ÿWPCÁ ¦]’";¾>…Ái„­ƒCP½Æ…~úÍÈ„s ±›?F¡Œ>vö‰¦[ß1| 4$‰–n‘@ïÜ‘IìOŽ=÷ ØÚÌŸêÄó#º ê¼~H²95{tJ£7å‚‹µmˆõ»€­H»E8Áä—a­òøÝÌ Uç]2Lê*Hdnz¼%âåÝÿš*¦£=¿¬n–Íþº‰3ÛÿœEn§(µ²äË„;¶i°DüØß»Âgpd!èåŠÏ‘úã=Nzͧ»måP1ªÈˆ””¢™„ÎË×}óê:ûœ—g2å#ï”Áµ¯\ìÖó)Ë¿ÔkÇ÷%’.…¿šÕVy¹Þx&Æ¿pÚ~Íð('ï{‚%΂Á±4»O$ è¶5øeÜ>Áêÿ¡¡½Ç‹¸ È®/åFà7U¼?º@´!éb(Hƒ Ý¥dTûqYTJ˜¾b…õÞÞæbÙå†yOˆ£ý}Il.áÓ:£.D¥ÀÈcxZE>{›M\'. ›ºøø„h2\E.˜î§/?ÛåÆÊ=íe6ñÙÜ‘]ž5úV„œØæIç\µô’S±yÙ\p¬…O$iæW(6m„ÅZë*ôOÈ“@DR9š Œrë‘÷R½ñ³$b %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë U@±Nñ}ó 0DpE´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´´b¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶ 0ë¾¾¾¾ B©© 0¤Æ D3j D- 0KÊÊ ASÆh 0¤. 0DÒ A«»‡ˆ) (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularõ}|)ê:i¢Ø+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0 Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÆúI Z‹(Times New Roman  sÝ ƒR#$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô±½ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTo€avoid€confusion,€we€note€that€the€contribution€and€indemnity€claims€at€issue€in€this€case€were€initiated€priorÐ ° Ðto€our€decision€in€òòMcIntyre€v.€Ô_ÔBalentineÔ_Ôóó,€833€S.W.2d€52€(Tenn.€1992).€€However,€because€of€our€resolution€o€f€theÐ tÄ Ðjurisdictional€issue€presented€here,€it€is€unnecessary€for€us€to€determine€how€comparative€fault€principles€affect€theÐ 8ˆ Ðavailability€of€contribution€and€indemnity€in€this€case.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2#$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô±½ò»»Ô d(|3?]$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?]$¢¢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  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€]iXXdì»»d8Ñà@™ ™ ìàÔ‡î$ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆà0 È àÔ#†¼»îî$ #ÔÐÖ&È(#È(# ÐÓ  ÓOctober€3,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X]iX»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XX]i#ÔNORTHLAND€INSURANCE€CO.òòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡X]iX»¼Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€by€permission€from€the€Court€of€Appeals,€Middle€Section€Ð ú J ÐTennessee€Claims€Commission€for€Davidson€CountyÐ æ 6 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€94435€€€€€W.€R.€Baker,€Commissioner€€Ð Ò " ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<•` AßÐ –æ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1998„00307„SC„R11„CV€„€Filed€December€8,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_Ô€€òòóóÐ ‘á  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<h` AßÐ i¹  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»XX]i†#ÔÔ€X]iX»¼ÔThe€issue€in€this€case€is€whether€the€Tennessee€Claims€Commission€has€subject€matter€jurisdictionÐ d´ Ðover€a€claim€against€the€State€of€Tennessee€for€contribution€and€indemnity.€€The€jurisdiction€of€theÐ P  ÐClaims€Commission€is€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€9„8„307.€€That€statute€allowsÐ <Œ Ðfor€suits€against€the€State€in€the€Claims€Commission€alleging€that€state€employees€have€maintainedÐ (x Ða€dangerous€condition€on€a€state€maintained€highway.€€The€statute,€however,€does€not€mentionÐ d Ðcontribution€and€indemnity€suits€as€part€of€the€Commissionððs€jurisdiction.€€Because€of€the€principleÐ P Ðthat€a€waiver€of€sovereign€immunity€must€be€clear€and€unmistakable,€we€conclude€that€the€State€hasÐ ì< Ðnot€consented€to€hear€contribution€and€indemnity€claims.€€We€therefore€affirm€the€Court€of€AppealsððÐ Ø( Ðdecision€dismissing€the€appellantððs€claim.