ÿWPC$ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ 0l 0Dl w@° ð 0Jø 0TB 0^– 0hô 0r\ 0|Î 0†J 0Ð 1u` U,Õ 0dU,eU>‘ BÏU*ìB) D3?DCr AMµ 0@U*B"lrŽÑ.Ñÿv~vÓœ AOo"ƾ" 0D„# D/È# B÷#˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡DÒ 3|xC((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó 1V2D34D5D67D89Ó€C2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d< Œ 9p`(Times% Line 7 d'''''ÿÿdxd))))7Border 1dd€-+Cþÿ << Gÿÿ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌJune€24,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó hÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝSome€analyses€have€denoted€the€basis€as€contractual,€òòRobertson€v.€Davisóó,€90€S.W.2dÌà à746€(Tenn.€1936);€òòWallace€v.€Lincoln€Savings€Bankóó,€15€S.W.€448,€453€(Tenn.€1891);Ìà àothers€have€engaged€in€an€analysis€based€in€agency€law,€òòKnox„Tenn.€Rental€Co.€v.Ìà àJenkinsóó,€755€S.W.2d€33,€36„37€(Tenn.€1988);€still€others€find€liability€to€be€based€inÌà àtort,€òòRadol€v.€Thomasóó,€772€F.2d€244€(6th€Cir.€1985).Ì ÇÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóó€defines€joint€liability€as€ð ð[l]iability€that€is€owed€to€a€third€party€byÌà àtwo€or€more€other€parties€togetherðð€and€several€liability€as€ð ð[l]iability€separate€and€distinctÌà àfrom€liability€of€€another€to€the€extent€that€an€independent€action€may€be€broughtÌà àwithout€joinder€of€others.€€ð ðJoint€and€several€liability€ð ð[d]escribes€the€liability€of€Ìà àcopromisors€of€the€same€performance€.€.€.€.ðð€€òòBlackððs€Law€Dictionaryóó,€837,€1374€(6th€ed.Ìà à1990).Ì $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThough€some€state€legislatures€have€abolished€the€doctrine€with€the€adoption€of€a€Ìà àcomparative€fault€statute,€this€is€a€policy€decision,€not€one€dictated€by€the€adoption€ofÌà àcomparative€fault.€€òòSeeóó€C.€Mutter€ð ðMoving€to€Comparative€Negligence€in€an€Era€ofÌà àTort€Reform:€Decisions€for€Tennessee,ðð€57€òòTenn.€L.€Rev.óó€199,€304€n.€491€(1990).Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€the€comments€to€Section€4,€the€Uniform€Act€specifies€that€ð ð[j]oint„and„severalÌà àliability€under€the€common€law€means€that€each€defendant€contributing€to€the€same€harmÌà àis€liable€to€[the€plaintiff]€for€the€whole€amount€of€the€recoverable€damages.€€This€is€notÌà àchanged€by€the€Act.ðð€€Uniform€Comparative€Fault€Act,€ðð€4,€Comments.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€VjXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€&¼ÔØ ØÓ&€((XÐd&ÓÙ€€ÙßL€,/+;+'h|«` ç `€€Lß›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€œNASHVILLE›ÌÌÌÌÌRESOLUTION€TRUSTà àà àà à)à àò òòòFORÏPUBLICATIONóóó óÌCORPORATION,€à àà àà à)òòÌóóà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àœò òòòFiled:€June€24,€1996óóó ó›Ìà àœPlaintiff,à àà à›à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCertified€Question€of€LawÌ€€€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àfrom€the€United€States€DistrictÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCourt€for€the€Eastern€DistrictÌ€à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€01S01„9412„FD„00155ÌADOLPH€J.€BLOCK,€et€al.,€€€à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Joe€A.