ÿWPCƒ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw@ 4W k 0§z 0J! 0Dk 0T¯ 0^ a 0hi 0rÑ 0|C 0†¿ 0E 1uÕ U,J 0dvbÚ BâU,ÿU >+ D3iU *œU*Æ 0@ðB)0DCY AMœ'é2.Bpv~vÓ  AOÞÆ- 0Dó D/7 Bf˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡@"Arial Regular ïDðñeòDóPôDõPöÓ€DÒ úÿÿú, ú3|x(W(2¨E$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€ôY©ôXXÔà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ- ù- d< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman%%%%'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Arial< Œ 9p`(Times("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd€-/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌSeptember€16,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó (Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Ô€+ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„103(9)€(1995).Ô€)ÔÌ $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Ô€+ÔòòKatzenbach€v.€McClungóó,€379€U.S.€294,€85€S.€Ct.€377,€13€L.€Ed.€2d€290€(1964);€òòWickardÏv.€Filburnóó,€317€U.S.€111,€63€S.€Ct.€82,€87€L.€Ed.€122€(1942).€€These€decisions€are€not€relevant€toÏthe€issue€in€this€case€as€they€were€rendered€as€interpretations€of€the€United€State€ConstitutionððsÏCommerce€Clause.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€)ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  Ý€Ô€+ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„103(9)€(1995).ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€((X„d&ÓÑ#€((Xd#ÑÔ€)ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÑ€ ÑÑ7€ô&XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€+ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑØ ØÓ&€,,XÀd&Ó›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙÙ€€ÙßL€01/;+'h|gèl` ç `€€LßÌ›à@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌ̛̜ÌÌÌœà àà àà àà àà àà à€€à àò òà àòòFORÏPUBLICATIONó óóóÌÌÒ 4 ÒÒ „ ÒÌ›ÌN.€THOMAS€œPURSELL›,€JR.,à àà àœ)à àò òFiled:€September€16,€1996ó ó›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà à›à àAppellant,à àà àà à)Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€€€€€DAVIDSON€CIRCUITÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ì›à àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌœVs›.à àà àà àà àà àà àœ)à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€HON.€WALTER€C.€KURTZ,€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÏJUDGEÌ›à àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌFIRST€AMERICAN€NATIONAL€œBANK,›à à)ÌCHARLES€WHITE,€ANITA€WHITE,€œand›à à)ÌCHARLES€œBAGSBY›,€œd/b/aà à›à à)ÌœTENNESSEE€AUTO›€œRECOVERY,›à àœ)à àNo.€€01„S„01„9509„CV„00150›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà à›à àAppellees.à àœà à›à à)ÌÌÌœÌÌ›ÌÌœò òòòFor€Appellant:à àà àà àà àà àFor€Appellees:ó óóớ̜Phillip€Northà àà àà àà àà àà àE.€Clifton€Knowles›ÌœA.€Gregory€Ramosà àà àà àà àà àAnthony€J.€McFarland›ÌœNORTH,€PURSELL€&€RAMOSà àà àà àJoseph€F.€Welborn,€III›ÌœNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àBASS,€BERRY€&€SIMS›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee›ÌÌÌœÌ̛̜ò òÔ€+„Ôà@ àO€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÔ€+XÔó ó›ÌÌÌÌÌÌœAFFIRMED.›à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àANDERSON,€J.