Ð Ä ÐÌÓÓò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€Application€for€Permission€to€Appeal;€Judgment€of€the€Ð œì ÐCourt€of€Appeals€Affirmedó óÐ ˆØ ÐÌÓ  ÓòòFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€Jóó.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€whichòò€E.€Riley€Anderson,€C.J.,Ð `° Ðóóandòò€Ô_ÔAdolphoÔ_Ô€A.€Birch,€Jr.,€Janice€M.€Holder,€óóandòò€William€M.€Barker,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð L œ ÐÌJames€G.€O'Kane,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Northland€Insurance€Company.Ð $"t! ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Michael€E.€Moore,€Solicitor€General;€Anthony€D.Ð ü#L# ÐMiller,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€Laura€T.€Kidwell,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€Nashville,Ð è$8 $ ÐTennessee,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌÓò ÓÌÓÓà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÐ ˜(è#( ÐÓ  ÓÓÓà  àOn€March€14,€1998,€Dion€Deskovic€became€involved€in€an€accident€while€driving€his€tractor„Ð p*À%* Ðtrailer€on€Interstate€40€in€Putnam€County.€€The€accident€caused€the€fuel€tank€of€the€tractor„trailer€toÐ \+¬&+ Ðspill€diesel€fuel€onto€the€highway.€€Employees€of€the€Tennessee€Department€of€TransportationÐ H,˜', Ðarrived€and€spread€sand€over€the€spilled€fuel.€€Thereafter,€Kenneth€B.€McDonald,€while€working€forÐ 4-„(-ý ÐTennessee€Walnut,€Inc.€and€Grundy€County€Lumber€Co.,€Inc.€(ð ðWalnut,€Inc.ðð),€drove€his€truck€andÐ ° Ðflatbed€€trailer€up€to€the€accident€scene.€€Mr.€McDonald€attempted€to€avoid€a€collision€with€Mr.Ð œì ÐDeskovicððs€disabled€tractor„trailer,€which€partially€obstructed€the€highway,€but€he€could€not€do€so.€Ð ˆØ ÐMr.€McDonaldððs€truck€struck€and€killed€Mr.€Deskovic,€who€was€standing€outside€his€vehicle,€andÐ tÄ Ðinjured€two€wrecker€operators,€Robert€L.€Sheppard€and€Emmet€McGuire,€who€were€at€the€sceneÐ `° Ðattending€the€disabled€tractor„trailer.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àMr.€Sheppard€and€his€wife,€Mr.€McGuire€and€his€wife,€and€the€estate€of€Mr.€Deskovic€filedÐ $ t Ðsuit€against€Mr.€McDonald€and€Walnut,€Inc.€€Northland€Insurance€Co.,€the€liability€insurer€of€theseÐ  ` Ðdefendants€and€the€appellant€before€this€Court,€settled€the€cases€by€paying€$150,000.00€to€the€estateÐ ü L  Ðof€Mr.€Deskovic,€$845,000.00€to€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Sheppard,€and€$5,000.00€to€Mr.€and€Mrs.€McGuire.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àAfter€this€settlement,€Mr.€McDonald€and€Walnut,€Inc.,€filed€a€claim€with€the€TennesseeÐ À  ÐClaims€Commission€seeking€indemnity€or€contribution€for€the€$1,000,000.00€paid€by€Northland,Ð ¬ü  Ðalleging€that€the€Stateððs€€negligence€in€failing€to€stop€traffic€caused€the€accident.€€In€May€1992,Ð ˜è  ÐNorthland€filed€a€motion€in€the€Claims€Commission€to€be€substituted€as€plaintiff€and€real€party€inÐ „Ô  Ðinterest.€€The€State€did€not€oppose€the€motion€and€the€Commission€granted€it.Ð pÀ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àà  àà x àÌà  àFor€reasons€that€are€not€clear€from€the€record,€no€further€action€was€taken€on€this€litigationÐ H˜ Ðfor€four€years.€€Then,€in€March€1996,€the€State€moved€to€dismiss€the€suit€for€lack€of€subject€matterÐ 4„ Ðjurisdiction.€The€Claims€Commission€denied€the€motion.€€After€trial,€which€occurred€in€OctoberÐ  p Ð1998,€Commissioner€W.€R.€Baker€entered€a€final€order.€€The€total€damages€recoverable€against€theÐ  \ ÐState€were€in€excess€of€the€$300,000.00€limit€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€9„8„307(e),Ð øH Ðtherefore,€judgment€was€entered€against€the€State€of€Tennessee€in€the€amount€of€$300,000.00.