# FILED
January 8, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Ap pellate Cou rt Clerk GEORGE MICH AEL SIMMONS, b/n/f ) GEORGE KENNE TH SIMMONS, ) GEORGE KENNE TH SIMMONS, ) Indiv idual ly, and GEO RGE KE NNETH ) SIMMONS as

ADMINISTRATOR

of ) the ESTATE OF BESS MAI BESSON, ) ) Plaintiffs/App ellants, ) ) Appeal No. VS. ) 01-A-01-9607- CV-00292 ) BILLY ANGLIN, STEVE ANGLIN, ) Hickman Circuit JOHN ANGLIN , and DOTTIE ) No. 92-5022C McCLEAREN, Individual ly and d/b/a ) Dottie’s Tra iler Park , a/k/a Riv erview ) Mobile Home Park, ) ) Defendants/Appellee. )

COURT OF APPE ALS OF TENNESSEE MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE
APPEALE D FRO M THE C IRCU IT COU RT OF H ICKMA N COU NTY AT CENTERVILLE, TEN NESSEE THE HONORABLE CORNELIA A. CLARK, JUD GE

CLIFFORD K. McGOW N, JR. P. O. Box 26 Waverly, Tennessee Attorney for Plaintiffs/Appella nts N. HOUSTON P ARKS P. O. Box 1004 Columbia, Tennessee 38402 JOHN S. CO LLEY P. O. Box 1476 Columbia, Tennessee 38402 Attorneys for Defendant/Appellee D ottie McCl earen

AFFIRMED AND REMAN DED

BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE
CONCUR: LEW IS, J. KOCH, J.- 2 - 

## O P I N I O N

The CircuitCourt of Hic kman County g ranted the owner of a trailer park summary judgment on cl aims for personal injuries an d wrong ful death based on a breach of the l ease an d an oral warran ty. We affirm.

I.

Bess Mai Besson an d her so n, George M ichael Simmons, lived in a trailer park owned by

the defen dan t, Do ttie McCle aren . Geo rge Ke nne th “B udd y” Simmons, fathe r of Geo rge Michael Si mmons, also liv ed at the trail er, buthe was not
a party to t he lease. On Aug ust 23, 1991 Buddy Simmons was shot and critically injured and Bess Mai Bes son was ki lled outside t he trailer by some other residents of the park and thei r kinsmen.

Buddy Simmons sued the as sailants and Dottie McC learen on behalf of himself and his son, alleging various c auses of action. Th e actions against Dottie McClearen - - the only ones invol ved in thi s appeal -- included common law negligence, the violation of provi sions in Bess Mai Besson’ s lease, and the breach of
an oral warranty given by Dottie McClearen. The trial judge granted su mmar y judgmentto Dottie M cClearen on t he claims based on the lease and t he oral warran ty.

II. The Lease

Dottie McClearen provided l ow rent housing for

persons in nee d of state assistance. In conjuncti on with the state progr am, Ms. McC learen entered i nto a Housing Assistance P ayments Contr act with the Tennessee Housi ng Devel opment- 3 -

Agency(THDA or PH A, Public Housing Agency). The contract with THD A obligated Ms. McClearen to provi de decent, safe, and sanitary housing in accordance w ith 24 C.F.R. Section 882.109. Th at section reads:

Housi ng used in this program shal l meet the Performan c e Requirements

set forth in thi s section. I n addition , the housing shal l meet the Acceptability Criteria set forth in this s ection excep t fo r such variat ions as are prop osed by th e PHAand approved by HUD. Local climati c or geolog ical conditionsor loc al codesareexa mple s w hic h may jus tify such variations. The two Pe rfo rman ce Re quire men ts an d the ir acc omp anyi ng A cceptability Criteria relied on by

the plaintiff are ( c) and (k) . They prov ide: (c) Space and security -- (1) Perfor mance Requ ireme nt. The dwelling unit shall afford the Family ade quat e spa ce an d sec urity. (2) Acceptabilit

y criteri a. The dwelli ng unit shall contain a livi ng room, kit chen are a, and bathroom. The dwellinguni t shal l contain at l east one bedroom or living /sleeping room of appropriat e size for each two persons. Personsof opposite sex , other than husband and wife or very young childre n, shal l not b e req uired to occ upy t he same bedroom or livin g/s leep ing ro om. Exteri or do ors a nd win dows accessible fr

om outside the unit

shall be loc kable.

. . . (k) Site and ne igh borhood -- (1) Performance requirem ent. The site and neighborho od shall be reasonably free from disturbingnoises and rever berations and oth er hazardsto the health, s afety , and g eneral wel fare of the occupants. (2) Acceptabilit

y crite ria

. The site and neig hborhood shal l not be subject t o serious adverse envi ronmental conditions, natural or manmade, su ch as dangerous wa lks, steps, inst abilit y, flooding, poor drainage, septic tank backups, sewage hazards or mudslides; abn orma l air poll ution, smoke or du st; e xcess ive noise, vi bration or vehicular traffic; exces sive accumulations of trash; verm in or rodent infestation; or fire ha zards.

