Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie v. David K. Hinchy and Pearline HInchy

Court of Appeals of Tennessee·Decided October 4, 1996·No. 03A01-9604-CH-00138·Published

Opinion

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON FILED October 4, 1996

Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk

RONALD D. MACKI E a nd ) COCKE COUNTY BRENDA L. MACKI E ) 03A01- 9604- CH- 00138 ) Pl a i nt i f f s - Appe l l e e s ) ) ) HON. C. S. RAI NWATER, J R. , v. ) CHANCELLOR ) ) DAVI D K. HI NCHY a nd ) PEARLI NE HI NCHY ) ) AFFI RMED I N PART; REVERSED De f e nda nt s - Appe l l a nt s ) I N PART; a nd REMANDED

FLETCHER L. ERVI N OF NEWPORT FOR APPELLANTS

R. J . TUCKER OF NEWPORT FOR APPELLEES

O P I N I O N

Godda r d, P. J .

Da vi d K. Hi nc hy a nd Pe a r l i ne Hi nc hy, who a r e r e s i de n t s

o f I n d i a na , a ppe a l j udgme nt s of t he Cha nc e r y Cour t f or Coc ke

Co u n t y . The Cha nc e l l or , f i r s t , gr a nt e d a de f a ul t j udgme nt

a g a i n s t t he m i n f a vor of Rona l d D. M c ki e a nd Br e nda L. M c ki e , a a

wh o a r e r e s i de nt s of Fl or i da . The Cour t a l s o or de r e d t he s a l e o f c e r t a i n r e a l e s t a t e , t he pr oc e e ds of whi c h woul d be a ppl i e d t o

t h e s a t i s f a c t i on o f t he i n de bt e dne s s s e c ur e d by t he r e a l e s t a t e

a n d , p r e l i mi na r i l y, a pe r s ona l j udgme nt i n t he a mount of $18, 2 0 0 ,

p l u s i n t e r e s t a t t he r a t e of 8. 65 pe r c e nt pe r a nnum f r om Oc t ob e r

1, 1989. Se c ond, a f t e r s a l e of t he pr ope r t y a nd gi vi ng c r e di t

f o r p a y me nt s pr e vi ous l y ma de , he a wa r de d a de f i c i e nc y j udgme nt i n

t h e a mo unt of $15, 719. 97, whi c h i nc l ude d c our t c os t s a nd e xpe ns e s

of t he s a l e .

The Hi nc hys a ppe a l , c ont e ndi ng t he Tr i a l Cour t wa s i n

e r r o r i n not s us t a i ni ng t h e i r Rul e 60 mot i on t o s e t a s i de t ha t

p o r t i o n of t he J une 1, 199 2, de f a ul t j udgme nt a wa r di ng t he

M c k i e s a pe r s ona l j udgme n t a ga i ns t t he m. a

Al t hough t he r e we r e ot he r mot i ons by t he pa r t i e s a nd

o r d e r s of t he Cour t , we wi l l de t a i l t hos e we de e m ne c e s s a r y f or

p r o p e r di s pos i t i on of t hi s a ppe a l .

1. Fe br ua r y 19, 1991, c ompl a i nt by M c ki e s s t yl e d, " COM a PLAI NT

TO FORECLOSE ON MORTGAGE DEED, " l a t e r a me nde d by or de r e nt e r e d

M y 6 , 1991, a l l e gi ng t he Hi nc hys ha d e xe c ut e d a mor t ga ge t o t h e m a

s e c u r i n g a n i nde bt e dne s s of $22, 000 t ha t , a f t e r pa yi ng e i ght

p a y me n t s t he r e on i n t he a mount of $475, t he i nde bt e dne s s be c a me

i n d e f a ul t a nd s ought ( 1) pr oc e s s , ( 2) a ppoi nt me nt of a Spe c i a l

M s t e r , ( 3) s a l e of t he mor t ga ge d pr ope r t y, a nd ( 4) ge ne r a l a

r el i ef .

2 2. J u ne 1, 1992, or de r gr a nt i ng de f a ul t j udgme nt a wa r di ng a

r e c o v e r y i n t he a mount of $18, 200, pl us i nt e r e s t a t t he r a t e o f

8 . 6 5 p e r c e nt pe r a nnum f r om Oc t obe r 1989, a nd or de r i ng s a l e of

t h e p r o pe r t y.

3. Se p t e mbe r 21, 1992, M s t e r ' s r e por t di s c l os i ng s a l e wa s a

a c c o mp l i s he d a nd t he t ot a l pur c ha s e pr i c e wa s $8500.

4. Oc t obe r 16, 1992, de c r e e c onf i r mi ng s a l e , f i xi ng a t t or ne y ' s

a n d M s t e r ' s f e e s , a nd or d e r i ng di s bur s e me nt of s a l e pr oc e e ds . a

5. De c e mbe r 11, 1992, pe t i t i on by M c ki e s s e e ki ng a de f i c i e n c y a

j u d g me n t .

6. M r c h 18, 1993, mot i on by Hi nc hys t o di s mi s s pe t i t i on a

s e e k i n g a de f i c i e nc y j udgme nt f or l a c k of pe r s ona l j ur i s di c t i o n .

