I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
FILED July 2, 1997
Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk PRI CE & PRI CE M ECHANI CAL, I NC. , ) HAM BLEN CHANCERY ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9612- CH- 00402 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. BEN K. WEXLER ) CHANCELLOR, BY I NTERCHANGE ) ) ) ) ) J AM ES EDWARD HALE a nd HALE ) REVERSED AND REMANDED CONSTRUCTI ON COM PANY, I NC. , ) ) De f e nda nt s - Appe l l e e s )
W GARY BLACKBURN & M CHELLE J ONES LONG, Bl a c kbur n, Sl obe y, Fr e e ma n . I & Ha p p e l l , P. C. , Na s hvi l l e , f or a ppe l l a nt .
ROBERT A. CRAWFORD, Ca r pe nt e r & O' Conne r , Knoxvi l l e , f or a ppe l l e e s .
O P I N I O N
M M r a y, J . c ur
Thi s case is b e f or e t he c our t on a n e xt r a or d i n a r y a pp e a l
p u r s u a n t t o Rul e 10, Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Appe l l a t e Pr oc e dur e . Th e s ol e i s s ue whi c h we a r e c a l l e d upon t o de c i de i s whe t he r Te nne s s e e
r e c o g n i z e s t he t or t of " i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h pr os pe c t i v e
e c o n o mi c a dva nt a ge " ( The t or t ) . The t r i a l c our t di s mi s s e d t h e
p l a i nt i f f ' s c l a i m o n t he pr e mi s e t ha t Te nne s s e e doe s not r e c ogn i z e
t he t or t , c i t i ng Kul t ur a , I nc . , v. Sout he r n Le a s i ng, 923 S. W 2 d .
536, ( Te nn. 1996) , quot i ng f r om Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s v. Bl uf f Ci t y
Bui c k, 876 S. W 2d 818, 823 ( Te nn. 1994) . .
The Supr e me Cour t ha s ne i t he r e xpr e s s l y r e j e c t e d t he t or t no r
e x p r e s s l y e mbr a c e d i t . I n Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s , t h e c our t di d de f i n e
t he e l e me nt s t ha t ma ke u p t he t or t a s f ol l ows :
M t j ur i s di c t i ons a nd c omme nt a t or s a gr e e t he t or t os i s c ompos e d of t he f ol l owi ng e l e me nt s : ( 1) t he e xi s t e nc e o f a bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y ( a n e xi s t i ng c ont r a c t i s not r e qui r e d) ; ( 2) k n o wl e dge by t he i n t e r f e r e r of t h e r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y; ( 3) a n i nt e nt i ona l a c t of i nt e r f e r e nc e ; ( 4) pr oof t ha t t he i n t e r f e r e nc e c a us e d t h e ha r m s us t a i ne d; a nd ( 5) da ma ge t o t he pl a i nt i f f . I d . , 5 A. L. R. 4 t h a t § 2[ a ] , p . 1 6; s e e a l s o Cr a n d a l l Cor p. v . Na vi s t a r I nt e r n . , 302 S. C. 265, 3 9 5 S. E. 2d 179 ( S. C. 1990) ; Commodor e v . Uni ve r s i t y M c ha ni c a l Cont r . , 120 W s h. 2d 120, 839 P. 2d 314 ( W s h e a a 1 9 92) .
The c our t de t e r mi ne d t ha t Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s ' c l a i m mus t f a i l
b e c a us e t he c ompl a i nt di d not a l l e ge t wo e s s e nt i a l e l e me nt s of t he
t or t — ( 1) t he e xi s t e nc e of a s pe c i f i c pr os pe c t i ve e mpl oyme nt
r e l a t i o ns hi p a nd ( 2) knowl e dge by Qua l i t y of s uc h a r e l a t i ons h i p .
