÐ ¬ü  Ðcustody€through€the€accompanying€chain€of€custody€forms.€€No€objection€was€made€before€theÐ ˜è  ÐCommission€on€the€admissibility€of€the€drug€test.€€In€addition,€the€Department€presented€extensiveÐ „Ô  Ðtestimony€concerning€the€chain€of€custody€of€the€random€drug€test€samples€including€that€of€Mr.Ð pÀ ÐWoods.€€This€testimony€given€by€Dr.€David€Lee€Black€included€the€following€statements€concerningÐ \¬ Ðthe€chain€of€custody€forms€submitted€to€the€Commission:Ð H˜ ÐÌà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDoes€your€review€of€this€form€indicate€any€breakdown€or€problem€inÐ  p Ðthe€chain€of€custody?Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.€€This€part€of€the€process,€no.€€This€is€complete.€€This€is€what€Dr.Ð øH ÐBluhm€also€would€have€reviewed.Ðä4Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àSo€when€you€testified€earlier€that€at€various€stages€the€chain€ofÐ Ð  Ðcustody€was€reviewed€and€found€to€be€intact€without€any€problem,€this€form€verifies?м Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.€€This€verifies€that€the€initial€part€of€the€chain€of€custody€processÐ ¨ø Ðand€the€collection€process€has€been€collected.ДäÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àSo€there€was€no€problem€with€the€chain€of€custody€in€this€case?ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à0 ¸ àThatððs€correct.Ðl¼¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌThis€testimony€remained€unchallenged€before€the€Commission.€€Under€the€circumstances,€this€CourtÐ D!” Ðfinds€that€a€reasonable€person€could€come€to€the€conclusion€that€the€urine€tested€by€Aegis€Labs€andÐ 0"€  Ðreturning€a€positive€result€for€cocaine€metabolites€was€indeed€Mr.€Woodsðð€urine.€€The€question€ofÐ #l! Ðwhether€the€requisite€chain€of€possession€has€been€sufficiently€established€to€justify€admission€isÐ $X" Ðaddressed€to€the€sound€discretion€of€the€trial€court.€€òòRitter€v.€Stateóó,€3€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€372,€462Ð ô$D # ÐS.W.2d€247€(1970);€òòShell€v.€Lawóó,€935€S.W.2d€402,€409€(Tenn.Ct.App.1996).€€The€CommissionerÐ à%0!$ Ðappropriately€exercised€his€discretion.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌIII.à0  àZERO„TOLERANCEФ(ô#'(#(# ÐÌà  àMr.€Woods€next€argues€that€the€fire€chief€is€without€authority€to€adopt€the€zero„toleranceÐ |*Ì%) Ðpolicy€without€Civil€Service€Commission€approval.€€Appellant€did€not€raise€this€issue€in€the€trialÐ h+¸&* Ðcourt€but€raises€it€for€the€first€time€on€appeal.€€Generally,€a€party€cannot€raise€such€an€issue€for€theÐ ° Ðfirst€time€on€appeal€and€this€Court€may€refuse€to€consider€such€issue.€€òòSeay€v.€County€of€Shelbyóó,€672Ð œì ÐS.W.2d€404,€409€(Tenn.Ct.App.1984);€òòHarrison€v.€Schraderóó,€569€S.W.2d€822€(Tenn.1978).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àAt€any€rate,€the€issue€is€without€merit€as€section€8.303€of€the€Metropolitan€Charter€providesÐ `° Ðthat€the€Fire€Chief€ð ðshall€make€regulations,€with€the€approval€of€the€Metropolitan€Mayor€and€inÐ L œ Ðconformity€with€applicable€ordinances,€concerning€the€operation€of€the€department,€the€conduct€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€officers€and€employees€thereof€.€.€.€.ðð€€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àThe€zero„tolerance€policy€was€adopted€by€the€Department€pursuant€to€Metropolitan€CharterÐ ü L  Ðsection€8.303€on€July€1,€1998,€revised€on€July€11,€1998,€approved€by€the€Fire€Chief€and€approvedÐ è 8  Ðby€the€Metropolitan€Mayor.€€Appellant€tested€positive€for€cocaine€on€January€21,€1999€by€means€ofÐ Ô$  Ðrandom€selection.€€The€departmental€hearing€was€held€on€February€1,€1999€and€Appellant€wasÐ À  Ðterminated.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àThe€proceedings€conformed€with€the€provisions€of€the€Metropolitan€Charter€and€the€zero„Ð „Ô  Ðtolerance€policy.€€As€there€is€substantial€and€material€evidence€in€the€record€to€support€the€action€ofÐ pÀ Ðthe€Administrative€Law€Judge€and€there€has€been€no€abuse€of€discretion,€the€judgment€of€theÐ \¬ Ðchancellor€is€in€all€respects€affirmed.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àCosts€of€the€cause€are€assessed€to€Appellant.Ð  p ÐÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ¼  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGE