FILED

July 2, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate Court Clerk

I N THE COURT OF APPEALS

PRI CE & PRI CE MECHANI CAL, I NC. , ) HAMBLEN CHANCERY

 ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9612- CH- 00402

 )

 Pl a i ntif f - Appe lla nt )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

vs . ) HON. BEN K. WEXLER

 ) CHANCELLOR, BY I NTERCHANGE

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

J AMES EDWARD HALE a nd HALE ) REVERSED AND REMANDED

CONSTRUCTI ON COMPANY, I NC. , )

 )

 De f e nda nt s - Appe l l ees )

W. GARY BLACKBURN & MI CHELLE J ONES LONG, Bl a c kbur n, Sl obe y, Fr eema n

& Ha ppe ll, P. C. , Na s hville , for a ppe lla 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

Mc Mur r a y, J .

Thi s cas e i s be f or e t he cour t on an ext r a or di na r y a ppe a l

pur s ua nt 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 . The
2

s ol e i s s ue whi c h we ar 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 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 pr os pe c t i ve

e c onomi 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 he

pl a i ntif f ' s cl a i m on t he pr e mi s e t ha t Te nne s s e e doe s not r e c ogni z e

t he tor t, c iting Kul t ur a , I nc ., v. Sout he r n Le a s i ng, 923 S. W. 2d

536, ( Te nn. 1996) , quot i ng f r om Qua lity Aut o Pa r t s v. Bl uf f City

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 ect e d t he t or t nor

e xpr e s s l y embr aced i t . I n Qua lity Aut o Pa r t s , the c our t di d de f i ne

t he e l eme nt s tha t ma ke up the tor t a s f ollows :

Mos 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

i s c ompos e d of t he f ollowi ng e l eme nt s : ( 1) the exi s t e nc e

of 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 act i s not r e qui r e d) ; ( 2) knowl e dge by t he

i nt e rfe r e r of t he r e l a t i ons hi p or e xpe c t a nc y; ( 3) a n

i nt e ntiona l act of i nt e r f e r e nc e ; ( 4) pr oof t ha t t he

i nt e r f e r e nc e c a us e d t he 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. 4t h a t § 2[ a ] , p . 1 6; s e e

a l s o Cr a nda l l Cor p. v. Na vi s t a r I nt e r n. , 302 S. C. 265,

395 S. E. 2d 179 ( S. C. 1990) ; Commodor e v. Uni ve r s ity

Mecha ni cal Cont r . , 120 Wa s h. 2d 120, 839 P. 2d 314 ( Wa s h

1992) .

The c our t de t e r mi ne d tha t Qua lity Aut o Pa r t s ' c l a i m mus t f a i l

becaus e the c ompl a i nt di d not a lle ge two e s s e ntia l e l eme nt s of the

t or t — ( 1) t he exi s t e nce of a s peci f i c pr os pect i ve empl oyme nt

r e l a t i ons 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 hi p.

The c our t t he n s t a t e d:

We 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

r ecogni zes the tor t of int e ntiona l int e r f e r e nc e with

pr 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 not he r da y whe n we ar e s qua r e l y pr e s e nt e d wi t h a case i n
3

whi c h al l of t he el e me nt s of t he t or t ha ve been al l e ge d

or ot he r wi s e e s t a bl i s he d. ...

I d, page 823.

The c our t i n Kul t ur a , I nc ., s upr a , ne i t he r accept e d nor

r e j ect e d t he t or t , obs e r vi ng t ha t no da ma ge s ha d be e n s hown.

The r eaf t e r , thi s c our t in Ne w Li f e Cor p. v. Thoma s Ne l s on, I nc . ,

932 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 ul 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 vor of 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 or

a tr i a l on the me r its .

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 :

... In Ka n Cons t . & Cl e a ni ng Cor p. v. Ta t um, No

01A01- 9304- CV- 00150, 1993 WL 434741 ( Te nn. App. W. S. , Oc t

27 1993, t he c our t s t a t e d:

The el e me nt s of t he t or t of i nt e r f e r e nce wi t h

bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons a r e a l s o s e t out i n 45 AmJ ur . 2d

I nt e rfe r e nc e 50 ( 1969) .

The ba s i c el e me nt s whi c h es t a bl i s h a pr i ma

f aci 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 ons hi p ar e t he exi s t e nce of a va l i d bus 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 tions hi p or e xpe c t a nc y on t he pa r t of t he

i nt e rfe 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

caus i ng a br each or t e r mi na t i on of t he r e l a t i ons hi p

or expect a nc y; and r e s ul t a nt da 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.