Th e c o u r t t he n s t a t e d:
W c onc l ude t ha t t he que s t i on of whe t he r Te nne s s e e e r e c ogni z e s t he t or t of i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h p r os pe c t i ve e c onomi c a dva nt a ge s houl d be pos t pone d t o a n ot he r d a y whe n we a r e s qua r e l y pr e s e nt e d wi t h a c a s e i n
2 wh i c h a l l o f t he e l e me nt s of t he t or t ha ve be e n a l l e ge d o r o t he r wi s e e s t a bl i s he d. . . .
I d, p a g e 823.
The c our t in Kul t ur a , I nc . , s upr a , ne i t he r a c c e pt e d no r
r ej ect ed t he t or t , obs e r vi ng t ha t no d a ma ge s ha d be e n s hown .
Th e r e a f t e r , t hi s c our t i n Ne w Li f e Cor p. v. Thoma s Ne l s on, I nc . ,
9 3 2 S. W 2d 921 ( Te nn. App. 1996, pe r mi s s i on t o a ppe a l de ni e d J u l y .
1, 1996) , r e ve r s e d a s umma r y j udgme nt whi c h ha d be e n e nt e r e d i n
f a v o r o f t he de f e nda nt a nd r e ma nde d t he c a s e t o t he t r i a l c our t f o r
a t r i a l on t he me r i t s .
I n di s c us s i ng t he i s s ue t he c our t poi nt e d out :
. . . I n Ka n Cons t . & Cl e a ni ng Cor p. v. Ta t um, No 0 1 A01- 9304- CV- 00150, 1993 W 434741 ( Te nn. App. W S. , Oc t L . 2 7 1993, t he c our t s t a t e d:
The e l e me nt s of t he t or t of i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h bus i ne s s r e l a t i o ns a r e a l s o s e t out i n 45 AmJ ur . 2d I nt e r f e r e nc e 50 ( 1969) .
The ba s i c e l e me nt s whi c h e s t a bl i s h a pr i ma f a c i e t or t i ous i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a bus i ne s s r e l a - t i o ns hi p a r e t he e xi s t e nc e of a va l i d b us i ne s s r e l a t i on ( not ne c e s s a r i l y e vi de nc e d by a n e nf or c e - a bl e c ont r a c t ) or e xpe c t a nc y; knowl e dge of t he r e l a t i o n s hi p or e xpe c t a nc y on t he pa r t of t he i nt e r f e r e r ; a n i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e i nduc i ng or c a us i ng a br e a c h or t e r mi na t i on of t he r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y; a nd r e s ul t a nt d a ma ge t o t he pa r t y whos e r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y ha s be e n di s - r upt e d.
W a r e una bl e t o ma ke a me a ni ngf ul di s t i nc t i on be t we e n Qua l i t y e
Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e Cor p . , i ns of a r a s t he e l e me nt s of t he t or t
a r e c on c e r ne d.
3 I t i s we l l - s e t t l e d l a w t ha t t he Supr e me Cour t i s not bound b y
a d e c i s i on of a n i nt e r me di a t e a ppe l l a t e c our t e ve n whe n c e r t i or a r i
o r p e r mi s s i on t o a ppe a l i s de ni e d. As e xpl a i ne d by Chi e f J us t i c e
Gr a f t o n Gr e e n, i n Br ya n v. Ae t na Li f e I ns . Co. , 174 Te nn. 602, 1 3 0
S. W 2 d 85 ( 19 3 9 ) : . " W ha ve r e pe a t e dl y poi nt e d out e t ha t a me r e
de ni a l by t hi s c our t of a wr i t of c e r t i or a r i t o t he Cour t of
Ap p e a l s doe s not c ommi t us to al l t he vi e ws e xpr e s s e d in a
p a r t i c u l a r opi ni on. W a r e pr i ma r i l y c onc e r ne d on s uc h a ppl i c a t i o n e
wi t h t h e r e s ul t r e a c he d . " 174 Te nn. at 611, 130 S. W 2d a t . 88.