à àà àà àÇÓÓà àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine€whether€the€actions€of€a€bankÏfollowing€repossession€of€collateral€for€a€loan€form€the€basis€for€an€action€underÏthe€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„101,€òòetóó€òòseqóó.€ÏThe€trial€court€granted€the€defendantsðð€motion€to€dismiss€for€failure€to€state€aÏclaim,€and€the€Court€of€Appeals€affirmed,€concluding€that€the€bank's€actions€didÏnot€constitute€a€violation€of€the€Consumer€Protection€Act€because€they€did€notÏaffect€the€conduct€of€any€ð ðtrade€or€commerce,ðð€as€those€terms€are€defined€in€theÏstatute.× ƒ2 ××  ×ÌÌà àAfter€a€careful€review€of€the€record€and€the€relevant€statutes,€we€concludeÏthat€the€actions€of€the€bank€and€its€agent€did€not,€in€this€case,€affect€the€conductÏof€any€ð ðtrade€or€commerce.ðð€€Accordingly,€the€Court€of€Appealsðð€judgment€isÏaffirmed.€ÌÌà@ àòòò òBACKGROUNDóóó óÌà àIn€October€of€1989,€the€plaintiff,€Thomas€Pursell,€borrowed€money€fromÏthe€defendant,€First€American€National€Bank€(hereafter€ð ðBankðð),€€to€purchase€aÏnew€1990€pickup€truck,€which€was€collateral€for€the€loan.€€Two€years€later,ÏPursellððs€loan€with€the€Bank€became€three€months€delinquent.€€After€severalÍunsuccessful€attempts€to€contact€Pursell,€on€January€10,€1992,€the€Bank,Ïthrough€its€agent,€defendant€Tennessee€Auto€Recovery,€(hereafter€ð ðRecoveryðð),Ïrepossessed€the€truck.€€ÌÌà àThe€dispute€in€this€case€arises€from€the€events€that€transpired€after€theÏtruck€was€repossessed.€€Pursell€contacted€the€Bank€on€the€day€of€theÏrepossession€to€ask€the€circumstances€under€which€he€could€retake€possessionÏof€the€truck.€€Although€the€original€loan€agreement€required€Pursell€to€pay€theÏBank€the€entire€unpaid€loan€balance€in€order€to€redeem€the€collateral€followingÏdefault,€the€Bank€offered€Pursell€the€alternative€of€paying€a€portion€of€the€loanÏbalance€and€repossession€costs.€€Pursell€was€instructed€to€call€back€later€for€anÏexact€dollar€amount.ÌÌà àIn€the€meantime,€Pursell€went€to€Recovery's€office€to€obtain€his€personalÏproperty€from€inside€the€repossessed€truck.€€Recovery€requested€that€PursellÏsign€a€release€of€liability€which€purported€to€release€Recovery€from€liability€withÏrespect€to€any€personal€property€that€was€in€the€automobile€at€the€time€it€wasÏrepossessed.€€Pursell€says€he€refused€to€sign€the€release€without€first€beingÏgiven€the€opportunity€to€inspect€his€personal€property€in€order€to€determine€ifÏany€items€were€damaged€or€missing.€€Recovery€asserts€that€Pursell€was€offeredÍthe€opportunity€to€inspect€his€property,€but€refused€to€take€advantage€of€thatÏopportunity.€€In€any€event,€Pursell€refused€to€sign€the€release€and€left€hisÏpersonal€property€there.ÌÌà àOn€Monday,€January€13th,€Pursell€spoke€to€the€Bankððs€Rivergate€branchÏmanager,€who€told€him€that€he€could€cure€the€default€and€obtain€possession€ofÏthe€truck€by€paying€the€sum€of€$3,487.68.€€Pursell€gave€the€Bank€a€personalÏcheck€for€that€amount,€and€was€given€a€receipt€in€return,€which€he€carried€toÏRecovery€to€claim€the€truck.€€Upon€his€arrival,€however,€Recovery€employeesÏagain€refused€to€relinquish€the€truck€to€Pursell€until€he€signed€the€release€formÏand€paid€a€$20€storage€fee.€€Pursell€refused,€contending€that€he€had€alreadyÏfully€redeemed€the€vehicle€through€his€payment€to€the€Bank.