We ar 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 lity

Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e Cor p. , ins of a r a s the e l eme nt s of the tor t

a r e concer ne d.
4

I t is we ll- s e ttle d la w tha t t he Supr e me Cour t i s not bound by

a de c i s i on of an i nt e r me di a t e appe l l a t e c our t e ve n whe n c e r t i or a r i

or pe 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 on Gr e e n, i n Br ya n v. Ae t na Li f e I ns . Co. , 174 Te nn. 602, 130

S. W. 2d 85 ( 1939) : " We ha ve r e pe a t e dl y poi nt e d out 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

Appe a l s doe s not c ommi t us t o a l l t he vi e ws e xpr e s s e d i n a

pa r tic ul a r opi ni on. We 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 on

with t he r e s ul t r eache d. " 174 Te nn. a t 611, 130 S. W. 2d a t 88.

We i ghi ng onl y t he r e s ul t i n Ne w Li f e Cor p. in the light of Qua lity

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 de tha t the

Supr e me Cour t ha s implic itly r ecogni z e d t he t or t . We a r e of t he

opi ni on t ha t t he t or t i s now r e c ogni z e d in thi s jur i s di c tion a nd s o

hol d.

Upon c ons i de r a t i on of t he e nt i r e c ompl a i nt , we a r e of t he

opi ni on tha t s uf f i c i e nt fa c t s ha ve been al 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 lity Aut o Pa r t s a nd Ne w Li f e ,

s upr a . We acknowl e dge t ha t da ma ge s ha ve been pl ead wi t h l i t t l e

s pe c i f i c ity. We be l i e ve , howe ve r , t ha t unde r t he r e l a xe d r e -

qui r e me nt s f or pl e a di ng unde r t he Te nne s s ee Rul e s of Ci vi l

Pr oc e dur 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 nt

not i ce t o ma ke t he m awa r e of t he cl a i ms aga i ns t t he m. Fur t he r :

We 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

f or pa r t i c ul a r i zed da ma ge pl eadi ng. As we not e d in

Ha ndl e y v. Ma y, [ 588 S. W. 2d 772, 774, - 76 Te nn. App. 1979]

t he pur pos e of pl e a di ng unde r t he Te nne s s ee Rul e s of

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 cl a i ms

a ga i ns t hi m. The r e ar e any numbe r of de vi c e s , i nc l udi ng

a mot i on f or mor e de f i ni t e s t a t e me nt a nd t he va r i ous

di s c ove r y pr oc e dur e s , t ha t ena bl e pa r t i e s to c l a r i f y the
1We ar e not conc e r n e d wi t h t h e des i gna t i on or t i t l e at t a c h e d t o t h e ca u s e of

a c t i on. We ar e mo r e co n cer n e d t h a t al l t h e nec e s s a r y el e me n t s ar e al l e g e d .

" Re v i e wi n g co u r t s mu s t al wa y s l o o k t o t h e subs t a n ce o f t h e ch a l l e n g e d comp l a i n t

r a t h e r tha n it s f o r m. " Us r e y v . Le wi s , 553 S. W. 2d 612, 614 ( Te nn. App. 1977) ;

Ka y l o r v . Br a d l e y , 912 S. W. 2d 728 ( Te nn. App. 1995) .

5

c l a i ms aga i ns t the m. Not hi ng r e qui r e s a pl a i ntif f to

pl ead al l da ma ge s wi t h mor e exact ne s s a nd s pe c i f i c ity

t ha n t ha t r e qui r e d by t he Te nne s s ee Rul e s of Ci vi l

Pr oc e dur e . [ The pl a i ntif f ' s ] c ompl a i nt me e t s the s t a nda r ds of Te nn. R. Ci v. P. 8. I t ga ve t he de f e nda nt s

s uffi c i e nt not i c e of t he t ype of da ma ge s c l a i me d t o be

s uffe r e d. The r e f or e , we f i nd t ha t t he compl a i nt wa s

pr ope r .

Eva ns v. Na s hville 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 dopt e d i n Te nne s s e e a nd t ha t t he pl a i ntif f ' s c ompl a i nt s t a t e s a

caus e of 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 tions hi p, we mus t e xa mi ne t he pr opr i e t y of the tr i a l c our t ' s a c tion in

gr a nt i ng de f e nda nt s ' mot i on f or j udgme nt on t hi s i s s ue .