W i g h i n g onl y t he r e s ul t i n Ne w Li f e Cor p . i n t he l i ght of Qua l i t y e
Aut o Pa r t s , a c ompe l l i ngl y pe r s ua s i ve a r gume nt i s ma d e t ha t t he
Su p r e me Cour t ha s i mpl i c i t l y r e c o gni z e d t he t or t . W a r e of t h e e
o p i n i o n t ha t t he t or t i s now r e c ogni z e d i n t hi s j ur i s di c t i on a n d s o
hol d.
Up on c ons i de r a t i on o f t he e nt i r e c ompl a i nt , we a r e of t he
o p i n i o n t ha t s uf f i c i e nt f a c t s ha ve be e n a l l e ge d whi c h, i f t r ue ,
s a t i s f y t he r e qui r e me nt s of bot h Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e ,
s upr a . W a c knowl e dge t ha t e da ma ge s ha ve be e n pl e a d wi t h l i t t l e
s p e c i f i c i t y. We be l i e ve , howe ve r , t ha t unde r t he r e l a xe d r e -
q u i r e me nt s f or pl e a di ng unde r t he Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Ci v i l
Pr o c e d u r e , t ha t t he de f e nda nt s ha ve be e n pl a c e d on s uf f i c i e n t
n o t i c e t o ma ke t he m a wa r e of t he c l a i ms a ga i ns t t he m. Fur t he r :
W a l s o be l i e ve t ha t . . . t he r e i s no l onge r a ny ne e d e f or pa r t i c ul a r i z e d da ma ge pl e a di ng. As we n o t e d i n Ha ndl e y v. M y, [ 588 S. W 2d 772, 774, - 76 Te nn. App. 1979] a .
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
FILED July 2, 1997
Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk PRI CE & PRI CE M ECHANI CAL, I NC. , ) HAM BLEN CHANCERY ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9612- CH- 00402 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. BEN K. WEXLER ) CHANCELLOR, BY I NTERCHANGE ) ) ) ) ) J AM ES EDWARD HALE a nd HALE ) REVERSED AND REMANDED CONSTRUCTI ON COM PANY, I NC. , ) ) De f e nda nt s - Appe l l e e s )
W GARY BLACKBURN & M CHELLE J ONES LONG, Bl a c kbur n, Sl obe y, Fr e e ma n . I & Ha p p e l l , P. C. , Na s hvi l l e , f or a ppe l l a nt .
ROBERT A. CRAWFORD, Ca r pe nt e r & O' Conne r , Knoxvi l l e , f or a ppe l l e e s .
O P I N I O N
M M r a y, J . c ur
Thi s case is b e f or e t he c our t on a n e xt r a or d i n a r y a pp e a l
p u r s u a n t t o Rul e 10, Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Appe l l a t e Pr oc e dur e . Th e s ol e i s s ue whi c h we a r e c a l l e d upon t o de c i de i s whe t he r Te nne s s e e
r e c o g n i z e s t he t or t of " i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h pr os pe c t i v e
e c o n o mi c a dva nt a ge " ( The t or t ) . The t r i a l c our t di s mi s s e d t h e
p l a i nt i f f ' s c l a i m o n t he pr e mi s e t ha t Te nne s s e e doe s not r e c ogn i z e
t he t or t , c i t i ng Kul t ur a , I nc . , v. Sout he r n Le a s i ng, 923 S. W 2 d .
536, ( Te nn. 1996) , quot i ng f r om Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s v. Bl uf f Ci t y
Bui c k, 876 S. W 2d 818, 823 ( Te nn. 1994) . .