€TilsonÌà àœDefendant.à àà à›à àà à)à àUnited€States€Magistrate€JudgeÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiff„Respondentóó:€à àà àà àòòFor€the€Defendants„Petitionersóó:ÌÌRonald€W.€Woodsà àà àà àà àà àBernard€E.€BernsteinÌN.€R.€Coleman,€Jr.à àà àà àà àà àJ.€Thomas€JonesÌMilligan€&€Colemanà àà àà àà àBernstein,€Stair€&€McAdamsÌGreeneville,€TNà àà àà àà àà àKnoxville,€TNÌÌWinthrop€A.€Short,€Jr.à àà àà àà àJoseph€F.€RosenbergÌDavid€J.€Pierceà àà àà àà àà àDale,€Jackson€&€RosenbergÌMegan€E.€Burnsà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TNÌJonathan€L.€ThortonÌKaufman€&€Canoles,€P.C.à àà àà àDavid€W.€BlankenshipÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àKingsport,€TNÌJohn€P.€ParkerÌF.D.I.C.à àà àà àà àà àà àThomas€A.€PetersÌWashington,€D.C.à àà àà àà àà àKingsport,€TNÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òO€€P€€I€€N€€I€€O€€NÌÌó óÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWHITE,€J.ÌÌÓÓÌÌÌà@ àò òI.€€Introductionó óÌà àThe€United€States€District€Court€for€the€Eastern€District€ofÏTennessee€has€certified€to€this€Court,€pursuant€to€Rule€23,€TennesseeÏSupreme€Court€Rules,€the€following€question:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àWhether€under€Tennessee€law€the€directors€andÏofficers€of€a€Tennessee€corporation€would€beÏjointly€and€severally€liable€for€the€collectiveÏactions€of€the€board€or€proportionately€liableÏunder€the€doctrine€of€comparative€fault.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àAs€written,€the€question€is€broadly€stated.€€We€understand€it,Ïhowever,€to€focus€on€the€application€of€principles€of€comparative€fault€toÏcircumstances€in€which€corporate€officers€and€directors€are€found€to€beÏliable€for€damages.€€The€issue€is€narrowed€and€clarified€by€the€pleadingsÏand€facts.ÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Factsó óÌà àResolution€Trust€Corporation,€which€was€first€conservator,€and€œthen›Ïreceiver,€for€Lincoln€Federal€Savings€and€Loan€Association,€sued€theÏcorporationððs€former€officers€and€directors€alleging,€as€causes€of€action,Ïbreach€of€fiduciary€duty,€negligence,€gross€negligence,€negligence€òòperóó€òòseóó,Ïand€breach€of€contract.€€The€causes€of€action€arise€out€of€certain€loansÏapproved€by€the€officers€and€directors€and€made€by€the€corporation.€€In€anÏamended€complaint,€Resolution€Trust€requested€judgment€"against€theÏdefendants,€jointly€and€severally€in€the€amount€of€$4.2€million€.€.€.€."ÌÌà àDefendants€filed€a€motion€to€strike€alleging€that€Resolution€TrustÏcould€not€obtain€a€joint€and€several€judgment,€but€was€limited€to€aÏjudgment€based€on€each€defendantððs€comparative€fault.€€After€initiallyÏdenying€the€motion,€the€federal€court€reconsidered€and€granted€defendantsððÏpetition€for€certification€of€a€question€of€law€which€we€accepted.ÌÌà àIn€addressing€the€certified€question,€we€make€the€followingÏassumptions.€€First,€we€assume€that€the€basis€of€defendantsðð€liability€is€notÏat€issue.€€The€question€implies€that€the€officers€and€directors€are€liable€toÏthe€corporation€for€losses€caused€by€their€ð ðcollectiveðð€breaches.