€ÌÌà àPursell€did€not€return€to€Recovery€after€January€13,€1992,€to€obtain€hisÏtruck€or€his€personal€property.€€Pursellððs€personal€property€was€turned€over€toÏthe€Bankððs€counsel,€who€attempted€to€return€it€to€Pursell;€but€Pursell€refused€toÏreview€the€inventory€of€items,€or€to€sign€the€receipt,€or€to€take€all€the€property.€ÏLater,€the€Bank€voluntarily€turned€Pursellððs€personal€property€over€to€the€trialÏcourt,€and€he€received€his€personal€property€from€the€court.ÌÌà àThe€truck€remained€at€Recovery€for€five€months,€during€which€timeÏPursell€did€not€make€any€additional€payments€on€the€loan€to€the€Bank.€€The€loanÏagain€became€delinquent,€and€on€May€13,€1992,€the€Bank€sold€the€truck€at€anÏauction€for€almost€$3,000€more€than€the€amount€owed€to€the€Bank€on€the€loan.€ÏThe€Bank€retained€the€proceeds€from€the€sale€to€cover€what€it€termed€ð ðcollectionÏexpenses.ððÌ€Ìà àPursell€brought€suit€against€the€Bank€and€Recovery€alleging€severalÏcauses€of€action,€including€a€claim€under€the€Tennessee€Consumer€ProtectionÏAct.€€€Prior€to€trial,€the€defendants€moved€to€dismiss€the€Consumer€ProtectionÏAct€allegations€for€failure€to€state€a€claim,€and€the€trial€court€granted€the€motion.€ÏThe€case€was€tried€to€a€jury€on€Pursellððs€remaining€claims€of€breach€of€contract,Ïconversion,€loss€of€property€and€fraud.€The€jury€awarded€Pursell€$3,350€inÏcompensatory€damages€from€the€Bank,€and€$500€in€compensatory€damagesÏfrom€Recovery,€but€awarded€no€punitive€damages.€Ìà àÌà àOn€appeal,€Pursell€claimed€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dismissing€hisÏclaim€under€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.€€The€Court€of€AppealsÏaffirmed€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court,€holding€that€the€actions€of€the€Bank€andÍRecovery€did€not€affect€the€conduct€of€€ð ðtrade€or€commerce,ðð€as€those€words€areÏdefined€by€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.ÌÌà àThereafter,€we€granted€the€plaintiffððs€appeal€and€now,€for€the€reasonsÏarticulated€below,€affirm€the€Court€of€Appealsðð€judgment.ÌÌÌò òòòà@ àSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWÌà àóóó óA€motion€to€dismiss€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€can€beÏgranted€tests€the€sufficiency€of€the€complaint.€€The€basis€for€the€motion€is€thatÏthe€allegations€contained€in€the€complaint,€considered€alone€and€taken€as€true,Ïare€insufficient€to€state€a€claim€as€a€matter€of€law.€€The€motion€admits€the€truth€ofÏall€relevant€and€material€allegations,€but€asserts€that€such€facts€do€not€constituteÏa€cause€of€action.€€In€resolving€the€issues€in€this€appeal,€we€are€required€toÏconstrue€the€complaint€liberally€in€the€plaintiffððs€favor€and€take€the€allegations€ofÏthe€complaint€as€true.€€òòCook€v.€Spinnaker's€of€Rivergateóó,€878€S.W.2d€934,€938Ï(Tenn.€1994).òòò òÌÌà@ àSTATUTORY€CONSTRUCTIONÌóóó óà àThe€issue€in€this€appeal€is€controlled€by€the€language€of€the€TennesseeÏConsumer€Protection€Act€and€familiar€rules€of€statutory€construction.ÓÓ€€ÓÓThe€role€ofÏthis€Court€in€construing€statutes€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€legislativeÏintent.€€€òòWilson€v.€Johnson€Countyóó,€879€S.W.2d€807,€809€(Tenn.€1994).€ÏLegislative€intent€is€to€be€ascertained€whenever€possible€from€the€natural€andÏordinary€meaning€of€the€language€used,€without€forced€or€subtle€constructionÏthat€would€limit€or€extend€the€meaning€of€the€language.