The Supr e me Cour t ha s ne i t he r e xpr e s s l y r e j e c t e d t he t or t no r
e x p r e s s l y e mbr a c e d i t . I n Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s , t h e c our t di d de f i n e
t he e l e me nt s t ha t ma ke u p t he t or t a s f ol l ows :
M t j ur i s di c t i ons a nd c omme nt a t or s a gr e e t he t or t os i s c ompos e d of t he f ol l owi ng e l e me nt s : ( 1) t he e xi s t e nc e o f a bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y ( a n e xi s t i ng c ont r a c t i s not r e qui r e d) ; ( 2) k n o wl e dge by t he i n t e r f e r e r of t h e r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y; ( 3) a n i nt e nt i ona l a c t of i nt e r f e r e nc e ; ( 4) pr oof t ha t t he i n t e r f e r e nc e c a us e d t h e ha r m s us t a i ne d; a nd ( 5) da ma ge t o t he pl a i nt i f f . I d . , 5 A. L. R. 4 t h a t § 2[ a ] , p . 1 6; s e e a l s o Cr a n d a l l Cor p. v . Na vi s t a r I nt e r n . , 302 S. C. 265, 3 9 5 S. E. 2d 179 ( S. C. 1990) ; Commodor e v . Uni ve r s i t y M c ha ni c a l Cont r . , 120 W s h. 2d 120, 839 P. 2d 314 ( W s h e a a 1 9 92) .
The c our t de t e r mi ne d t ha t Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s ' c l a i m mus t f a i l
b e c a us e t he c ompl a i nt di d not a l l e ge t wo e s s e nt i a l e l e me nt s of t he
t or t — ( 1) t he e xi s t e nc e of a s pe c i f i c pr os pe c t i ve e mpl oyme nt
r e l a t i o ns hi p a nd ( 2) knowl e dge by Qua l i t y of s uc h a r e l a t i ons h i p .
Th e c o u r t t he n s t a t e d:
W c onc l ude t ha t t he que s t i on of whe t he r Te nne s s e e e r e c ogni z e s t he t or t of i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h p r os pe c t i ve e c onomi c a dva nt a ge s houl d be pos t pone d t o a n ot he r d a y whe n we a r e s qua r e l y pr e s e nt e d wi t h a c a s e i n
2 wh i c h a l l o f t he e l e me nt s of t he t or t ha ve be e n a l l e ge d o r o t he r wi s e e s t a bl i s he d. . . .
I d, p a g e 823.
The c our t in Kul t ur a , I nc . , s upr a , ne i t he r a c c e pt e d no r
r ej ect ed t he t or t , obs e r vi ng t ha t no d a ma ge s ha d be e n s hown .
Th e r e a f t e r , t hi s c our t i n Ne w Li f e Cor p. v. Thoma s Ne l s on, I nc . ,
9 3 2 S. W 2d 921 ( Te nn. App. 1996, pe r mi s s i on t o a ppe a l de ni e d J u l y .
1, 1996) , r e ve r s e d a s umma r y j udgme nt whi c h ha d be e n e nt e r e d i n
f a v o r o f t he de f e nda nt a nd r e ma nde d t he c a s e t o t he t r i a l c our t f o r
a t r i a l on t he me r i t s .
I n di s c us s i ng t he i s s ue t he c our t poi nt e d out :
. . . I n Ka n Cons t . & Cl e a ni ng Cor p. v. Ta t um, No 0 1 A01- 9304- CV- 00150, 1993 W 434741 ( Te nn. App. W S. , Oc t L . 2 7 1993, t he c our t s t a t e d:
The e l e me nt s of t he t or t of i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h bus i ne s s r e l a t i o ns a r e a l s o s e t out i n 45 AmJ ur . 2d I nt e r f e r e nc e 50 ( 1969) .
The ba s i c e l e me nt s whi c h e s t a bl i s h a pr i ma f a c i e t or t i ous i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a bus i ne s s r e l a - t i o ns hi p a r e t he e xi s t e nc e of a va l i d b us i ne s s r e l a t i on ( not ne c e s s a r i l y e vi de nc e d by a n e nf or c e - a bl e c ont r a c t ) or e xpe c t a nc y; knowl e dge of t he r e l a t i o n s hi p or e xpe c t a nc y on t he pa r t of t he i nt e r f e r e r ; a n i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e i nduc i ng or c a us i ng a br e a c h or t e r mi na t i on of t he r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y; a nd r e s ul t a nt d a ma ge t o t he pa r t y whos e r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y ha s be e n di s - r upt e d.
