Session Date: October 26, 2016 
from the Circuit Court for Decatur County No. 12-CV-14
Charles C. McGinley, Judge
plaintiff in a breach of contract action filed a motion to
enforce a settlement agreement allegedly agreed to by the
defendant. The defendant argued that there was no acceptance
of the plaintiff's settlement offer; rather, the
defendant contended that she responded to the plaintiff's
offer with a counter-offer, which she revoked prior to its
acceptance. The trial court found that the parties had
entered into an enforceable settlement agreement but denied
the plaintiff's request for attorney's fees.
Discerning no error, we affirm.
W. Hinson, Lexington, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jeanna
Grace d/b/a Grace Trucking.
L. Wood, Parsons, Tennessee, for the appellee, Tim Grace.
Steven Stafford, P.J., W.S., delivered the opinion of the
court, in which Arnold B. Goldin and Brandon O. Gibson, JJ.,
STEVEN STAFFORD, JUDGE
8, 2012, Plaintiff/Appellee Tim Grace ("Appellee")
filed a lawsuit against Defendant/Appellant Jeanna Grace
d/b/a Grace Trucking ("Appellant") for breach of
contract. The complaint alleged that the parties entered into
a contract in which Appellant agreed to purchase a tractor
from Appellee. According to the complaint, the tractor
eventually "became disabled" in Wyoming, and
Appellant refused to transport the tractor back to Tennessee.
Thereafter, Appellant allegedly failed to make payments on
the tractor as required by the parties' contract.
Appellee was eventually able to transport the tractor back to
Tennessee, and he then filed his complaint to recover his
expenses and the depreciated value of the tractor due to
Appellant's alleged failure to maintain the tractor in
proper condition. In his complaint, Appellee sought $31,
096.73 in damages, plus interest, storage expenses,
attorney's fees, and costs. Appellee later amended his
complaint to clarify his allegations.
filed an answer and counter-complaint on July 16, 2012.
Therein, Appellant alleged that the tractor had mechanical
defects that were not disclosed at the time of the
parties' contract. Accordingly, Appellant alleged that
she was required to expend funds to make the tractor
"road ready, " amounting to a total of $74, 009.30.
In addition, Appellant alleged that she had overpaid under
the contract's terms, bringing the total requested
damages to $99, 476.30. On August 27, 2012, Appellee filed an
answer to the counter-complaint, denying the material
allegations contained therein and raising several affirmative
matter was set for trial on August 1, 2013, but was continued
in order to allow the parties to engage in court-ordered
mediation. Thereafter, the parties unsuccessfully mediated
the case. On March, 24, 2015, Appellant's counsel filed a
motion to withdraw, which was granted by order of April 30,
2015. Eventually, Appellant obtained new counsel, Samuel W.
Hinson, who filed a notice of appearance on October 29, 2015.
February 16, 2016, Appellee filed a motion to enforce a
settlement agreement allegedly entered into by the parties.
The motion contained the following allegations:
1. On or about September 10, 2015, Ryan M. Hagenbrok,
attorney in Savannah, Tennessee contacted [Appellee's]
attorney to discuss settlement of the above case on behalf of
2. Telephone conversations were exchanged and letters of
offers and counteroffers were exchanged in effort to work out
a compromised settlement and dismissal of lawsuit.
3.On September 10, 2015, a letter was e-mailed to [Attorney]
Hagenbrok offering to settle, which attorney indicated was
accepted by Defendant pursuant to a telephone call from
[A]ttorney Hagenbrok with instructions for [Appellant's]
attorney to prepare an Agreed Order of Dismissal with the
terms of agreement. Attorney Hagenbrok stated that he did not
represent [Appellant], but was conveying offer and acceptance
and that the Order should not have his signature. . . .
4. Attorney for [Appellee], prepared the Agreed Order for
[Appellant] to sign and she was to tender the settlement
check at the office of [Appellee's] attorney. . . .
5. [Appellant] in fact did show up at [Appellee's]
attorney's office and requested that one item be added to
the Order "dismissed with prejudice[."] The Order
was corrected and [Appellant] said ...