€€€òòCarson€CreekÏVacation€Resorts,€Inc.€v.€Dept.€of€Revenueóó,€865€S.W.2d€1,€2€(Tenn.€1993).€€€InÏperforming€our€statutory€analysis,€we€observe€that€the€Legislature€has€directedÏthat€the€provisions€of€the€Consumer€Protection€Act€be€liberally€construed€toÏprotect€consumers€and€legitimate€business€enterprises€from€those€who€engageÏin€ð ðunfair€or€deceptive€acts€or€practices€in€the€conduct€of€any€trade€orÏcommerce.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„102(2);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòMorris€v.€Mackððs€UsedÏCarsóó,€824€S.W.2d€538€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àIn€support€of€his€claim€that€the€acts€of€the€Bank€and€its€agent,€Recovery,Ïform€the€basis€of€a€claim€under€the€Consumer€Protection€Act,€Pursell€relies€uponÏa€part€of€the€Act€„€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„104€(1995)€„€which€provides,€inÏpertinent€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà8 àò òUnfair€or€deceptive€acts€prohibited.€ó ó„„„(a)€Unfair€orÏdeceptive€acts€or€practices€òòaffectingóó€the€conduct€of€any€trade€orÏcommerce€constitute€unlawful€acts€or€practices€and€are€Class€BÏmisdemeanors.€ÌÌà8 à(b)€Without€limiting€the€scope€of€subsection€(a),€the€following€unfairÏor€deceptive€acts€or€practices€òòaffectingóó€the€conduct€of€any€trade€orÏcommerce€are€declared€to€be€unlawful€and€in€violation€of€this€part:ÌÌà@ à.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 à(12)€Representing€that€a€consumer€transaction€confers€or€involvesÏrights,€remedies€or€obligations€that€it€does€not€have€or€involve€orÏwhich€are€prohibited€by€law.ÌÌÌÓÓÌ(Emphasis€added.)€€Pursell€argues€that€the€actions€of€the€Bank€and€its€agent€Ïwere€unfair€or€deceptive€under€the€above„quoted€statutory€provision.ÌÌà àThe€Bank,€on€the€other€hand,€disagrees€that€its€actions,€or€its€agent's,Ïwere€unfair€or€deceptive.€€Even€if€they€were,€it€contends€that€the€ConsumerÏProtection€Act€does€not€apply€because€the€actions€of€which€Pursell€complainsÏdid€not€occur€in€the€course€of€ð ðtrade,€commerce€or€a€consumer€transaction,ðð€asÏthose€terms€are€defined€in€the€Act.€€In€support€of€its€argument,€the€Bank€reliesÏupon€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„103€(9)€(1995)€which€provides€thatÌÌÓÓà8 àð ðTrade,ðð€ð ðcommerce,ðð€or€ð ðconsumer€transactionðð€means€theÏadvertising,€offering€for€sale,€lease€or€rental,€or€distribution€of€anyÏgoods,€services,€or€property,€tangible€or€intangible,€real,€personal,Ïor€mixed,€and€other€articles,€commodities,€or€things€of€valueÏwherever€situated.ÌÌÌÌÓÓThe€Bank€points€out€that€it€is€òònotóó€asserting€that€the€Tennessee€ConsumerÏProtection€Act€generally€exempts€banking€activities€from€its€application.€€Instead,€Ïthe€Bank€asserts€that€its€actions€at€issue€in€this€case€do€not€fall€within€theÏstatutory€definition€of€trade,€commerce€or€consumer€transaction.€ÌÌà àIn€response,€Pursell€focuses€on€the€statutory€term€ð ðaffectingðð€and€urgesÏthe€Court€that€the€construction€of€that€term€adopted€by€the€United€StatesÏSupreme€Court€in€two€decisions× ƒ3 ××  ×€brings€his€claim€within€the€purview€of€theÏTennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.