W a r e una bl e t o ma ke a me a ni ngf ul di s t i nc t i on be t we e n Qua l i t y e
Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e Cor p . , i ns of a r a s t he e l e me nt s of t he t or t
a r e c on c e r ne d.
3 I t i s we l l - s e t t l e d l a w t ha t t he Supr e me Cour t i s not bound b y
a d e c i s i on of a n i nt e r me di a t e a ppe l l a t e c our t e ve n whe n c e r t i or a r i
o r p e r mi s s i on t o a ppe a l i s de ni e d. As e xpl a i ne d by Chi e f J us t i c e
Gr a f t o n Gr e e n, i n Br ya n v. Ae t na Li f e I ns . Co. , 174 Te nn. 602, 1 3 0
S. W 2 d 85 ( 19 3 9 ) : . " W ha ve r e pe a t e dl y poi nt e d out e t ha t a me r e
de ni a l by t hi s c our t of a wr i t of c e r t i or a r i t o t he Cour t of
Ap p e a l s doe s not c ommi t us to al l t he vi e ws e xpr e s s e d in a
p a r t i c u l a r opi ni on. W a r e pr i ma r i l y c onc e r ne d on s uc h a ppl i c a t i o n e
wi t h t h e r e s ul t r e a c he d . " 174 Te nn. at 611, 130 S. W 2d a t . 88.
W i g h i n g onl y t he r e s ul t i n Ne w Li f e Cor p . i n t he l i ght of Qua l i t y e
Aut o Pa r t s , a c ompe l l i ngl y pe r s ua s i ve a r gume nt i s ma d e t ha t t he
Su p r e me Cour t ha s i mpl i c i t l y r e c o gni z e d t he t or t . W a r e of t h e e
o p i n i o n t ha t t he t or t i s now r e c ogni z e d i n t hi s j ur i s di c t i on a n d s o
hol d.
Up on c ons i de r a t i on o f t he e nt i r e c ompl a i nt , we a r e of t he
o p i n i o n t ha t s uf f i c i e nt f a c t s ha ve be e n a l l e ge d whi c h, i f t r ue ,
s a t i s f y t he r e qui r e me nt s of bot h Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e ,
s upr a . W a c knowl e dge t ha t e da ma ge s ha ve be e n pl e a d wi t h l i t t l e
s p e c i f i c i t y. We be l i e ve , howe ve r , t ha t unde r t he r e l a xe d r e -
q u i r e me nt s f or pl e a di ng unde r t he Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Ci v i l
Pr o c e d u r e , t ha t t he de f e nda nt s ha ve be e n pl a c e d on s uf f i c i e n t
n o t i c e t o ma ke t he m a wa r e of t he c l a i ms a ga i ns t t he m. Fur t he r :
W a l s o be l i e ve t ha t . . . t he r e i s no l onge r a ny ne e d e f or pa r t i c ul a r i z e d da ma ge pl e a di ng. As we n o t e d i n Ha ndl e y v. M y, [ 588 S. W 2d 772, 774, - 76 Te nn. App. 1979] a . t he pur pos e of pl e a di ng und e r t he Te nne s s e e Rul e s o f Ci vi l Pr oc e dur e i s t o not i f y t he de f e nda nt of t he c l a i ms a ga i ns t hi m. The r e a r e a ny numbe r of de vi c e s , i nc l udi ng a mot i on f or mo r e de f i ni t e s t a t e me nt a nd t he va r i ous d i s c ove r y pr oc e dur e s , t ha t e na bl e pa r t i e s t o c l a r i f y t he
4 c l a i ms a ga i ns t t h e m. Not hi ng r e qui r e s a pl a i nt i f f t o p l e a d a l l da ma ge s wi t h mor e e xa c t ne s s a n d s pe c i f i c i t y t ha n t ha t r e qui r e d by t he Te n n e s s e e Rul e s of Ci vi l Pr oc e dur e . [ The pl a i nt i f f ' s ] c ompl a i nt me e t s t he s t a n- d a r ds of Te nn. R. Ci v. P. 8. I t ga ve t he de f e nda nt s s u f f i c i e nt not i c e of t he t ype of da ma g e s c l a i me d t o be s u f f e r e d. The r e f or e , we f i nd t ha t t he c omp l a i nt wa s p r ope r .
