SECOND DI VI SI ON DOYLE, C. J.

, M I LLER, P. J, and REESE, J.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

June 22, 2017



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 7 A0 38 9

. SW ANSON TOW ING & RECOVERY, LLC et al

. v

. W RECKER 1 , INC., et al

. DO-0 1 5

D O Y LE , Ch ief J ud g e.

W reck er 1

, In c., an d i ts own er, St acy Ri ch ard s o n, ( c olle c tive ly

, “ the pla i n t i ffs ”)

s u ed Swan s o n T o wi n g & Reco very , LLC; Ni ck Gro u p , LLC; Sarah Ch a; an d Am an d a

M cCal l i s t er (co l l ect i v el y , “ t h e d efen d an t s”) fo r t o rt i o u s i n t erferen ce wi t h b u s i n es s

rel at i o n s , l i b el

, an d s l an d er. Th e d efen d an t s m o v ed fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, an d t h e

t ri al co urt d en i ed t h e m o t i o n , cert i fy i ng i t s ru l i n g fo r i m m ed i at e rev i ew. 1 Th i s Co u rt

g ran t ed t h e d efen d an t s ’ ap p l i cat i o n f or inte r loc utor

y r e vie w , a nd th i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

1 Th e t ri al co u rt g ran t ed su m m ary ju d g m en t t o t he d efen d an ts as t o Ri ch ard s o n ’ s i n d i v i d u al cl ai m fo r t o rt io u s i n t erferen ce wi t h b u s i n es s rel at i o n s. Th at ru l in g i s n o t at is s u e i n t h i s ap p eal

.Becau s e t h e d efen d an t s w ere en t i t l ed t o j u d gm en t as a m at t er o f l aw, we rev ers e t h e

t ri al co u rt ’ s d en ial o f t hei r s u m m ary ju d g m en t m o t i o n.

“ ‘ On ap p eal fro m t h e g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t t h i s Co u rt co nd u ct s a d e

n o v o rev iew o f t h e ev i d en ce t o det erm i n e wh et h er t here i s a g en u i n e i s s u e o f m at eri al

fact an d wh et h er t h e u n d i s p u ted fact s , v i ewed i n t h e l i g h t m o s t fa v o r a b le t o t h e

n o n m o v i n g p art y , warran t ju d g m en t as a m at ter o f l aw.’ ” 2

So v i ewed

, t h e rel ev an t fact s s h o w t h at fo r s ev eral y ears , St ev e Ri ch ard so n

o p erat ed a t o wi n g co m

p an y cal l ed Si l en t Ni g h t Reco very an d Tran s p ort

, In c., t h e s o l e

b u s i n es s o f wh i ch was n o n -co n s en s u al to wi n g

. In 2 0 0 7

, p u r s u a n t t o a co n s en t

ag reem en t wi t h Si l en t Ni g h t

, t h e Pu b l i c Serv ice Co m m i s s io n (“ t h e PSC”) rev o k ed

Si l en t N i g h t ’ s pe r

m i t to c onduc t n o n -co n s en s u al to wi n g , i m p o s ed a fi n e ag ai n s t Si l en t

Ni g ht

, an d o rd ered it to p ay res t i t u t i o n t o co n s um ers

. In a pres s rel eas e, t h e PSC n o t ed

t h at “ Si l en t Ni gh t h ad v i o lat ed s t at e l aw an d Co m m i s s i o n ru l es , i n cl u d i n g p ro v i d i n g

fal s e b u s i n es s ad dres s es , i m p ro p er s i g n ag e, fai l in g t o fi le pro o f o f p ro p er i n s u ran ce

wi t h t h e Co m

m i s si o n[,] an d ex ceed in g t h e m ax i m u m t a r i f f rat e ap pro v ed b y t h e

Co m m i s s i o n .”

2 Met ro At la nt a Ta s k Fo r ce f o r t h e Ho mel es s, In c. v. Ich t hu s Co mmu n i t y Tr u s t

, 2 9 8
Ga. 2 2 1

, 2 2 4 (1 ) (b ) (7 8 0 SE2 d 3 1 1 ) (2 0 1 5 ), q u o t i n g G i l es v. Swi mmer , 2 9 0 Ga. 6 5 0 (1 ) (7 2 5 SE2 d 2 2 0 ) (2 01 2 ).

