WPC zh]GrGvx1ٯm_ \i/O03rΙ2m0r&f)6gbV#Qr{_s'3n[<:f!4zvK5K~H#xJj3zG=yj;]QǶ`Q}2PmZ-HeE#6Ӄg% ~{gtqb#8Fj% !1RMށrN"圥ATpNf^!S>DIA3ɠ (mwa=urJ}k=IxYRo{ XP!BQ"׊%T6řfF\3p>\4 ع# 'cGCԭY\w$}*cMqRKJqTCvƲT^o֯^έcq#kU̝d00E=z'H~) %>nD 0rU:cnwXJ4U: 0  0Dh   " U: $ U: P U:kU:U:VP B AQb 0D( 0Dl 0D D/'# BJ D3gX<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@(JO$XqXX X&+e&X Xq  ,cAZ"Arial Regular<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@DDPDPDIDPӀAq$%<(#3|x, AZ"Arial Regular   DX?XXX&D&XX?     1           DX?XXX&D&XX?     2    ݀    (f(3$ O!XXXX&Hq&XX       0  (#$  0     H  X X ,cAZ"Arial Regular   D$X?XXX&D&XX?      2    PlaintifffiledsuitagainstJohns,Maddox,Roberts,theirlawfirm,MaddoxandRoberts,  andShelbyBank.AdefaultjudgmentwasenteredagainstMaddox.Johnsdeclaredbankruptcy,andtheclaimsagainstShelbyBankremainpending.ThepresentappealfocusesonlyontheplaintiffsclaimofmalpracticeagainstRoberts.,cAZ"Arial Regular   DX?XXX&D&XX?     2        PlaintifffiledsuitagainstJohns,Maddox,Roberts,theirlawfirm,MaddoxandRoberts,andShelbyBank.AdefaultjudgmentwasenteredagainstMaddox.Johnsdeclaredbankruptcy,andtheclaimsagainstShelbyBankremainpending.ThepresentappealfocusesonlyontheplaintiffsclaimofmalpracticeagainstRoberts.,cAZ"Arial Regular   DX?XXX&D&XX?     2    ݀    PlaintifffiledsuitagainstJohns,Maddox,Roberts,theirlawfirm,MaddoxandRoberts,andShelbyBank.AdefaultjudgmentwasenteredagainstMaddox.Johnsdeclaredbankruptcy,andtheclaimsagainstShelbyBankremainpending.ThepresentappealfocusesonlyontheplaintiffsclaimofmalpracticeagainstRoberts.,cAZ"Arial Regular   D$X?XXX&D&XX?      2        PlaintifffiledsuitagainstJohns,Maddox,Roberts,theirlawfirm,MaddoxandRoberts,andShelbyBank.AdefaultjudgmentwasenteredagainstMaddox.Johnsdeclaredbankruptcy,andtheclaimsagainstShelbyBankremainpending.ThepresentappealfocusesonlyontheplaintiffsclaimofmalpracticeagainstRoberts.   DX?XXX&D&XX?     1        Tenn.CodeAnn.283104(a)providesinpertinentpart: Thefollowingactionsshallbecommencedwithinone(1)yearafterthecauseofactionaccrued:...(2)Actionsandsuitsagainstattorneys...formalpractice,whethertheactionsaregroundedorbasedincontractortort....,cAZ"Arial Regular   $XXXX&Hq&XX      1      Tenn.CodeAnn.283104(a)providesinpertinentpart: Thefollowingactionsshallbecommencedwithinone(1)yearafterthecauseofactionaccrued:...(2)Actionsandsuitsagainstattorneys...formalpractice,whethertheactionsaregroundedorbasedincontractortort....Citcorp opinion for release(current version  ;& ' IB011S50IB011S5 .    d!"#$%C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  ''' dxd  ""  XXXX:8 XX   Ad FILEDXX :8   October5,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr. XXAppellateCourtClerk P Pd'dxd O!XXXX&Hq&XX   XX&&Hq    TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T%  =XXdd=r &(<,(j 8` `@E` ttx$ rߛ @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE | @HH)ATJACKSON h ̛̜ -XX  XX-CITICORPMORTGAGE,INC.,  8    )  X|:XXXNOTFORPUBLICATION #XXX X|:# #   @    0      8   )  X|:XXXFiled: #XXX X|:#ԀOctober5,1998  2   Plaintiff/Appellee,   8   ) R  #  $    0      8   )ShelbyChanceryv.  0      8   ) R      0      8   )Hon.NealSmall,Chancellor̀)JOHNP.ROBERTS,   8   )TrialCt.No.1018151R.D. R   0      8   ) Defendant/Appellant. 8   )Sup.Ct.No.02S019712CH00109 #  n @.?,XX p XXX  X?ForPlaintiffAppellee:  0 8    R  @ ForDefendantAppellant: # 8$8$ R.MarkGlover     8    R  @ TimEdwards h MichaelC.Patton     8    R  @ JamesF.Horner N Baker,Donelson,Bearman, 8    R  @ Glassman,Jeter,Edwards 4 &Caldwell,P.C.     8    R  @ &Wade,P.C. j Memphis,Tennessee   8    R  @ Memphis,Tennessee P  GXX@(OPINION B&!