€€In€effect,€Pursell€argues€that€òòevery€actionóóÏof€an€entity€engaged€in€business€affects€trade€or€commerce,€and,€if€unfair€orÏdeceptive,€gives€rise€to€a€cause€of€action€under€the€Tennessee€ConsumerÏProtection€Act.ÌÌà àWe€think€Pursellððs€broad€argument€is€flawed,€however,€because€it€doesÏnot€acknowledge€that€ð ðaffectingðð€modifies€other€terms€which€are€specificallyÏdefined€by€the€statute.€€Pursell€is€correct€that€the€Legislature€intended€to€protectÏthe€ð ðconsuming€publicðð€by€its€adoption€of€the€Act.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„102(4).€€The€parameters€of€the€Act,€however,€do€not€extend€to€every€action€ofÏevery€business€in€the€State.€€The€terms€ððtrade€or€commerceðð€are€specificallyÏdefined€to€limit€the€Actððs€application.€€The€actions€of€the€Bank€and€its€agent,Ïeven€if€considered€to€be€unfair€or€deceptive,€did€not€affect€the€ð ðadvertising,Ïoffering€for€sale,€lease€or€rental,€or€distribution€of€any€goods,€services,€orÏproperty,€tangible€or€intangible,€real,€personal,€or€mixed,€and€other€articles,Ïcommodities,€or€things€of€value€wherever€situated.ðð× ƒ4 ××  ×€€Pursellððs€allegation,€ifÏtaken€as€true,€establishes€only€that€the€defendants€breached€an€agreement€toÏreturn€to€him€his€own€property.€€Such€allegations€do€not€form€the€basis€of€anÏaction€under€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.€€òòCfóó.€òòCity€of€Cars,€Inc.€v.ÏSimmsóó,€526€So.€2d€119€(Fla.€Ct.€App.€1988)€(Litigation€relating€to€repossessionÏand€disposition€of€collateral€does€not€support€an€award€under€the€FloridaÏDeceptive€and€Unfair€Trade€Practices€Act).ÌÌà àWe€have€stated€many€times€that€the€most€basic€rule€of€statutoryÏconstruction€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€the€intention€and€purpose€of€theÏLegislature.€€Where,€as€here,€the€language€contained€within€the€four€corners€ofÏa€statute€is€plain,€clear,€and€unambiguous,€there€is€no€room€for€interpretation€orÏconstruction,€and€we€must€apply€the€words€of€the€statute.€€òòCarson€CreekÏResorts,€Inc.€v.€Dept.€of€Revenueóó,€865€S.W.2d€1,€2€(Tenn.€1993).€€Though€theÏdefinitions€of€ð ðtrade€or€commerceðð€contained€within€the€Tennessee€ConsumerÏProtection€Act€are€broad,€they€do€not€extend€to€this€dispute,€which€arose€over€Ïrepossession€of€the€collateral€securing€the€loan.€€We€conclude€that€the€facts€ofÏthis€case€fail€to€state€a€claim€for€relief.€€€ÌÌà àThis€holding€is€confined€to€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€this€case,€andÏwe€do€not,€by€this€Opinion,€generally€exempt€banking€activities€from€theÏTennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€Consumer€Protection€orÏDeceptive€Trade€Practices€Statutes:€Their€Application€to€Extensions€of€CreditÏand€Other€Banking€Activitiesóó,€105€Banking€L.J.€214€(1988).€ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òCONCLUSIONóóó óÌà àBecause€we€have€determined€that€Pursell€failed€to€state€a€claim€underÏthe€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act€against€either€First€American€NationalÏBank€or€its€agent,€Tennessee€Auto€Recovery,€the€judgment€of€the€Court€ofÏAppeals€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€plaintiff,€N.€ThomasÏPursell,€Jr.,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àRILEY€ANDERSON,€JUSTICEÌÌÌÌò òCONCUR:ó óÌÌBirch,€C.J.ÌDrowota,€Reid,€and€White,€JJ.Ì