2A r o u n d t h e s am e t i m e, i n J an u ary 2 0 0 7

, St ev e’ s wi fe, St acy Ri ch ard s o n,

i n co rp o rat ed h er o w n t o wi ng co m p an y , W reck er 1

. St ev e wo rk ed fo r W reck er 1,

ad v is ed St acy wi t h res p ect t o t h e b u s i n es s, an d ad vo c a t e d fo r t h e co m p an y wi th

g o v ern m en t en t i t i es i n cl u d i n g t h e PSC. In i t i al l y , W reck er 1 o n l y p ro v i d ed co n s ensua l

t o wi n g s erv i ces

– t owi n g req ues t ed b y t h e v eh icl e’ s own er. In 2 0 09

, h o wev er, St acy ,

wi t h as si s t an ce fro m St ev e, s o u g ht t o b e ad d ed t o Hen ry Co u n t y ’ s l i s t o f ap p ro v ed

t o wi n g s erv i ces fo r n on -co n s en s u al t o ws req u es t ed b y p u b l i c o ffi ci al s

. 3 In M ay 2 0 1 1,

W reck er 1 was ad d ed t o t h e Co u n ty ’ s ap pro v ed li s t. A t t h a t t i m e, o n ly t wo o t h er

co m p an i es were o n t h e l i s t , o n e o f wh i ch was Swan s o n

. 4

Acco rd i ng t o t he d efen d an t s , t h e ad d i t io n o f W re c k e r 1 t o t h e Co u n t y l i s t o f

ap p ro v ed wreck ers w as fi n an ci al l y d ev as t at i ng

. Bo th Sarah Ch a, t h e own er o f

Swan s o n , an d Am an d a M cCal l i s t er, a l o n g -t erm em p l o y ee of t h e co m

p an y , s en t

3 Pu rs u an t t o Hen ry

Co un t y W reck er Ord i n an ce 0 8 -0 3

, ch

. 3-4

, art

. III, § 3 -4 -3 3 4

,

a co p y o f wh i ch ap p ears i n t h e reco rd

, t h e Co u n t y m ai n t ai ned a l i s t a p p r o v e d wreck er

co m p an i es an d h ad a “ W reck er Serv i ces Co m m i t t ee” t h at en fo rced t h e o rd i n an ce

p ro v i s i o n s, accep t ed ap pl icat i o n s an d ad d ed q ual i fi ed wreck ers , an d rev ok ed o r s u s p en d ed
wreck er co m

p an i es i f ap p ro p ri at e aft er a d u e cau s e h eari n g

. Th e C om m itte e was au t h o ri zed

t o en fo rce a fee s ch ed ul e t hat ap p ro v ed wreck er co m pan i es co u ld ch arg e.

4 Befo re W reck er 1 w as ad ded t o t h e li s t, Swan s o n co n d u ct ed to ws in t h e n o rt hern

p o rt i o n o f t h e co u n t y , an d a s ep arat e co m p an y

– E l k i n s – o p erat ed i n t h e s o u t hern p ort i o n

. On ce W reck er 1 was a d d e d t o t h e l i s t

, t h ey sh ared t o ws i n t h e n o rt h ern po rt i o n w i t h

Swan s o n.

3co rres p o n d en ce t o t h e Co u n t y m an ag er an d v ari o u s Co u n t y co m m i s s i o n ers to

co m p l ai n ab o u t t h e fi n an ci al h ard s h i p. 5 Sev eral o f t h e m es s ag es al s o co n v ey ed

co m p l ai n t s recei v ed ab o u t W reck er 1 ’ s bu s in es s in t eg ri t y an d b i l l i n g h ab i t s

. In o ne,

M cCal l i s t er wro t e “ I d o n ’ t s ee h o w W reck er 1 can ev en ca l l t h e m s el v es an

u p s t an d in g co m

p an y .” In an o t her, s h e wro t e t h at W reck er 1

h as n o m o ral s [ a n d ] n o reg ard fo r t h e Ci t i zen s o f Hen ry Co u n t y

. . . . [W reck er 1] u s ed t o b e u n d er t h e n am e “ Si l en t Kn i g h t [s i c] To wi ng an d

g o t i n HOT w at er wi t h t h e [PSC]

. . . s o t h ey ch an g ed th ei r n am e t o

W reck er 1.

. . . [W reck er 1 ] co n t i n u e [ s ] t o o v erch arg e o n 9 5 % o f t h ei r

cal l s

. . . . W e wo u l d t hi n k t h at t h e p eo p le [an d ] o ffi ci al s o f Hen ry

Co u nt y wo u l d wan t v al u ab l e wreck er s erv i ces d eal i n g w ith the i r ci t i zen s

. . . n o t a m ean , vu lg ar, d em ean i n g [] cro o k l i k e St ev e [an d ] S t a c y

Ri ch ard s o n o f W reck er 1

.

