FILED

January 3, 1996

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

 I N THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

EASTERN SECTI ON

EXPLOSI VE SPECI ALI STS, I NC. , ) C/ A NO. 03A01- 9509- CH- 00305

)

Pl a i ntif f - Appe lle e , ) KNOX CHANCERY

)

v. ) HON. H. DAVI D CATE,

) CHANCELLOR

WHALEY CONSTRUCTI ON CO. , I NC. , )

) AFFI RMED AND

De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt . ) REMANDED

HOWARD G. HOGAN, GRESHAM & HOGAN, Knoxvi l l e , f or Pl a i nt i f f -

Appe l l ee.

RON CUNNI NGHAM, FI NKELSTEI N, KERN, STEI NBERG & CUNNI NGHAM,

Knoxvi l l e , f or De f e nda nt - Appe l l a nt .

O P I N I O N

Fr a nks . J .

I n t hi s a c t i on, pl a i nt i f f wa s a wa r de d j udgme nt f or

wor k pe r f or me d unde r a c ont r a c t , a nd de f e nda nt ha s a ppe a l e d,

i ns i s t i ng t ha t pl a i nt i f f di d not pe r f or m i n a c c or da nc e wi t h

t he agr eeme nt be t ween t he pa r t i e s .

The de f e nda nt hi r e d pl a i nt i f f t o bl a s t t he r oc k on

t he Goody' s Fa mi l y Cl ot hi ng Pr oj e c t , ne a r I nt e r s t a t e 40- 75 i n

Knoxvi l l e , f or $3. 50 pe r c ubi c ya r d, wi t h pl a i nt i f f s uppl yi ng

t he powde r a nd i ns ur a nc e a nd t he de f e nda nt s uppl yi ng t he f ue l
2

f or the dr ills . The r e wa s no wr itte n c ont r a c t, a nd pl a i ntif f

be ga n bl a s t i ng i n mi d- Nove mbe r 1988 a nd bl a s t e d unt i l t he e nd

of De c e mbe r whe n pl a i nt i f f wa s t e r mi na t e d by de f e nda nt . 

Es s e ntia lly, the de t e r mi na tive is s ue on a ppe a l wa s

f r a me d by t he Tr i a l J udge i n hi s f i ndi ngs of f a c t :

The di s put e pe r t a i ns t o whe t he r or not t he pl a i nt i f f

wa s r e qui r e d t o f ur ni s h a n e nd pr oduc t , a f t e r

bl a s t i ng, of t he r oc k t he s i z e of t wo f e e t i n

di ame t e r or le s s . The pl a i ntif f e mpha tic a lly de ni e s

t ha t t hi s wa s t he agr eeme nt , and s a ys t he r oc k,

a f t e r bl a s ting, wa s to be the s i z e s o it c oul d be

move d, a nd t he de f e nda nt e mpha t i c a l l y a s s e r t s t ha t

i t wa s t he agr eeme nt .

The Tr i a l Cour t , a f t e r he a r i ng t he e vi de nc e , c onc l ude d:

To de t e r mi ne wha t t he cont r act wa s i n t hi s cas e t he

c r e di bi l i t y of t he wi t ne s s become s cr uc i a l .

Whe n t he pl a i nt i f f ' s t e s t i mony e vi de nc e i s

c ons i de r e d i n t he l i ght of t he l og book a nd ot he r

wr i t t e n e vi de nc e of t he de f e nda nt , a nd t he f a c t t ha t

t he count e r - c l a i m appear s t o ha ve ar i s e n af t e r t he

f a c t, the Cour t c onc l ude s tha t the pl a i ntif f ' s

ve r s i on of t he c ont r a c t a ppe a r s t o be t he c or r e c t

ve r s i on.