€€It€furtherÏassumes€that€the€receiver€is€entitled€to€maintain€the€suit€on€behalf€of€theÏinsolvent€corporation.€€Finally,€the€question€as€written€implies,€and€weÍassume€for€purposes€of€our€response,€that€no€affirmative€defenses€or€claimsÏfor€contribution€or€indemnity€are€presented.€ÌÌà àOur€answer,€then,€to€the€question€before€us€is€as€œfollows:€›€In€anÏaction€for€damages€on€behalf€of€a€corporation€against€its€officers€andÏdirectors€who€are€found€to€be€liable€for€their€collective€breach€of€fiduciaryÏduty€and€contract€and€œfor€negligence,›€the€liability€of€the€officers€andÏdirectors€to€the€corporation€is€joint€and€several,€not€proportional€to€fault.ÌÌà@ àò òIII.€€Analysisó óÌà àOur€analysis€begins€with€the€recognition€that€the€adoption€ofÏcomparative€fault€principles€in€òòMcIntyre€v.€œBalentineóó,›€833€S.W.2d€52Ï(Tenn.€1992),€has€prompted€reconsideration€of€numerous€tort€principles.€ÏWhile€we€noted€in€òòMcIntyreóó€the€inconsistencies€in€the€premises€ofÏcomparative€œfault€and€those€of€joint€and›€several€liability,€we€did€so€in€theÏcontext€of€that€case€involving€a€sole€tortfeasor€sued€for€damagesÏproximately€caused€by€his€negligence.€€In€our€more€recent€decision,€òòOwensÏv.€Truckstops€of€Americaóó,€915€S.W.2d€420€(Tenn.€1996),€œin€which€JusticeÏDrowota€dissented,€we›€addressed€head€on€defendantsðð€contention€thatÏòòMcIntyreóó€abolished€all€joint€and€several€liability.€€After€an€exhaustiveÏreview€of€all€our€comparative€fault€decisions,€we€concluded€that€ð ðwhere€theÍseparate,€independent€negligent€acts€of€more€than€one€tortfeasor€combine€toÏcause€a€single,€indivisible€injury,€each€tortfeasor€will€be€liable€only€for€thatÏproportion€of€the€damages€attributable€to€its€fault.ðð€€òòOwens€v.€TruckstopsÏof€Americaóó,€915€S.W.2d€at€430.€€Nonetheless,€as€we€noted€in€òòOwensóó,€jointÏand€several€liability€ð ðhas€continued€to€be€an€integral€part€of€the€law€.€.€.€.ðð€ÏòòIdóó.€at€431,€n.€13.€€ÌÌà àIn€few,€if€any,€areas€of€the€law€has€the€concept€of€joint€and€severalÏliability€remained€so€œintegral€as›€in€the€circumstances€presented€here.€€œWhile›Ïofficers€and€directorsðð€liability€to€the€corporation€has€been€attributed€toÏvarious€legal€theories,œ× ƒ0 ××  ×›€it€has€been€unanimously€recognized€that€officer€andÏdirector€liability€to€the€corporation€for€their€collective€actions€is€joint€andÏseveral.€€òòSeeóó€òòe.g.óó,€òòRadol€v.€Thomasóó,€772€F.2d€244€(6th€Cir.€1985)(applyingÏOhio€law);€òòLawson€v.€Baltimore€Paint€&€Chemical€Corporationóó,€347ÏF.Supp.€967€(D.€Md.€1972)(applying€Maryland€law);€òòHeit€v.€Bixbyóó,€276ÏF.Supp.€217€(E.D.€Mo.€1967)(applying€Missouri€law);€òòStopford€v.€Haskellóó,Ï147€F.Supp.€509€(D.€Conn.€1957)(applying€Connecticut€law);€òòFagerberg€v.ÏPhoenix€Flour€Mills€Companyóó,€71€P.2d€1022€(Ariz.€1937);€òòWilson€v.ÍLucasóó,€47€œS.W.2d›€8€œ(Ark.›€1932);€òòResolution€Trust€Corporation€v.ÏHeisermanóó,€898€P.2d€1049€(Colo.€œ1995);›€òòDixmoor€Golf€Club€v.€Evansóó,€156ÏN.E.€785€(Ill.€1927);€œòòTackett›€v.€Greenóó,€218€S.W.€468€(Ky.€1920);€òòCrowleyÏv.€Communications€for€Hospitals,€Inc.óó,€573€N.E.2d€996€(Mass.€App.€Ct.Ï1991);€òòKnox€Glass€Bottle€Company€v.€Underwoodóó,€89€œSo.2d›€799€(Miss.