Ch a al so s en t l et t ers s t at i n g t h at W reck er 1 an d Si len t Ni g ht were t h e s am e co m p an y

.

At s om e p oi nt

, Swan so n h eard fro m a GEICO i n s u ran ce ad ju st er, Su m

m er

Sm it h

, reg ard i n g co m

p l ai nt s of o v er-ch arg i n g by W reck er 1

. Swan s o n rel ay ed t h o s e

co m p l ai n t s t o t he Co u n t y an d en co u rag ed Sm i t h to co n t act th e Co un t y d i rect l y

. Sm i th

d i d s o ; s h e al s o h ad a m eet i n g wi t h t h e ci t y m an ag er. In Feb ru ary 2 0 1 2 , t h e Co u n t y

5 El k i n s , t h e o t h er ap pro ved wreck er o n t h e Co u n t y l i s t, al s o m ad e co m p l ai n t s ab o u t
W reck er 1

.

4h el d a d u e cau s e h eari n g reg ard i n g th e co m p l ai n t s

. N o n e o f t h e d efen d an t s were

p res en t at t h e heari ng , an d St acy co n ced es t hat th e defen d an t s h ad “ [n o t h i n g ] t o d o

wi t h t he ev i d en ce

. . . p ro vi ded at t h e h eari n g .” In Ap ri l 2 01 2

, b as ed u p o n ev i d en ce

i n t ro du ced at t h e h eari n g , t h e Co u n t y s u s p en d ed W reck er 1 fro m to wi n g fo r 9 0 day s

aft er co n cl u d i n g t h at i t h ad o v erch arg ed cu s to m ers o n 2 4 o ccas i o n s

.

U n rel at ed to t h e d efen dan t s ’ co m p lai n t s , t h e W reck er Serv i ces Co m m i t t e e

recei v ed a co m

p l ai n t fro m L ee Ham l i n reg ard i n g a cl ai m o f o v erch arg i n g. In 2 0 1 2,

a t ru ck own ed b y Ham l i n was i n a n acci d en t wi t h a t ru ck o wn ed b y Pen s k e, an d

W r e c k e r 1 cl eared Ham l i n ’ s t ru ck fro m t h e ro ad w ay ; Ham l i n o ffered t o p ay fo r

s erv i ces ren d ered i n m o vi n g t h e t ru ck t o t h e s h o u l der, b u t req u es t ed t h at W reck er 1

n o t t o w t he t ru ck fro m t he s cen e. W reck er 1 n o t o n l y d i s reg ard ed Ham l i n ’ s req u es t

,

i t al s o ch arg ed h i m $ 1 1

, 6 4 7 .7 5 fo r t h e t o w.

On Au g us t 2 8

, 2 0 12

, t h e W reck in g Serv i ce Co m m i t t ee co n d u ct ed a d u e cau s e

h eari n g on Ham l i n ’ s co m p lai nt

. Al t h o u g h W reck er 1 recei v ed n o t i ce o f t he h eari n g,

n o o n e fro m th e co m

p an y at t en d ed t h e h eari n g

. Th e Co m m i t t ee i s s u ed a w ri t t en ru l i n g

fi nd i ng t hat W reck er 1 h ad o v erch arg ed Ham l i n b y $ 7,8 2 2 .7 5

. 6 Al t h o u gh Pen s k e d id

6 Th e Co m

m i t t ee al s o no t ed t h at W reck er 1 at t em p t ed to s el l Ham l i n’ s veh i cl e wh en h e refu s ed to p ay

t he ex ces s i v e i n v o i ce.

5n o t co n t es t i t s b i l l

, t h e Co m m i t t ee al s o rev i ewed W reck er 1 ’ s $1 3

, 9 6 5 i nv o i ce to

Pen sk e an d fo un d t h at W reck er 1 o ver-ch arg ed Pen s k e by $ 1 3,0 55

. Bas ed u p o n t h e

fi nd i ng o f o v erch arg es t o P e n s k e an d Ham l i n, fal si fi cat i o n o f i n v o i ces , an d t h e

ev i d en ce s u p p o rt i n g W reck er 1 ’ s p ri or s u s pen s i on , th e Co m m i t tee perm an en t l y

rem o v ed W reck er 1 fro m i t s l i st o f au t h o ri zed t o wi n g co m p an i es

.