The pl a i nt i f f ' s evi de nce wa s t o t he ef f ect t ha t t he

c ont r a c t di d not r e qui r e t ha t t he bl a s t e d r oc k ha d t o be t wo

f e e t or l e s s a nd pa na bl e , whi l e de f e nda nt ' s pr oof wa s t ha t

s uc h wa s t he a gr e e me nt . The Tr i a l J udge , i n ma ki ng hi s

f a c t ua l de t e r mi na t i on, r e l i e d he a vi l y on t he t e s t i mony of

pl a i ntif f ' s witne s s e s to tha t e f f e c t, a nd tha t de f e nda nt di d

not c ompl a i n or pr ot e s t t he wa y a nd ma nne r i n whi c h pl a i nt i f f

wa s bl a s t i ng t he r oc k, whi c h t he Tr i a l Cour t f ound wa s

c or r obor a t e d by t he l og book a nd ot he r wr i t t e n e vi de nc e of t he

de f e nda nt , i . e . , no not a t i on of a ny c ompl a i nt a bout

pl a i nt i ff' s pe rfor ma nc e . 

The f a milia r r ul e r e qui r i ng no c ita tion is tha t

a ppe l l a t e cour t s ge ne r a l l y de f e r t o t he Tr i a l Cour t ' s
3

de t e r mi na tion of the c r e di bility of the witne s s e s . We f i nd

not hi ng i n t hi s r e c or d t ha t woul d r e qui r e a ny de vi a t i on f r om

t he r ul e i n t hi s c a s e . The Tr i a l Cour t obs e r ve d t he de me a nor

of t he wi t ne s s e s a nd he a r d t he t e s t i mony, a nd wa s i n a be t t e r

pos i t i on t ha n t hi s Cour t t o e va l ua t e t he r e s pe c t i ve wi t ne s s e s '

c r e di bility.

De f e nda nt ' s pr i nc i pa l a r gume nt on a ppe a l , a s s t a t e d

i n its br i e f is :

I t i s t he pos i t i on of de f e nda nt t ha t r e a s ona bl y

pr ude nt bus i ne s s me n i n t he bl a s t i ng a nd s i t e

pr e pa r a t i on a nd c ons t r uc t i on i ndus t r y woul d ne ve r

e nt e r i nt o a n a gr e e me nt t o dr i l l , s hoot , a nd

t r a ns por t r oc k t o a c ont r ol l e d f i l l a r e a wi t hout

r e qui r i ng t ha t t he r oc k f r a gme nt s c ompl y wi t h t he

c us t om of t he i ndus t r y f or a c ont r ol l e d f i l l a r e a ,

i.e ., to be two f e e t or le s s in di ame t e r . 

The de f e nda nt di d of f e r e vi de nc e t ha t t hi s wa s t he c us t om i n

t he i ndus t r y, a nd i ns i s t s t ha t t he c ont r a c t s houl d be

de t e r mi ne d, t a ki ng i nt o a c c ount t he c us t om a nd us a ge of t he

t r a de , c iting Be at y Che v r ol e t, Inc . v . Compl e t e Aut o Tr ans it,

I nc . , 586 S. W. 2d 122 ( Te nn. App. 1979) ; J . Aver y Br y an, I nc .

v . Hubbar d, 225 S. W. 2d 282 ( Te nn. App. 1949) . The l e ga l

pos i t i on a dva nc e d i s s ound, howe ve r , t hi s e vi de nc e wa s

di s put e d by pl a i nt i f f ' s e xpe r t wi t ne s s .

Pl a i nt i f f of f e r e d t he t e s t i mony of a n e xpe r t

e xpe r i e nc e d i n bl a s t i ng, who t e s t i f i e d i n pe r t i ne nt pa r t :

Q. As s umi ng t ha t you ha ve a c ont r a c t t o bl a s t t he

r oc k t ha t we f ound out he r e , a nd we ' r e t a l ki ng

a bout a t t he Goody' s s i t e t o t wo- f oot or l e s s ,

woul d you ha ve us e d t he pa t t e r n, a nd t he a mount

of dyna mi t e , a nd t he s t e mmi ng t ha t Expl os i ve

Spe c i a lis t s us e d?