7. Se pt e mbe r 8, 1993, a n s we r t o mot i on t o di s mi s s mot i on f or

d e f i c i e nc y j udgme nt by M c ki e s . a

8. No ve mbe r 2, 1993, or d e r ove r r ul i ng Hi nc hys ' mot i on t o

d i s mi s s pe t i t i on.

9. De c e mbe r 29, 1993, a ns we r a nd c ount e r - c ompl a i nt by Hi nc hy s .

10. Fe br ua r y 23, 1995, a n s we r t o c ount e r - c ompl a i nt .

3 11. Oc t obe r 2, 1995, mot i on by M c ki e s t o di s mi s s Hi nc hys ' a

c o u n t e r - c ompl a i nt .

12. Oc t obe r 26, 1995, r e s pons e of Hi nc hys t o M c ki e s ' a mot i on t o

d i s mi s s .

13. No ve mbe r 3, 1995, Rul e 60 mot i on t o s e t a s i de de f a ul t

j u d g me n t a nd or de r of s a l e of J une 1, 1992.

14. No ve mbe r 6, 1995, a ns we r t o mot i on t o s e t a s i de de f a ul t

15. No ve mbe r 6, 1995, mot i on by Hi nc hys t o di s mi s s M c ki e s ' a

s u p p l e me nt a l pl e a di ng s e e ki ng a de f i c i e nc y j udgme nt .

16. J a nua r y 9, 1996, j udgme nt f i ndi ng t ha t t he Cour t ha d

e x e r c i s e d pr ope r i n pe r s ona m a nd i n r e m j ur i s di c t i on ove r t he

Hi n c h y s , t ha t t he de c r e e c onf i r mi ng t he s a l e e nt e r e d Oc t obe r 1 6 , 1 1992, i s r e s j udi c a t a t o a l l pl e a di ngs f i l e d t he r e a f t e r , a nd

t h a t t h e Cour t i mpr ope r l y ove r r ul e d Hi nc hys ' mot i on t o di s mi s s

t h e p e t i t i on f or de f i c i e nc y j udgme nt .

Ba s e d upon t he f or e goi ng f i ndi ngs t he Tr i a l Cour t

g r a n t e d t he Hi nc hys ' mot i on t o di s mi s s t he M c ki e s ' a pe t i t i on f o r

d e f i c i e nc y j udgme nt , di s mi s s e d t he mot i on s e e ki ng t o s e t a s i de

1 Th i s o r d e r r e c i t e s t h e Oc t o b e r o r d e r wa s e n t e r e d o n Oc t o b e r 12. It wa s s i g n e d o n Oc t o b e r 1 2 ; h o we v e r , i t wa s e n t e r e d o n Oc t o b e r 1 6 .

4 t h e d e f a ul t j udgme nt , di s mi s s e d t he c ount e r - c ompl a i nt , a nd

r e a f f i r me d i t s a wa r d o f a de f i c i e nc y j udgme nt .

W f i r s t not e t ha t t he c ompl a i nt a s a me nde d doe s not e

s e e k a n y pe r s ona l j udgme nt a ga i ns t t he Hi nc hys , but onl y t he s a l e

o f t h e pr ope r t y t o s a t i s f y t he M c ki e s ' a i nde bt e dne s s .

W ha ve i t of ol d- - Foot not e 14, § 648, Gi bs on' s Sui t s e

i n Ch a n c e r y, 4t h Ed. ( 1937) , whe n a ddr e s s i ng e xe c ut i ons - - t ha t a

d e c r e e mus t b e c i r c ums c r i b e d by t he e vi de nc e , t he e vi de nc e 2 c i r c u ms c r i be d by t he pl e a di ngs , a nd t he pl e a di ngs c i r c ums c r i b e d

b y t h e pr oc e dur e of t he c ha nc e r y c our t . ( Se e a ppe ndi x. )

I n t he pr e s e nt pos t ur e of t hi s c a s e , i t i s obvi ous t h a t

t h e r e a r e no pl e a di ngs s e e ki ng a pe r s ona l j udgme nt a ga i ns t t he

Hi nc h y s . I t i s t r ue t ha t a pe t i t i on wa s f i l e d by t he M c ki e s a

wh i c h d i d s e e k s uc h r e l i e f , but t he or de r of t he Tr i a l Cour t o n

J a n u a r y 9, 1996, gr a nt e d t he mot i on of t he Hi nc hys t o s t r i ke t h a t

p e t i t i o n, a nd t hi s a c t i on by t he Cha nc e l l or i s not a ppe a l e d.

W a c c or di ngl y f i nd t ha t a t t he t i me of t he e nt r y of e

t h e p e r s ona l j udgme nt on J a nua r y 9, 1996, t he r e we r e no pl e a di n g s

wh i c h woul d a ut hor i z e t he Cha nc e l l or t o gr a nt s uc h a j udgme nt ,

a n d s o muc h of hi s or de r t ha t pur por t s t o do s o i s r e ve r s e d.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie v. David K. Hinchy and Pearline HInchy, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996).

Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie v. David K. Hinchy and Pearline HInchy (Ronald D. Mackie and Brenda L. Mackie v. David K. Hinchy and Pearline HInchy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.