% #XXG # JUDGMENTOFCOURTOFAPPEALSB$DROWOTA,J. F505 REVERSED  7b27 7Xd&&d7OaC  0 Inthislegalmalpracticeaction,thedefendant,JohnP.Roberts,appeals  fromtheCourtofAppealsreversalofsummaryjudgmententeredbythetrialcourtinhisfavorbasedontheexpirationofthestatuteoflimitations.Theissueforourdeterminationiswhetherthepresentactionisbarredbytheoneyearstatuteoflimitationsapplicabletolegalmalpracticeactions,Tenn.CodeAnn.283104.  #  1       #  1        0 Aftercarefullyexaminingtherecordbeforeusandconsideringtherelevantauthorities,weconcludethattheinstantsuitistimebarred.Accordingly,forthereasonsexplainedhereafter,thedecisionoftheCourtofAppealstoreversethetrialcourtsgrantofsummaryjudgmenttothedefendantisreversed.  ` @)BACKGROUND  @.ӈ   0 WilburJohns( Johns)wastheownerofaparcelofrealproperty d locatedinasubdivisioninMemphis.Johnssoughttheservicesoftheplaintiff,CiticorpMortgage,Inc.,( Citicorp),inrefinancingdebtsecuredbytheproperty.TheplaintiffhiredattorneyMichaelG.Maddoxtohandletheclosingoftheloan. #     0 OneofthreeexistingliensonJohnsspropertywasalienheldbyShelbyBank.Aspartoftheclosingoftheloan,theplaintiffinstructedMaddoxtoobtainandrecordareleaseofthelienheldbyShelbyBank,sothattheplaintiffwouldbetheseniorlienholderontheproperty.Contrarytotheseinstructions,however,MaddoxneverfiledareleaseoftheShelbyBanklien.Thus,aftertheloanwasclosedonJanuary10,1990,ShelbyBankcontinuedtoholdthefirstlienontheproperty,superiortotheplaintiffslien.  0 Subsequenttotheclosing,JohnsdefaultedonhisindebtednesstoShelbyBankandtotheplaintiff.Theplaintiffinitiatedforeclosureproceedingsonthe 3.4 propertyinSeptember1991.InOctober1991,theplaintiffsnewcounseldiscoveredthatareleaseoftheShelbyBanklienhadneverbeenfiled.  0 InDecember1991,ShelbyBankforeclosedonitsdeedoftrustandsoldthepropertytosatisfyitslien,therebyextinguishingtheplaintiffslien.TheplaintiffthenfiledtheinstantlegalmalpracticeclaimagainstRoberts,whowasMaddoxslawpartner,onAugust14,1992.  #  2       #  2      񛀀Thus,suitwasfiledapproximatelytwo   andahalfyearsaftertheclosingandlessthanoneyearafterShelbyBankforeclosedontheproperty.&D&XX?Ԁ#X?X&&D#ThecomplaintallegedthatMaddoxcommittedlegal p malpracticewhenhedidnotensurethatallexistingliensonthepropertywerepaidorreleasedatclosingsothattheplaintiffwouldbetheseniorlienholderontheproperty.ThesolebasisfortheplaintiffsclaimagainstRobertsishisvicariousliabilityforthemalpracticeofMaddox,asRobertswasnotinvolvedinthetransactionatissue.  0 Thetrialcourtgrantedsummaryjudgmentinfavorofthedefendant,holdingthattheplaintiffsmalpracticeactionwasbarredbytheoneyearstatuteoflimitationsinTenn.CodeAnn.283104(a)(2).Thetrialcourtexplainedthebasisforitsholdingasfollows:8 80 ! !Therealestateclosingwhichisthesubjec @  @  @ tofthislitigationwasconductedinJanuaryof199[0].Within30daysaftersaidclosing,plaintiffkneworshouldhaveknownthattheclosinghadnotbeenconductedinaccordancewithclosinginstructions,specificallythatplaintiffwasnotinafirstlienpriorityposition.Further,becauseplaintiffdidnotreceiveafirstlienpositionatthetimeofclosing,ithadsustainedlegallycognizabledamagesatthatpointintime.Accordingly,thepresentactionisbarredbytheapplicablestatuteoflimitations,T.C.A.283104. 0 h0 h  4/4 Ї  0 TheplaintiffappealedtotheCourtofAppeals,whichreversedthetrialcourt.TheCourtofAppealsheldthattheplaintiffsactionwasnotbarredbythestatuteoflimitationssincenoactualinjurywassustainedbytheplaintiffuntilShelbyBankforeclosedonthepropertyinDecember1991.TheCourtofAppealsexplainedthebasisforitsholdingasfollows:8 80 ! !  