A. We ll, if I kne w tha t my r e qui r e me nt wa s twof oot or l e s s , t he n I pr oba bl y woul d of ha d t o

a dj us t my - - ma ybe I ' d ha d t o - - I woul d of

pr oba bl y s t a r t e d wi t h t ha t pa t t e r n. And I ma y

of ha d t o a dj us t t he s t e mmi ng, a nd a dj us t i t i n
4

t e r ms of : Ca n I ge t by with a little le s s

s t e mmi ng, a nd a l i t t l e mor e powde r , a nd not

t hr ow r oc k. And i t ' s goi ng t o be a ba l a nc e .

J us t like - - jus t like Mr . Cl a r k s a i d. It' s a

c r i t i cal ar ea out t he r e .

Q. But woul d you ha ve be e n c a pa bl e of doi ng i t ,

bl a s t i ng t ha t r oc k?

A. Sur e . Abs ol ut e l y. One of t he r e qui r e me nt s on

one of our r e c e nt j obs , l i ke I wa s t e l l i ng you,

a t t he a i r por t . The y ha d a r e qui r e me nt not

t wo- f oot , but down t o t we l ve - i nc he s f or f i l l

r oc k.

Q. For f ill r oc k?

A. I don' t t hi nk t hi s t wo- f oot i s ne c e s s a r i l y a

uni ve r s a l s t a nda r d t hi ng a nybody c a n s hoot . I t

j us t de pe nds on t he j ob. And s ome j obs I ' ve

s een we r e accept a bl e f or a f our - f oot e r , or eve n

l a r ge r r oc k, i s accept a bl e .

We c onc l ude t he Tr i a l J udge pr ope r l y e va l ua t e d t he

e vi de nc e be f or e hi m. He pa s s e d on t he c r e di bi l i t y of t he

wi t ne s s e s a nd f ound f r om de f e nda nt ' s wr i t t e n doc ume nt a t i on

t ha t de f e nda nt , dur i ng pl a i nt i f f ' s pe r f or ma nc e , di d not obj e c t

t o pl a i nt i f f ' s pe r f or ma nc e . I nt e r pr e t a t i on of a c ont r a c t by

t he pa r t i e s a s s hown by t he i r a c t s ma y be a dopt e d by t he Cour t

i n e s t a bl i s hi ng the te r ms of the c ont r a c t. Hambl e n Count y v .

City of Mor r i s t own, 656 S. W. 2d 331 ( Te nn. 1983) . The Cour t ' s

de t e r mi na t i on of t he cont r act be t ween t he pa r t i e s come s t o us

wi t h a pr e s umpt i on of c or r e c t ne s s , unl e s s t he e vi de nc e

pr e ponde r a t e s ot he r wi s e . T. R. A. P. Rul e 13( d) . We a f f i r m the

j udgme nt . 

De f e nda nt ' s c ount e r - c l a i m f or a ddi t i ona l e xpe ns e s

i nc ur r e d wa s c ont i nge nt upon a f i ndi ng t ha t pl a i nt i f f ha d

br e a c he d t he c ont r a c t , a nd we f i nd de f e nda nt ' s a ppe a l on t hi s

i s s ue to be without me r it.

Pl a i ntif f s e e ks to r e c ove r c os t s , int e r e s t a nd
5

e xpe ns e s on t he a ut hor i t y of Te nne s s e e Code Annot a t e d §27- 1-

122 on t he gr ound t ha t t he a ppe a l wa s f r i vol ous . We c a nnot

a gr ee.

The judgme nt of the Tr i a l Cour t is a f f i r me d, with

c os t s as s e s s e d t o appe l l a nt , and t he caus e r e ma nde d.

________________________

He r s c he l P. Fr a nks , J .

CONCUR:

___________________________

Don T. Mc Mur r a y, J .

___________________________

Cl i ffor d E. Sa nde r s , Sr . J .