Th e s am e d ay as t h e h eari n g , W reck er 1 an d St acy Ri ch ard s o n fi led s u i t ag ai n s t

t h e Swan s o n d efen dan t s , al l eg i n g a cl ai m fo r t o rt i o u s i n t erferen ce wi t h b u s i n es s

rel at i o n s

. S p eci fi cal l y , t h e p l ai n t i ffs al l eg ed t hat Swan s o n was res p o n s i b l e fo r

W reck er 1 ’s r e m o v a l fro m t he Co u n t y ’ s l i s t o f au t h o ri zed wreck ers

. In Sep t em b er

2 0 1 2

, t h e p l ai n ti ffs am en d ed t h e co m p l ai n t t o i n cl u de cl ai m s f o r l i b el an d s l an d er

b as ed u p o n co m

m en t s m ad e b y Ch a an d McCal l i s t e r t h at al l eg ed l y s oi l ed t h e

p l ai n t i ffs ’ rep u tat i o n s an d l i n ked W reck er 1

, erro n eo u s l y , wi t h Si len t Ni g h t

. Swan so n

m o ved fo r s u m

m ary j u d gm en t o n al l t h ree cl ai m s , an d t h e t ri al c o u rt d en i ed t h e

m o ti o n

. Th i s ap peal fo l l owed

.

1

. To r t i o u s i nt er

f er en ce wi t h b u s i n es s r el a t io n s

. Th e defen d an t s arg u e t h at t h e

t ri al co u rt erred b y

d en y i ng t h ei r m o t i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t as t o t h e p l ai n t i ffs ’

cl ai m o f t o rt i o us i n t erferen ce wi t h b u s i nes s rel at i o n s . W e ag ree.

6“ To rt i o u s i n t erferen ce cl a im s, w he the r a ss ert i ng i n t erferen ce w i t h

co n t ract u al rel at i o n s , b u s i n es s rel at i o n s , o r p o t en t i al b u s i n es s rel at i o ns ,

s h a r e cert ai n co m

m o n es s en t i al el em en t s : (1 ) im pro p er act i o n o r

wro n g fu l co n d u ct b y t h e d efen d an t [s ] wi t h ou t p ri vi l e g e; (2 ) th e

d efen d an t [s ] act ed pu rp o s el y an d wi t h m al i ce wi th t h e i n t en t t o i n ju re; (3 ) t h e d efen d an t [s ] i nd u ced a breach o f co n t ract u al ob l i g at io n s o r

c a u s ed a p art y o r th ird p art i es t o d i s co n t i nu e or fai l t o en t er i n t o a n

an t i ci p at ed bu s i n es s rel at i o n s h i p wi t h t h e p l ai n t iff[s ] ; an d (4 ) th e

d efen d an t [s ’ ] to rt i o u s co n d u ct p ro x i m at el y cau s ed d am ag e t o th e

p l ai n t i ff[s ] .” 7

Here, p ret erm i t t i n g wh et h er t he p l ai n ti ffs can es t ab l is h t he fi rs t two el em en t s ,

t h ey h av e fai l ed t o es t ab l i s h t h at i t was t h e d efen d an t s ’ co n d uct t h at i n d u ced Hen ry

Co u n t y t o re m o v e W reck er 1 fro m t h e l i s t o f au t ho ri zed t o wi ng s erv i ces

. Ev en

as s u m in g t h at th e d efen d an t s ’ co n d u ct i n m ak i n g co m p l ai n t s an d en co u rag i n g Sm i th

t o d o t h e s am e in s ti g at ed t h e i n ves t ig at i on , t h e Co u n ty d i d no t su s p en d an d u l t i m at el y

t erm i n at e W reck er 1 ’ s s t at u s b as ed u p o n t h e d e f en d an ts ’ co m

pl ai n t s

. Rat h er, t h e

Co u n t y co nd u ct ed h eari n gs at wh i ch i t t o o k i n e v i d e n ce fro m Ham l i n an d Sm i th

b efo re m ak i n g i ts d eci s i o n s reg ard i n g W reck er 1

. T h e d efen dan t s di d n o t p art i ci p at e

at ei th er h eari n g

. Un d er t h es e ci rcu m s t an ces , t h e p l ai n t i ffs hav e fai led t o d em o n s t rat e

7 Ch a n ey v. H

a rr i s o n & Lyn a m, LLC

, 3 0 8 Ga. Ap p

. 80 8

, 8 1 8 (2 ) (7 0 8 SE2 d 6 7 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ), qu o t i n g Ki rkl an d v. Ta mp l i n , 2 8 5 Ga. Ap p

. 2 4 1

, 2 4 3 (1 ) (6 4 5 SE2 d 6 5 3 ) (2 0 0 7 ).