1

We f i r s t not e tha t the c ompl a i nt c ont a i ns t wo c ount s . One is

f or de 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

bus i ne 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 udgme nt 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 ng

t o de f a ma t i on wa s pr e mi s e d upon t he pl a i ntif f ' s ina bility to pr ove

da ma ge s caus e d by t he al l e ge d de f a ma t or y s t a t e me nt s . The mot i on,

a s 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 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 ons hi p, t he de f e nda nt s ' mot i on

s i mpl y s t a t e d "a cause of act i on f or i nt e r f e r e nce wi t h a pr os pect i ve 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 unde r

t he l a ws of t hi s s t a t e . " No cl a i m i s ma de ( a s t o ei t he r count )
6

t ha t "t he r e i s no ge nui ne i ssu e a s t o any ma t eri a l f a c t . " Se e Rul e

56. 03, Te nne s s ee Rul e s of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e . We f eel t ha t i t is

i nf or ma tive to s e t out the ma t e r i a l pa r t s of the motion for s umma r y

j udgme nt. The motion, in pe r tine nt pa r t, is a s f ollows :

... [ A] s gr ounds f or t hi s mot i on, t he de f e nda nt s

woul 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 the pl a i ntif f wa s not caus e d

by t he al 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 caus e of act i on f or i nt e r f e r e nce wi t h a pr os pective economi c adva nt a ge i s not a r ecogni z e d caus 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 as a r e s ul t of t he al 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 .

Dur i ng or a l a r gume nt be f or e t hi s c our t , t he appe l l ees de vot e d

muc h of 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 he

l ack of 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 he

de f e nda nt s ' mot i on f or s umma r y j udgme nt . We not e howe ve r , t ha t t he

t r i a l c our 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 of

l a w, r e l yi ng upon Kul t ur a , I nc . , s upr a a nd Qua lity Aut o Pa r t s ,

s upr a . Speci f i cal l y, the c our t, in 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 ntiona l i nt e r f e r e nce wi t h pr os pect i ve economi c

a dva nt a ge t ha t t hi s i s not a r ecogni zed caus e of act i on

i n Te nne s s e e . [Citing Kultur a , s upr a . ]

Si nc 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 udgme nt , a s s e t out a bove , wa s pur e l y a que s t i on of l a w not

di r ect e d t owa r d "undi s put e d ma t e r i a l f act s " , t he pl a i nt i f f ha d no
7

not i c e tha t he woul 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 , with no s uc h gr ound s t a t e d i n t he

mot i on, he wa s unde r no obl i ga t i on t o do s o. We a r e not a t libe r t y

t o pr 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 or e

us is a ll of the e vi de nc e tha t the pl a i ntif f i s a bl e t o pr oduc e on

t hi s is 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

of 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 udgme nt a r e we ll s e ttle d. Si nc e our inqui r y i nvol ve s

pur 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 onf 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.

1991) . Te nn. R. Ci v. P. 56. 03 pr ovi de s t ha t s umma r y

j udgme nt i s onl y a ppr opr i a t e whe r e : ( 1) t he r e i s no

ge nui ne is s ue with r e ga r d t o t he ma t e r i a l f act 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. 1993) ; a nd ( 2) t he

movi 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

on t he undi s put e d f a c t s . Ande 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

ha 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 the 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. 2d

523, 524 ( Te nn. 1991) .

Ca r ve ll v. Bottoms , 900 S. W. 2d 23 ( Te nn. 1995) .

We 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 ,

ha ve fa 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 for

s umma r y judgme nt s a tis f i e s t he r e qui r e me nt s s e t out a bove a nd t ha t

t he y a r e e nt i t l e d to judgme nt a s a ma t t e r of law. 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 be e n

gr a nt e d.
8

We do not e xpr e s s a ny opi ni on on the me r i t s of a ny i s s ue ,

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 or d

be f or e us , a r e not e ntitle d to judgme nt a s a ma t t e r of l a w. The

j udgme nt of t he t r i a l c our t gr a nt i ng t he mot i on f or s umma r y

j udgme nt i s r e ve r s e d.

Cos t s ar e as s e s s e d t o t he appe l l ees and t hi s cas 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 a s ma y be

r e qui 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. Mc Mur r a y, J .

CONCUR:

___________________________________

Cha r l e s D. Sus a no, J r . , J udge

___________________________________

Ga r y R. Wa de , Speci a l J udge
I N THE COURT OF APPEALS

PRI CE & PRI CE MECHANI CAL, I NC. , ) HAMBLEN CHANCERY

 ) C. A. NO. 03A01- 9612- CH- 00402

 )

 Pl a i ntif f - Appe lla nt )

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

vs . ) HON. BEN K. WEXLER

 ) CHANCELLOR, BY I NTERCHANGE

 )

 )

 )

 )

 )

J AMES EDWARD HALE a nd HALE ) REVERSED AND REMANDED

CONSTRUCTI ON COMPANY, I NC. , )

 )

 De f e nda nt s - Appe l l ees )

JUDGMENT

Thi s appeal c a me on t o be he a r d upon t he r e c or d f r om t he

Cha nc 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 .

Upon c ons 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 ve r s i bl e e r r or in the tr i a l c our t .

The j udgme nt of t he t r i a l c our t i s r e ve r s e d. Cos t s a r e

a sse sse d t o t he appe l l ees and t hi 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 a s ma y be r e qui 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 .

 PER CURI AM