A. Buddy

Simmons- 4 - In part, the tri al judge dismi ssed Buddy Simmons’ clai ms based on the leas e because he was not a party to the contrac

t. We agree that he may not c lai m the bene fit of t he le ase wit hou t bei ng a pa rty or a third part y beneficiary. See Tennessee

Valley Author

ity v. Exxo

n Nuclear C

o., Inc. , 753 F.2d 493 (6th Cir. 1985). There is nothing in the recor d to indicate t hat the parties to the lease intended that Mr. Simmons should benefit from the lease terms. Therefore the lease di d not create any duty running from Ms. McClearen to Mr. Simmons.
B. George Michael Simmons

Ms. McCl earen concedes that G eorgeMich ael Si mm o ns, the son of Bess Mai Besson w ho lived w ith her in the trailer, was a beneficiary of the lease contract. We are, therefore, forced to decide w hether the two provisi ons relied on by the plaintiff prov ide a cause of acti on for the intentio na l killing of the child’s mot her under the circumstances of this case.

Housing Quality Standard (c) provides that the dwelling unit shall afford the family adequ ate space and security . The Acceptabil ity Cr iteria refer to the interi or livingarrangements

and provid es that exter ior doors and windows accessibl e from the outside shall be loc kable. We ar e convince d that these provisions refer to the u nit itself and do not impose a duty on the l andlord to keeporder in the trailer par k. That duty may arise from other circumstance s, see McClung v. Delta Square , ___ S.W.2d

___(Tenn. 1996), but it relates to the negli gence clai m which thetrial judge refused to dismiss.
Housing Quality Standard (k) does refer to th e sit e and the neighborhood; it provi des that the dwel ling unit shall be located in an area reasonably free from disturbingnoisesand rever beration and other hazar dsto the heal th, s afe ty, and general welfare of the tenant s. The Acceptability Criteria under this standard- 5 -

refer to adverse env ironmental condi tions whi ch may be generalized as fire hazards, floods, air quality, sewage, and dangerous construction de fects.

We are persuaded t hat this standar d refers tothe physical envir onment of the site and neighborhood and that th e hazards to health and saf ety mentioned in the standard do not r

efer to dangerous

individ uals who may

reside on or

come about the premises.
Regulations should not besubjected to a forced or subtle constr uction which would ex

tend or lim it their meani ng. Roseman v . Roseman , 890 S.W.2d 27 (Tenn. 1994). Court s have not construed the Publ ic HousingAct in a manner that all ows inferen ces of private rights from the Act’s g eneral wor ds. Stevenson v. San Francisco

Housing Author

ity , 24 Cal. App. 4th 269, 29 Cal. Rept. 2d 398 (Cal. App. 1994); Cobos

v. Dona Ana Co unty Housing Au thority , 908 P.2d 250 (N.M. App. 1995). Therefore, the cited porti ons of the HousingAct do not create a duty on the p art of a landlord to keep the neighbor hood crime-free.

III. Breach of Warranty

To suppport his war ranty claim Buddy

Simmons cites a conversat ion he had with M s. McClear

en in whic h she stated that she “tried to keep her par k straig ht and tried to keep tr ouble down,” and that she was “goingto keep it as safe as possible.”

We hold that as a matter of law these statements, made to aperson not
a part y to th e lea se, d id no t amo unt t o a warr anty. A wa r ranty ordinarily arises in connection with a tr

ans actio n whi ch conn ects t he wa rrant or and warr antee i n some sort of legal relationshi p, whether direct or r emote. (See Tenn. Cod e Ann. § 29-34-104 which abolishes t he requir ement of privi ty in most actions inv olving personal injuriesand property damage.) As to buy ers an d sell ers, “ There mu st be s ome affirmation of fact or

promise by the seller, the tendency of which in duced the buyer to purchase the mach ine in order to constitute him a warr anto r.” Wal

lace v. McCampbell

, 178 Tenn. 224, 156 S.W .2d 442 at 445 (Ten n. 1941).

There was no legal relat ions hip b etwe en Ms . McClearen and Buddy Simmons -- either before or after the conve rsat ion o n which he re lies. Ther efo re, we hold that her words, even if construed as p romises, would not impose any legal obligation on her with respect to Mr. Simmons.

The judgmentof the court below is affirmed and the cause is remanded to the Circ uit Court of Hi ckman County. Tax the costs on appeal to the appellant.

_____________________________ BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE
CONCUR:

_______________________________ SAMUEL L. LEWIS, JUDGE

_______________________________ WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., J UDGE