Plaintiff...didnotsufferanactualinjuryuntilShelbyBankforecloseduponitslien,therebywipingoutallotherliens,includingthePlaintiffslien.BeforeShelbyBanksforeclosure,PlaintiffhadnotsufferedaninjuryasaresultofMaddoxsnegligentfailureto[obtain]areleaseoftheShelbyBanklien.AlthoughMaddoxcommittedthenegligentactinJanuary1990,thisactdidnotbecomelegallyinjuriousuntilcertainconsequences,i.e.,whenShelbyBankforecloseduponitslieninDecember1991.IfJohnshadpaidShelbyBank,asheagreedtodo,PlaintiffwouldnothavesufferedanyinjuryfromMaddoxsnegligentact.Thus,becausePlaintifffiledthiscauseofactionwithinoneyearofthedateof[the]injury,Plaintiffspresentactionforlegalmalpracticeisnotbarredbytheapplicableoneyearstatuteoflimitations. 0 h0 h !  0 Wegrantedreviewtodecidewhethertheintermediatecourterredinholdingthattheplaintiffdidnotsufferanactualinjuryforstatuteoflimitationspurposesuntilitsjuniorlienuponthepropertyhadbeenextinguishedbytheforeclosureoftheseniorlien.  0   򀀀ANALYSIS T,'+ @-I. <.)-   0  Thestandardsgoverninganappellatecourtsreviewofamotionfor  2\-1 summaryjudgmentarewellsettled.Summaryjudgmentisappropriateonlyiftherearenogenuineissuesofmaterialfactandthemovingpartyisentitledtojudgmentasamatteroflaw.Tenn.R.Civ.P.56.03.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmenthastheburdenofdemonstratingthatnogenuineissueofmaterialfactexists,Byrd l949 v.Hall,847S.W.2d208,211(Tenn.1993),andmusteitheraffirmativelynegatean  essentialelementofthenonmovingpartysclaimorconclusivelyestablishanaffirmativedefense,McCarleyv.WestQualityFoodService,948S.W.2d477,478 ` (Tenn.1997).Ifthemovantdoesnotnegateanessentialelementoftheplaintiffsclaimorconclusivelyestablishanaffirmativedefense,thenthemotionforsummaryjudgmentmustbedenied.Id.at47879.  8    0 Further,appellatecourtsmustreviewtherecordbeforethemwithoutattachinganypresumptionofcorrectnesstothetrialcourtsjudgmenttodeterminewhethertheabsenceofgenuineissuesofmaterialfactentitlethemovanttojudgmentasamatteroflaw.Robinsonv.Omer,952S.W.2d423,426(Tenn.1997);  p Bainv.Wells,936S.W.2d618,622(Tenn.1997).Courtsarealsorequiredtoview H theevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothenonmovingparty,drawallreasonableinferencesinthatpartysfavor,anddiscardallcountervailingevidence.Byrd,847  S.W.2dat21011.Ifboththefactsandconclusionstobedrawnfromthefactspermitareasonablepersontoreachonlyoneconclusion,summaryjudgmentshouldbegranted.Robinson,952S.W.2dat426;Bain,936S.W.2dat622;McClungv. 0"  DeltaSquareLtd.Partnership,937S.W.2d891,894(Tenn.1996).  $X"  @||- II.  '#&   0  X?XXX?   #X?XX X?/#Thestatuteoflimitationsforlegalmalpracticeisoneyearfrom x+&* whenthecauseofactionaccrues.Tenn.CodeAnn.283104(a)(2).Whenthecauseofactionaccruesisdeterminedbyapplyingthediscoveryrule.InourrecentdecisioninJohnKohl&CompanyP.C.v.Dearborn&Ewing,___S.W.2d___(Tenn. 1P,0 1998),weexplainedthat8 80 ! !  [i]nlegalmalpracticecases,thediscoveryruleiscomposedoftwodistinctelements:(1)theplaintiffmustsufferlegallycognizabledamageanactualinjuryasaresultofthedefendantswrongfulornegligentconduct,and(2)theplaintiffmusthaveknownorintheexerciseofreasonablediligenceshouldhaveknownthatthisinjurywascausedbythedefendantswrongfulor 8:5: Oa  Oa  Oa  negligentconduct.Anactualinjuryoccurswhenthereisthelossofalegalright,remedyorinterest,ortheimpositionofaliability.Anactualinjurymayalsotaketheformoftheplaintiffbeingforcedtotakesomeactionorotherwisesuffer someactual X?XXX?inconvenience#X?XX X?4#,suchas ` incurringanexpense,asaresultofthedefendantsnegligentorwrongfulact.... 