òòóóÐ ä4 ÐÌòòóóÓ  ÓSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWÐ ¼  ÐÓÿÓà  àA€motion€to€dismiss€for€lack€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€falls€under€Tennessee€Rule€ofÐ ¨ø ÐCivil€Procedure€12.02(1).€€The€concept€of€subject€matter€jurisdiction€involves€a€court's€lawfulÐ ”ä Ðauthority€to€adjudicate€a€controversy€brought€before€it.€€òòSeeóó€òòMeighan€v.€U.S.€Sprint€CommunicationsÐ €Ð ÐCo.óó,€924€S.W.2d€632,€639€(Tenn.€1996);€òòStandard€Sur.€&€Casualty€Co.€v.€Sloanóó,€180€Tenn.€220,€230,Ð l¼ Ð173€S.W.2d€436,€440€(1943).€€Subject€matter€jurisdiction€involves€the€nature€of€the€cause€of€actionÐ X ¨ Ðand€the€relief€sought,€òòseeóó€òòLanders€v.€Jonesóó,€872€S.W.2d€674,€675€(Tenn.€1994),€and€can€only€beÐ D!” Ðconferred€on€a€court€by€constitutional€or€legislative€act.€€òòSeeóó€€òòKane€v.€Kaneóó,€547€S.W.2d€559,€560Ð 0"€  Ð(Tenn.€1977);€òòComputer€Shoppe,€Inc.€v.€State,óó€780€S.W.2d€729,€734€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1989).€€SinceÐ #l! Ða€determination€of€whether€subject€matter€jurisdiction€exists€is€a€question€of€law,€our€standard€ofÐ $X" Ðreview€is€de€novo,€without€a€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòSeeóó€òòNelson€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,€Inc.óó,€8Ð ô$D # ÐS.W.3d€625,€628€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌÓ  ÓANALYSISÐ ¸'#& ÐÓQÓà  àArticle€I,€section€17€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€provides€that€ð ð[s]uits€may€€be€broughtÐ ¤(ô#' Ðagainst€the€State€in€such€manner€and€in€such€courts€as€the€Legislature€may€by€law€direct.ðð€€ThisÐ )à$( Ðconstitutional€provision€reflects€sovereign€immunity,€the€notion€that€a€sovereign€governmental€entityÐ |*Ì%) Ðcannot€be€sued€in€its€own€courts€without€its€consent.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Cookóó,€171€Tenn.€605,€609,€106Ð h+¸&* ÐS.W.2d€858,€860€(1937);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€20„13„102€(ð ðNo€court€in€the€state€shall€have€any€power,Ð ° Ðjurisdiction,€or€authority€to€entertain€any€suit€against€the€state...with€a€view€to€reach€the€state,€itsÐ œì Ðtreasury,€funds,€or€property...ðð).€€As€a€general€interpretive€matter,€this€Court€has€held€that€theÐ ˆØ Ðprinciple€of€sovereign€immunity€requires€that€legislation€authorizing€suits€against€the€state€mustÐ tÄ Ðprovide€for€the€stateððs€consent€in€ð ðplain,€clear,€and€unmistakableðð€terms.€€òòCookóó,€171€Tenn.€at€611,Ð `° Ð106€S.W.2d€at€861;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòBeare€Company€v.€Olsenóó,€711€S.W.2d€603,€605€(Tenn.€1986).€€We€€mustÐ L œ Ðtherefore€carefully€analyze€the€statute€granting€jurisdiction€to€the€Tennessee€Claims€Commission,Ð 8 ˆ Ðwhich€this€Court€has€previously€held€creates€a€ð ðsweeping€procedure€for€filing€monetary€claimsÐ $ t Ðagainst€the€state.ðð€€òòHembree€v.€Stateóó,€925€S.W.2d€513,€516€(Tenn.€1996).Ð  ` ÐÌà  àThat€statute,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€9„8„307,€begins€by€stating€that€theÐ è 8  ÐCommission€has€ð ðexclusive€jurisdiction€to€determine€all€monetary€claims€against€the€state€based€onÐ Ô$  Ðthe€acts€or€omissions€of€[state€employees]€falling€within€one€(1)€or€more€of€the€followingÐ À  Ðcategories...ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1).€€One€such€category,€which€applies€here,€isÐ ¬ü  Ðð ð[d]angerous€conditions€on€state€maintained€highways.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(J).€€ToÐ ˜è  Ðmaintain€a€suit€based€on€this€category,€the€claimant€ð ðmust€establish€the€foreseeability€of€the€risk€andÐ „Ô  Ðnotice€given€to€the€proper€state€officials€at€a€time€sufficiently€prior€to€the€injury€for€the€state€to€haveÐ pÀ Ðtaken€appropriate€measures.