# FILED June 26, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE
CITY OF KNOXVILLE, ) C/A NO. 03A01-9801-CV-00038 ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) KNOX CIRCU IT ) v. ) HON. HAROLD WIMBERLY, ) JUDGE GARUIN LEOTTO CURRIER, ) ) REVERS ED AND Defend ant-App ellant. ) REMANDED
GEORGE T. UNDERW OOD, JR., Knoxville, for Plaintiff-Appell ee. RONA LD L. G RIMM and ROB ERT B . FROST , AMBR OSE, W ILSON , GRIMM & DUR AND , Knoxv ille, for Defe ndant-A ppellant.

O P I N I

O N Franks, J.
The City of Kno xville charged defen dant with violating the C ity’s ordinance Section 16 .188, i.e., defen dant sold a p awned television w hich was not held for ninety

days before sal

e as required by

the ordinance. Defendant defended on the ground tha t the ordinance was i

n conflict with the State law on the subject matt er, but the Trial Judge found the ordi nance to be valid. Defendant has

appealed. Defendant insists that the or dinance is in confl

ict with Tennessee Code Annotated §45-6-204, which pr ovides that a pawnbroker licensed in Tennessee has the power to: purchase tangibl e personal propert

y under a buy- sell agreement from individuals

as a pawn or a pawn transacti on, on the conditi

on that it may be redeemed or repurchased by the sell er at a fixed pri

ce within a fixed time not to be less than sixty (60) days.2

In contrast, the City

ordinance provides: A paw nbroker is re quired to ho ld at the place of busine ss a property taken on p awn, dep osit or pledg e, for a perio d of not less than ninety (90) days befor

e offering the prope

rty for s ale or disposi

ng of the prope rty by t rade, tran sfer , shi

pment or ot herwi se. Af

ter t he la wful t ime of ninety (90) days has expi red and the arti

cles are placed in stock or offered for sale,

such articl

es shall be repor

ted to the poli

ce department by their given number, and when any article is redeeme d by its owner, the number of the art

icle redeemed shal

l be reported t

o the police departme nt. The plain tiff argues, a nd we a gree, that w here the G eneral As sembly does not completel

y pre-empt t

he field of regulation, the municipal regulat ion of the schem e whic h does not adv ersely aff ect the S tate sche me, is va lid. Capital News Co. Inc., v. Metro politan G overnm ent of Nas hville and D avidson C ounty , 562 S.W.2d 430-434 (Tenn. 1978). I t is contended t

hat since the St

ate statut e expresses minimum standards, i .e, “not less than” extendi ng the time frame by

the municipal or

dinance does not conflict

with the State statute. Appellan t insists, howe ver, the cod e sections an d the ordina nce are in conflict,and points to Tenness ee Code Annotated §45-6-211, which aft er stati ng that a “pa wnb roke r sha ll reta in in his p osse ssio n the pled ged goo ds fo r thir ty (30 ) days after the matur

ity dat e of the pawn transact

ion” provides t

hat if the pledger does not redeem the pledged goods wit hin thirt y days aft

er the maturit

y date, a “

pawnbroker shall acquire an absolu te title to the pledg ed good s,” and “. . . shall h ave the au thority to sell or di spose of the unredeemed pledged goods as his own, and he may , if he decides, sell th e unredee med pled ged goo ds.” Also, T .C.A. §45 -6-211(b) s ets forth thirty day after t

he maturity

date, as the e

xact time when the pawnbroker acquires absolute title to th e pledged goods. M oreover, T .C.A. §45 -6-211(d)( I) requires tha t a notice that

the goods are subjec

t to resale thirty

days after

the maturity

date “shall” be printed on all pa wn or buy-sell tic kets, an d speci fies the exact w ording of suc h notice
. After the stat

utorily stated maturi

ty date,T.C.A. §45-6-211 gives a pl edger an3

additional t

hirty days after the matur ity of t he pawn transaction i

n which to redeem the pledged goods, and vest s title in the pawnbroker if t

he goods are not redeemed i n the statutori ly prescr ibed period. The fore going statuto ry scheme w as established by Chapter 7 24, Public Acts of 1988, which was described as Tennessee Pawnbrokers Act of 1988. The General A ssembly revise d the Act in 1995 in C hapter 186 , Public Ac ts 1995. Th is statutory scheme is a broad and deta iled regulat

ion of pawnbrokers in Tennesse e. Munic ipal ordinan ces in conf lict and repu gnant to a S tate Law of state wide a pplicatio n, are un iversally h eld to be invalid. Southern Railway Co. V. Th e City of Knoxv ille , 442 S.W .2d 619 (T enn. 1968 ). A test wh ich has bee n widely use d in determinin g wheth er the provis ions of a m unicipal ord inance co nflict with a s tatute governin g the same subject, is wh ether the ord inance pro hibits an act w hich the statu te permits, or pe

rmits an act which t

he statute for

bids. 56 Am.Jur.2d Munici pal Corporations, e

tc., §374 at

p.408. Generally, an ordinance may enlarge upon the provisions o f a statute by req uiring mor e than the sta tute requires, u nless the statu te limits the require ment in all cases to its ow n presc ription, Id. at 409. In the case before us, the or

dinance enlargement of time runs counter

to the provisi

ons of the statute. The statute vests owne rship in the pawnb roker after the prescribed statutory time in all case s, and man dates that the th irty day waiting per iod shall be p rinted on all pawn tickets. The e nlargement of time in th e ordinance conf licts with the statutory rights of pa wnbrok ers establishe d in the statute , and we c onclude th at the ordina nce in question runs count

er to what the legi slature has expr essly l icensed and authori

zed. We reve rse the hold ing of the T rial Judge an d find that th e ordinanc e is in conflict wit

h the State st

atutory scheme set forth in t he Tennessee Pawnbrokers Act and is in valid. Southern Railway Co.

The cause is remanded to t he Trial Court for e

ntry of judgment4

consistent wit

h this opinion,

and the cost of the a

ppeal is asses sed to the appell ee.

__________________________ Herschel P. Franks, J.
CONCUR:

___________________________ Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.

___________________________ William H. Inman, Sr.J.