0 h0 h 8 80 ! !  Theknowledgecomponentofthediscoveryrulemaybeestablishedbyevidenceofactualorconstructiveknowledgeoftheinjury.Accordingly,thestatuteoflimitationsbeginstorunwhentheplaintiffhasactualknowledgeoftheinjuryaswhere,forexample,thedefendantadmitstohavingcommittedmalpracticeortheplaintiffisinformedbyanotherattorneyofthemalpractice.Underthetheoryofconstructiveknowledge,however,thestatutemaybegintorunatanearlierdatewhenevertheplaintiffbecomesawareorreasonablyshouldhavebecomeawareoffactssufficienttoputareasonablepersononnoticethataninjuryhasbeensustainedasaresultofthedefendantsnegligentorwrongfulconduct.Wehavestressed,however,thatthereisnorequirementthattheplaintiffactuallyknowthespecifictypeoflegalclaimheorshehas,orthattheinjuryconstitutedabreachoftheappropriatelegalstandard. 0 h0 h JohnKohl&CompanyP.C.,___S.W.2dat___(citationsomitted).  s1  0 Applyingtheseprinciplestotherecordbeforeus,wearepersuadedthatanactualinjurywassustainedbytheplaintiffatthetimeoftheclosingonJanuary10,1990.Itwasonthatdatethattheplaintifflostitslegalpositionwithregardtothesecurityinterestwhichwastobeusedtosecuretheloan.Inotherwords,theplaintiffslienwasrenderedsubordinatetoShelbyBanksinterestinthepropertyasofthedateofclosing.Also,theplaintiffsloanwasworthlessasofthedayofclosingduetoitsjuniorposition.Accordingly,wefindthattheactualinjuryoccurredwhenShelbyBanksseniorpositionwasestablishedattheclosingonJanuary10,1990.  0 Regardingthediscoveryrulesknowledgerequirement,therecordreflects,andtheplaintiffconcedesinitsbrief,thatitsauditorsshouldhavediscoveredtheabsenceofarecordedreleaseofShelbyBankslieninitsfilesbyMarch1990.Thus,theplaintiffshouldhavereasonablyknownbyMarch1990thatMaddoxhadfailedtoobtainthereleaseoftheShelbyBanklienashewasinstructed (:x5: CXX  CXX  CXX  ќtodo.Again,itwasunnecessaryfortheplaintifftohavebeenawarethattherehadbeenabreachoftheappropriatelegalstandardinordertobedeemedtohavediscovereditsrightofaction,butneededonlytobeawareorthroughtheexerciseofreasonablediligenceshouldhavebeenawareoffactssufficienttoputitonnoticethataninjuryhadbeensustainedasaresultofMaddoxsnegligence.SeeJohnKohl  ` &CompanyP.C.,___S.W.2dat___.Itfollowsthatbecausetheplaintifffiledits  8  causeofactionmorethanoneyearafterMarch1990,theplaintiffsclaimisbarredbytheoneyearstatuteoflimitations.  0 Finally,wemustrejecttheplaintiffsfraudulentconcealmentargumentthatthestatuteoflimitationswastolledbecauseofrepresentationsmadebyMaddoxtotheplaintiffthatthereleaseinquestiondidinfactexist.Thetollingdoctrineoffraudulentconcealmentisnotapplicabletothiscasebecausetheplaintiff,throughtheexerciseofreasonablediligence,shouldhavediscoveredthereleasemissingbyMarch1990.SeeShadrickv.Coker,963S.W.2d726,736(Tenn.1998)(holdingthat ( aplaintiffrelyinguponthedoctrineoffraudulentconcealmentmustshow,amongotherthings,thatitcouldnothavediscoveredthewrongdespiteexercisingreasonablecareanddiligence).Inanyevent,theplaintiffsclaimoffraudulentconcealmentmustfailbecausethestatuteoflimitationshadalreadyexpiredpriortotheconversationsbetweenMaddoxandagentsoftheplaintiffwhichformthebasisoftheplaintiffsfraudulentconcealmentargument. @)CONCLUSION 0 @ 0#@$@$*(,#$#$   0 Inviewoftheforegoingdiscussion,weconcludethattheplaintiffssuitwasnottimelyfiled.Accordingly,thedecisionoftheCourtofAppealsisreversed.Costsofthisappealaretaxedtotheplaintiffappellee.0  $ $ $  0      8 񛀛񛀛______________________________________638 $ $ .$  0      8 FRANKF.DROWOTA,III̜"$  0      8 JUSTICE Concur:  9`7< Anderson,C.J.,BirchandHolder,J.J.