Ïœ1956);€and›€òòBendum€v.€First€Citizensðð€Bankóó,€œ78›€S.W.€656€(W.Va.€1913).€ÏThis€unanimous€recognition€finds€support€not€only€in€these€modern„dayÏdecisions,€but€in€historical€treatment€as€well.ÌÌà àOriginally,€the€concept€of€joint€and€several€liability€embraced€theÏnotion€that€several€persons€uniting€to€cause€harm€to€a€plaintiff€could€beÏjoined€as€defendants€and€held€individually€liable€for€the€harm€to€œplaintiff.›€ÏThus,€the€idea€of€joint€liability,€in€that€each€defendant€could€be€joined€inÏœthe›€œaction,›€and€several€liability,€in€that€each€defendant€could€be€heldÏresponsible€for€the€entire€harm,œ× ƒ1 ××  ×›€was€established.ÌÌà àAs€originally€contemplated,€joint€and€several€liability€applied€only€toÍjoint€tortfeasors€who€acted€in€concert€with€one€another.€€V.€Schwartz,ÏòòComparative€Negligenceóó,€ðð€15„3€(3d€ed.€1994).€€Thus,€it€attached€to€actionsÏof€ð ðtwo€or€more€persons€[who]€owe€to€another€the€same€duty,€and€[who]€byÏtheir€common€neglect€of€that€duty€.€.€.€injure€[the€plaintiff].ðð€€òòCooley€onÏTortsóó,€ðð€223€(3d€ed.€œ1930)(quoting›€òòMatthews€v.€Delaware€R.R.€Co.óó,€27€A.Ï919,€920€(Del.€œ1893)).›€€In€the€context€of€concerted€actions,€ð ðit€is€a€veryÏreasonable€and€just€rule€of€law€which€compels€each€to€assume€and€bear€theÏresponsibility€of€the€misconduct€of€all.ðð€€òòId.óóÌÌà àAs€defined,€joint€and€several€liability€of€tortfeasors€who€act€inÏconcert€need€not€be€affected€by€the€adoption€of€comparative€faultÏprinciples.œ× ƒ2 ××  ×›€€This€is€the€approach€taken€in€the€Uniform€Comparative€FaultÏAct,€œwhich€we€have€not€adopted,€Uniform›€Comparative€Fault€Act,€ðð€4,ÏComments,× ƒ3 ××  ×€and€by€most€legal€scholars.ÌÌà àProsser€and€Keeton,€for€example,€express€the€principle€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àœòòConcerted›€ActionóóÌÌà8 àà8 àà àWhere€two€or€more€persons€act€in€concert,Ïit€is€well€settled€both€in€criminal€and€in€civil€casesÏthat€each€will€be€liable€for€the€entire€result.€€SuchÏconcerted€wrongdoers€were€considered€ððjoint€tortÏfeasorsðð€by€the€early€common€law.€€In€legalÏcontemplation,€there€is€a€joint€enterprise,€and€aÏmutual€agency,€so€that€the€act€of€one€is€the€act€ofÏall,€and€liability€for€all€that€is€done€is€visited€uponÏeach.ÌÌÓÓòòProsser€and€Keeton€œon€Tortsóó,›€ðð€52,€p.€346€œ(W.€Page€Keeton€ed.)(5th›€ed.Ï1984).̛̜Ìà àœHarper,›€œJames,€and›€Gray€expound€further:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àIn€terms€of€legal€responsibility,€theÏdistinguishing€feature€of€a€wrong€to€which€theÏlabel€joint€tort€has€been€affixed€is€that€theÏtortfeasors€will€be€held€jointly€and€severally€„€orÏentirely€„€liable€for€the€harm€proximatelyÏresulting.€€This€principle€was€established€early€œinÏthe›€common€law€and€is€of€primary€importance€inÏany€discussion€of€whether€the€particular€tortÏconsummated€by€any€given€wrongdoers€is€thoughtÏof€as€joint.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àCases€in€which€there€is€a€concert€of€actionÏor€a€common€plan€are€the€clearest€examples€ofÏjoint€torts.ÌÌÓÓF.€œHarper,€F.€James,›€&€O.€Gray,€3€òòThe€Law€of€Tortsóó,€ðð€œ10.1,›€p.€œ1„2›€(2dÏed.€1986).