Ev a n s v. Na s hvi l l e Ba nne r Publ i s hi ng Co . , 1988 Te nn. App. LEXI S 638.
Ha vi ng now r e a c he d t he c onc l us i ons t ha t t he t or t ha s be e n
a d o p t e d i n Te nne s s e e a nd t ha t t h e p l a i nt i f f ' s c ompl a i nt s t a t e s a
c a us e o f a c t i on f or t or t i ous i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a bus i ne s s r e l a t i on -
s h i p , we mus t e xa mi ne t he pr opr i e t y of t he t r i a l c our t ' s a c t i on i n 1 g r a n t i n g de f e nda nt s ' mot i on f or j udgme nt on t hi s i s s ue .
W f i r s t not e t ha t t he c ompl a i nt c ont a i ns t wo c ount s . e On e i s
f o r d e f a ma t i on a nd t he s e c ond i s f or t or t i ous i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a
b u s i n e s s r e l a t i ons hi p. The de f e nda nt f i l e d a mot i on f or s umma r y
j u d g me n t on bot h c ount s . The mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt r e l a t i n g
t o d e f a ma t i on wa s pr e mi s e d upon t he pl a i nt i f f ' s i na bi l i t y t o pr o v e
d a ma ge s c a us e d b y t he a l l e ge d de f a ma t or y s t a t e me nt s . The mot i o n ,
as t o t ha t c ount wa s ove r r ul e d. As t o t he c ount f or t or t i o u s
i n t e r f e r e nc e wi t h a bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons hi p, t he de f e nda nt s ' mot i o n
s i mp l y s t a t e d " a c a u s e o f a c t i on f or i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a pr os p e c -
t i v e e c onomi c a dva nt a ge i s not a r e c ogni z e d c a us e of a c t i on un d e r
t he l a ws of t hi s s t a t e . " No c l a i m i s ma de ( a s t o e i t he r c ou n t )
1 W a r e n o t c o n c e r n e d wi t h t h e d e s i g n a t i o n o r t i t l e a t t a c h e d t o t h e c a u s e o f e a c t i o n . W a r e mo r e c o n c e r n e d t h a t a l l t h e n e c e s s a r y e l e me n t s a r e a l l e g e d . e " Re v i e wi n g c o u r t s mu s t a l wa y s l o o k t o t h e s u b s t a n c e o f t h e c h a l l e n g e d c o mp l a i n t r a t h e r t h a n i t s f o r m. " Us r e y v . Le wi s , 5 5 3 S. W 2 d 6 1 2 , 6 1 4 ( Te n n . Ap p . 1 9 7 7 ) ; . Ka y l o r v . Br a d l e y , 9 1 2 S. W 2 d 7 2 8 ( Te n n . Ap p . 1 9 9 5 ) . .