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(1)(J).€€Also€of€relevance€to€this€disputeÐ \¬ Ðis€the€following€directive:€€ð ðIt€is€the€intent€of€the€general€assembly€that€the€jurisdiction€of€the€claimsÐ H˜ Ðcommission€be€liberally€construed€to€implement€the€remedial€purposes€of€this€legislation.ðð€€Tenn.Ð 4„ ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€9„8„307(a)(3).€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àReading€these€provisions€together,€Northland€argues€that€subject€matter€jurisdiction€is€clear.€Ð øH ÐThis€case€involves€state€employeesðð€negligent€conduct€regarding€a€dangerous€condition€on€a€stateÐ ä4 Ðmaintained€highway;€thus,€it€fits€within€one€of€the€jurisdictional€categories.€€Northland€is€seekingÐ Ð  Ðrecovery€from€the€state,€based€on€its€share€of€fault,€which€is€a€ð ðmonetary€claim€against€the€state.ðð€Ð ¼  ÐNorthland€avers€that€while€contribution€and€indemnity€claims€are€not€specifically€mentioned€in€theÐ ¨ø Ðstatute,€they€are€nonetheless€ð ðmonetary€claimsðð€which€are€directly€connected€to€the€underlying€tortÐ ”ä Ðsuit€ð!ð€and€the€statute€refers€to€ð ðallðð€monetary€claims.€€Moreover,€in€case€there€is€any€doubt,€the€scopeÐ €Ð Ðof€jurisdiction€should€be€ð ðliberally€construed.ðð€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àGiven€the€interpretive€principle€governing€sovereign€immunity€stated€above,€Ð D!” Ðand€the€statutory€construction€argument€on€which€Northland€relies,€resolution€of€this€dispute€turnsÐ 0"€  Ðon€the€inference€to€be€drawn€from€statutory€silence.€€Northland€argues€that€since€the€statute€refersÐ #l! Ðto€ð ðallðð€monetary€claims€there€was€no€need€ð!ð€indeed€it€would€be€redundant€ð!ð€to€mention€contributionÐ $X" Ðand€indemnity.€€The€State€responds€that€since€this€is€a€question€of€sovereign€immunity€this€CourtÐ ô$D # Ðshould€€presume€that€the€legislature€must€not€have€intended€to€consent€to€contribution€and€indemnityÐ à%0!$ Ðsuits;€if€the€legislature€had€consented€it€would€have€said€so€in€the€text€of€section€9„8„307.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àWe€find€that€the€Commission€does€not€have€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€hear€contributionÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€indemnity€claims.€€The€statuteððs€liberal€construction€mandate€allows€a€court€to€more€broadly€andÐ )à$( Ðexpansively€interpret€the€concepts€and€provisions€within€its€text.€€For€instance,€in€òòHembree€v.€StateóóÐ |*Ì%) Ðthis€Court€was€presented€with€the€question€of€how€to€interpret€one€of€the€jurisdictional€categoriesÐ h+¸&* Ðlisted€in€section€9„8„307,€specifically,€the€category€allowing€suits€against€the€state€involvingÐ ° Ðð ðnegligent€care,€custody€and€control€of€persons.ðð€€òòHembreeóó,€925€S.W.2d€at€516€(interpreting€theÐ œì Ðprovision€that€is€now€codified€at€9„8„307(a)(1)(E)).€€The€state€contended€that€a€claim€for€ð ðnegligentÐ ˆØ Ðreleaseðð€of€a€patient€from€a€state€controlled€mental€health€institute€did€not€fall€into€this€category.€€òòId.óó€Ð tÄ ÐThe€Court€disagreed,€holding€that€ð ðcare,€custody€and€controlðð€jurisdiction€should€be€read€to€coverÐ `° Ðthe€stateððs€decision€to€release€a€patient€from€custody.€€òòId.óó€at€517„18.€€òòHembreeóó€illustrates€that€theÐ L œ Ðjurisdictional€categories€in€section€9„8„307€should€not€be€interpreted€narrowly.€€A€liberalÐ 8 ˆ Ðconstruction€of€an€existing€category,€however,€is€a€different€proposition€than€a€construction€creatingÐ $ t Ða€òònewóó€category.