€€And€œFletcher,›€addressing€specifically€the€concept€in€the€contextÍof€the€liability€of€corporate€officers€and€directors€who€act€in€œconcert,›Ïexplains:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àLiability€is€joint€and€several€where€two€or€moreÏdirectors€participate€in€the€wrongful€acts.€ÏDirectors€and€officers€of€a€corporation€are€jointlyÏas€well€as€severally€liable€for€mismanagement,Ïwillful€neglect,€or€misconduct€of€corporate€affairsÏif€œthey›€jointly€participate€in€the€breach€ofÏfiduciary€duty€or€approve€of,€acquiesce€in€orÏconceal€a€breach€by€a€fellow€director€or€officer.ÌÌÓÓ3€òòFletcher€Cyclopedia€of€the€Law€of€Private€Corporationsóó,€ðð€œ1002€(1990ÏRev.€Ed.).ÌÌà àEven€those€commentators€who€have€advocated€the€abolition€of€jointÏand€several€liability€as€a€corollary€to€the€adoption€of€comparative€faultÏhave€acknowledged€the€need€for€retaining€its€application€to€collective€orÏconcerted€actions.€€òòSeeóó€C.€Mutter,€ð ðMoving€to€Comparative€Negligence€inÏan€Era€of€Tort€Reform:€Decisions€for€Tennessee,€57€òòTenn.€L.€Rev.óó,€199,Ï305€(1990)€(hereafter€57€òòTenn.€L.€Rev.óó€at€ðð›€____);€òòProsser€and€Keeton€onÏœTortsóó,€ðð€52€(W.€Page€Keeton€ed.)(5th€ed.€1984);€19€C.J.S.€ð ðCorporations,ððÏðð€484€(1990).€€For€example,€in€an€article€published€before€our€decision€inÏòòMcIntyreóó,€Professor€Mutter€advocated€the€adoption€of€a€comparative€faultÏsystem€in€Tennessee.€€While€noting€that€ð ðcomparative€negligence€and€jointÏand€several€liability€do€not€mesh,ðð€57€òòTenn.€L.€Rev.óó€at€318„19,€she€addedÍthe€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àIn€order€to€understand€joint€and€severalÏliability€it€is€necessary€to€advert€to€some€of€theÏgeneral€principles€applicable€to€joint€tortfeasors.€ÏInitially€at€common€law,€a€ð ðjoint€tortðð€was€limitedÏto€actual€concerted€action.€€Thus,€all€individuals,Ïwho€with€a€common€purpose,€committed€a€tortÏagainst€the€plaintiff€were€liable€for€the€entireÏdamage€done,€ð ðalthough€one€might€have€battered,Ïwhile€another€imprisoned€the€plaintiff,€and€a€thirdÏstole€the€plaintiffððs€silver€buttons.ðð€€Only€a€tacitÏunderstanding,€not€an€express€agreement€wasÏnecessary.€€òòLiability€for€concerted€actionÏcontinues€to€be€joint€and€several€today,€and€inÏgeneral€opponents€of€the€rule€have€no€quarrelÏwith€its€application€in€this€context.óóÌÌÓÓòòIdóó.€at€305€(emphasis€added)(citations€omitted).ÌÌà@ àò òIV.€€Conclusionó óÌà àUnder€either€the€historic€or€modern€approach,€the€result€is€the€same.€ÏIn€an€action€for€damages€by€or€on€behalf€of€a€corporation€against€theÏofficers€and€directors€of€the€corporation€in€which€the€officers€and€directorsÏare€found€to€be€liable€as€the€result€of€their€collective€breach€of€fiduciaryÏduty,€negligence,€or€breach€of€contract,€the€liability€of€the€defendants€to€theÏcorporation€is€joint€and€several.ÌÌÇà àThe€Clerk€will€transmit€this€opinion€in€accordance€with€Rule€23,ÏSection€8€of€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€Rules.€€The€costs€will€be€taxedÏone„half€to€plaintiff€and€one„half€to€defendants€equally.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àPenny€J.€White,€JusticeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌBirch,€C.J.ÌDrowota,€Anderson,€Reid,€J.J.Ì