5 t ha t " t he r e i s no ge nui ne i s s u e a s t o a ny ma t e r i a l f a c t . " Se e Rul e
56. 03, Te nne s s e e Rul e s of Ci vi l Pr oc e dur e . W f eel e t ha t it is
i nf o r ma t i ve t o s e t out t he ma t e r i a l pa r t s of t he mot i on f or s umma r y
j ud g me n t . The mot i on, i n pe r t i ne nt pa r t , i s a s f ol l ows :
. . . [ A] s gr ounds f or t hi s mot i on, t he de f e nda nt s wo ul d s how unt o t he c our t a s f ol l ows :
( 1) Any da ma ge i nc ur r e d by t he pl a i nt i f f wa s not c a us e d by t he a l l e ge d de f a ma t or y s t a t e me nt s of J a me s Edwa r d Ha l e ;
( 2) A c a us e of a c t i on f or i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h a pr os pe c - t i ve e c onomi c a dva nt a ge i s not a r e c ogn i z e d c a us e of a c t i on unde r t he l a ws of t hi s s t a t e ; a nd
( 3) The pl a i nt i f f ha s not s uf f e r e d, a nd c a nnot pr ove , t ha t he i nc ur r e d da ma ge s a s a r e s ul t of t he a l l e ge d de f a ma t or y s t a t e me nt s of J a me s Edwa r d Ha l e .
Du r i ng or a l a r gume nt be f or e t hi s c our t , t he a ppe l l e e s de vo t e d
mu c h o f t he i r a r gume nt a nd s t r ongl y di r e c t e d our a t t e nt i on t o t h e
l a c k o f a s howi ng of da ma ge s by t he pl a i nt i f f i n r e s pons e t o t h e
d e f e n d a nt s ' mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt . W not e howe ve r , t ha t t h e e
t r i a l c o ur t i n gr a nt i ng t he mot i on, di d s o pur e l y a s a ma t t e r o f
l a w, r e l yi ng upon Kul t ur a , I nc . , s upr a a nd Qua l i t y Aut o Pa r t s ,
s upr a . Spe c i f i c a l l y, t he c our t , i n i t s me mor a ndum opi ni on s t a t e d :
The c our t i s of t he opi ni on, a s t o t he i s s ue of i nt e nt i ona l i nt e r f e r e nc e wi t h pr os pe c t i ve e c onomi c a dva nt a ge t ha t t hi s i s not a r e c ogni z e d c a us e of a c t i on i n Te nne s s e e . [ Ci t i ng Kul t ur a , s upr a . ]
Si n c e t he ba s i s of t he de f e nda nt s ' mot i on f or s umma r y
j u d g me n t , as s et out a bove , wa s pur e l y a que s t i on of l a w not
d i r e c t e d t owa r d " u ndi s put e d ma t e r i a l f a c t s " , t he pl a i nt i f f ha d no
6 n o t i c e t ha t he wo u l d be c a l l e d upon t o de mons t r a t e da ma ge s a s t o
t he s e c ond c ount . Fur t he r , wi t h no s uc h gr ound s t a t e d i n t h e
mo t i o n , he wa s unde r no obl i ga t i on t o do s o. W a r e not a t l i be r t y e
t o p r e s ume or a s s ume t ha t t he e vi de nc e f ound i n t he r e c or d be f o r e
u s i s a l l of t he e vi de nc e t ha t t he pl a i nt i f f i s a bl e t o pr oduc e o n
t hi s i s s ue .
The s t a nda r ds gove r ni ng a n a ppe l l a t e c our t ' s r e vi e w o f a t r i a l c our t ' s a c t i on on a mot i on f or s umma r y j u dgme nt a r e we l l s e t t l e d. Si nc e our i nqui r y i nvol ve s p u r e l y a que s t i on of l a w, no pr e s umpt i on of c or r e c t ne s s a t t a c he s t o t he t r i a l c our t ' s j udgme nt , a nd our t a s k i s c o nf i ne d t o r e vi e wi ng t he r e c or d t o de t e r mi ne whe t he r t he r e qui r e me nt s of Te nn. R. Ci v. P. 56 ha ve be e n me t . Cowde n v . Sovr a n Ba nk/ Ce nt r a l Sout h , 816 S. W 2d 741, 744 ( Te nn. . 1 9 91) . Te nn. R. Ci v. P. 56. 03 pr ovi de s t ha t s umma r y j u dgme nt i s onl y a ppr opr i a t e whe r e : ( 1) t he r e i s no g e nui ne i s s ue wi t h r e ga r d t o t he ma t e r i a l f a c t s r e l e va nt t o t he c l a i m or de f e ns e c ont a i ne d i n t he mot i on, Byr d v. Ha l l , 847 S. W 2d 208, 210 ( Te nn. 199 3 ) ; a nd ( 2) t he . mo vi ng pa r t y i s e nt i t l e d t o a j udgme nt a s ma t t e r of l a w o n t he undi s put e d f a c t s . An d e r s on v. St a nda r d Re gi s t e r Co. , 857 S. W 2d 555, 559 ( Te nn. 1993) . The movi ng pa r t y . h a s t he bur de n of pr ovi ng t ha t i t s mot i on s a t i s f i e s t he s e r e qui r e me nt s . Downe n v . Al l s t a t e I ns . Co . , 811 S. W 2 d . 5 2 3, 524 ( Te nn. 1991) .