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àNorthland€argues€that€contribution€and€indemnity€claims€are€intimately€related€to€theÐ è 8  Ðunderlying€tort€suit€which,€in€this€case,€the€Commission€would€have€had€subject€matter€jurisdictionÐ Ô$  Ðto€hear.€€Thus,€the€category€of€ð ðdangerous€highway€conditionðð€may€be€read€to€include€NorthlandððsÐ À  Ðclaim€against€the€State;€no€new€jurisdictional€category€need€be€created.€€While€contribution€andÐ ¬ü  Ðindemnity€claims€are,€of€course,€linked€to€the€underlying€tort,€they€are€separate€and€independent€Ð ˜è  Ðremedies€under€Tennessee€law.€€òòSeeóó€òòButler€v.€Trenthamóó,€224€Tenn.€528,€534,€458€S.W.2d€13,€15Ð „Ô  Ð(1970)€(ð ð[W]here€[contribution]€is€allowed€between€joint€tortfeasors,€it€does€not€sound€in€and€is€notÐ pÀ Ðbased€on€tort.€€It€rests€rather€on€principles€of€equity€and€natural€justice.ðð);€Uniform€ContributionÐ \¬ ÐAmong€Tort„Feasors€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29„11„101,€òòet€seq.óó€(providing€a€contribution€remedyÐ H˜ Ðthat€is€distinct€from€the€underlying€tort€remedy).€€A€plaintiffððs€suit€against€an€alleged€tortfeasor€seeksÐ 4„ Ðredress€for€harm€caused€by€that€tortfeasor,€in€this€case€because€of€the€tortfeasorððs€negligence.€Ð  p ÐContribution€and€indemnity,€however,€are€remedies€a€party€seeks€after€having€been€found€liable€forÐ  \ Ðtortious€conduct,€designed€to€recover€all€or€part€of€the€loss€from€another€responsible€party.€€òòSeeóóÐ øH ÐòòOwens€v.€Truckstops€of€Americaóó,€915€S.W.2d€420,€433€(Tenn.€1996)€(ð ð[C]ontribution€shifts€part€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€loss€from€one€party€to€another€[and]€traditional€implied€indemnity€shifts€the€entire€loss€from€theÐ Ð  Ðparty€found€liable€to€a€party€who€should€bear€the€entire€loss.ðð).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòóóThus,€although€Northlandððs€desiredÐ ¼  Ðcontribution€suit€against€the€State€is€related€to€Mr.€Sheppardððs,€Mr.€McGuireððs€and€the€estate€of€Mr.Ð ¨ø ÐDeskovicððs€suit€against€Mr.€McDonald€and€Walnut,€Inc.,€the€two€suits€are€nonetheless€distinct.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àRecognition€that€contribution€and€indemnity€claims€are€not€merely€expansions€of€theÐ l¼ Ðunderlying€tort€suit€on€which€they€are€based,€but€rather€different€remedies€which€exist€for€differentÐ X ¨ Ðpurposes,€resolves€this€dispute.€€As€noted,€legislation€authorizing€suits€against€the€state€must€provideÐ D!” Ðfor€the€stateððs€consent€in€ð ðplain,€clear,€and€unmistakableðð€terms.€€òòCookóó,€171€Tenn.€at€611,€106Ð 0"€  ÐS.W.2d€at€861.€€No€such€clarity€is€present€in€section€9„8„307.€€A€decision€from€this€Court€interpretingÐ #l! Ðthis€statute€to€include€Northlandððs€claim€within€the€Commissionððs€subject€matter€jurisdiction€wouldÐ $X" Ðbe€tantamount€to€judicially€creating€a€waiver€of€sovereign€immunity€to€which€the€State€has€notÐ ô$D # Ðactually€consented.€€We€decline€to€adopt€this€€interpretation€and€therefore€affirm€the€Court€ofÐ à%0!$ ÐAppeals.Ð Ì&"% ЇÓ  ÓCONCLUSIONÐ ° ÐÓ®CÓà  àBased€on€our€interpretation€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€9„8„307,€we€hold€that€theÐ œì ÐTennessee€Claims€Commission€does€not€have€subject€matter€jurisdiction€to€hear€contribution€andÐ ˆØ Ðindemnity€claims.€€The€decision€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€dismissing€Northlandððs€claim€against€theÐ tÄ ÐState€is€affirmed.Ð `° ÐÌÌÓ  Óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ $ t ÐÔ‡X]iXXX]iÔà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àFRANK€F.€DROWOTA,€III,€JUSTICEà Ð àÔ#†X]iXXX]i1F#Ô