Ca r v e l l v. Bot t oms , 900 S. W 2d 23 ( Te nn. 1995) . .
W a r e of t he opi ni on t ha t t he de f e nda nt s , t he movi ng pa r t i e s , e
h a v e f a i l e d t o me e t t he bur de n of pr ovi ng t ha t t he i r mot i on f o r
s u mma r y j udgme nt s a t i s f i e s t he r e qui r e me nt s s e t out a bove a nd t h a t
t he y a r e e nt i t l e d t o j udgme nt a s a ma t t e r of l a w. Ac c or di ngl y, we
f i nd t ha t t he mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt s houl d not ha ve b e e n
gr a nt e d.
7 W do not e e xpr e s s a ny opi ni on on t h e me r i t s of a ny i s s u e ,
ot he r t ha n t o hol d t ha t t he de f e nda nt s , ba s e d upon t he r e c o r d
b e f o r e us , a r e not e nt i t l e d t o j udg me n t a s a ma t t e r of l a w. Th e
j u d g me n t of t he t r i al c our t gr a nt i ng t he mot i on f or s umma r y
j u d g me n t i s r e ve r s e d.
Cos t s a r e a s s e s s e d t o t he a ppe l l e e s a nd t hi s c a s e i s r e ma nd e d
t o t he t r i a l c our t f or s uc h ot he r a nd f ur t he r a c t i on a s ma y b e
r e q u i r e d, c ons i s t e nt wi t h t he opi ni on of t hi s c our t .
____________________________ _ _ Don T. M M r a y, J . c ur
CONCUR:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________________________ Ch a r l e s D. Sus a no, J r . , J udge
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________________________ Ga r y R. W de , Spe c i a l J udge a
8 I N THE COURT OF APPEALS
PRI CE & PRI CE M ECHANI CAL, I NC. , ) HAM BLEN CHANCERY ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9612- CH- 00402 ) Pl a i nt i f f - Appe l l a nt ) ) ) ) ) ) vs . ) HON. BEN K. WEXLER ) CHANCELLOR, BY I NTERCHANGE ) ) ) ) ) J AM ES EDWARD HALE a nd HALE ) REVERSED AND REMANDED CONSTRUCTI ON COM PANY, I NC. , ) ) De f e nda nt s - Appe l l e e s )
JUDGMENT
Thi s a ppe a l c a me o n t o be he a r d upon t he r e c or d f r om t h e
Ch a n c e r y Cour t of Ha mbl e n Count y, br i e f s a nd a r gume nt of c ouns e l .
Up o n c o n s i de r a t i on t he r e of , t hi s Cour t i s of opi ni on t ha t t he r e wa s
r e v e r s i bl e e r r or i n t he t r i a l c our t .
The j udgme nt of t he t r i al c our t is r e ve r s e d. Cos t s ar e
a s s e s s e d t o t he a ppe l l e e s a nd t h i s c a s e i s r e ma nde d t o t he t r i a l
c our t f or s uc h ot he r a nd f ur t he r a c t i on as ma y be r e qui r e d ,
c o n s i s t e nt wi t h t he opi ni o n of t hi s c our t .
PER CURI AM