7t h at t h e d efen d an t s ei t h er i n d u ced H en ry Co u nt y t o d i s co n t i n u e t h e b u s i n es s

rel at i o n s h i p wi t h W reck er 1 o r p ro x i m a t e l y cau s ed W reck er 1 ’ s d am ag es

. 8

Acco rd in g ly , W reck er 1 ’ s cl ai m fo r t o rt i o u s i n t erferen ce fai ls as a m at t er o f l aw. 9

2

. Def a ma t i o n

. Th e d efen d an t s al s o al leg e t h at t h e tri al co u rt erred b y d en y i n g

t h ei r m o t i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t as t o t h e p l ai n t i ffs ’ cl ai m s fo r l i b el an d s l an d er.

Ag ai n , we ag ree.

Fi rs t

, we n o t e t h at t h e cl ai m s are n ot p art i cu l arl y wel l s et fo rt h i n t h e am en d ed

co m p l ai n t

, wh i ch al l eg es t h at C h a an d M cCal l i st er “ p u b li s h ed an d co m m u n i cat ed

d efam at o ry s t at em en t s

. ” Th e ex act d efam at o ry s t at em en t s are n ot i d en t i fi ed

. Befo re

t h e tri al co u rt

, W reck er 1 p oi n t e d t o s t at em en t s m ad e b y t h e d efen d an ts eq u at i n g

8 See Tr i beca Ho mes
, LLC v. Ma r a t h o n In v. Co r p

. , 3 2 2 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 6, 59 9 (2 ) (7 4 5
SE2 d 8 0 6 ) (2 01 3) (t o rt i o u s i n terferen ce cl ai m fai l ed b ecau s e pl ai n t i ff co ul d n o t s h o w t h at

, i n d ep en d en t o f al l eg ed m i s d eed s, t h e res ul t wo u ld h av e b een d i fferen t ); Ba r n wel l v. Ba r n et t & Co

., 22 2 Ga. Ap p

. 6 9 4

, 6 9 5 (1 ) (4 7 6 SE2 d 1 ) ( 1 9 9 6 ) (d efen d an t co u l d n o t b e h el d l i ab l e fo r t ort io us i n t erferen ce b ecau s e t he d efen d an t h ad n o i n p u t i n d eci si o n

m ak i ng ).

9 See Du ke Ga l i s h

, LLC v

. M a n t o n , 2 9 1 Ga. A pp

. 8 2 7

, 8 32 (1 ) (6 6 2 SE2 d 8 8 0 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

8W reck er 1 wi t h t h e d efu n ct Si l en t Ni g h t

, w h i ch W re ck er 1 al leg es “ s oi l [ed i t s ]

rep u t at i o n .”

OCGA § 5 1 -5 -1 d efi n es l i b el as “ a fal s e an d m al i ci o us d efam at i on o f an o t h er,

ex p res s ed i n p ri n t, wri t i ng , p i ct u res , o r s ig n s , t en di n g t o i n j u re t h e rep u t at i o n o f t h e

p ers o n an d ex p os i ng hi m t o p ub l i c h at red

, co n t em p t

, o r ri d i cu l e.” Sl an der m ay co n s i s t

o f “ [m ] ak i n g ch arg es ag ai ns t an o t h er i n referen ce to [h er] t rad e, o ffi ce, o r pro fes s i o n,

cal cu l at ed t o i n

ju re [h er.] ” 1 0 Bo t h l i b el an d s l an d er co n s t i t u t e d efam at i o n

. 1 1

Gen eral ly

, t h ere are fo u r el em en t s i n a cau s e o f a ct io n fo r d efam at i o n : (1 ) a fal s e an d defam at o ry st at em en t co n cern in g t he p l ai n t i ff; (2 ) an

u n p ri v il eg ed co m

m u n i cat i o n t o a t hi rd p art y ; (3 ) fau l t b y t h e d efen d an t

am o u nt i n g at l eas t t o n eg l i g en c e ; a n d (4 ) s p eci al h arm o r th e

act i o n ab i li t y

o f t h e s t at em en t i rres pect i v e o f s p eci al h arm

. 1 2

(a) McCa l l i s ter ’s s ta t emen t s t h a t W r ecker 1 ha s “n o m or a ls ” a n d t h a t t h e

Ri ch a r ds o ns a r e “cr o o k[ s ] .”

1 0 OCGA § 5 1 -5 -4 (a) (3 ).

1 1 See Aj o uel o v. Au t o -S

o l er Co

. , 6 1 Ga. Ap p . 2 16 -2 2 1 (6 SE2 d 4 1 5 ) (1 9 3 9 ).

1 2 (Pu n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed

. ) Ren t o n v. W a ts o n , 3 1 9 Ga. Ap p

. 8 9 6

, 9 0 0 (2 ) (7 3 9 SE2 d

1 9 ) (2 0 13 ), q u o ti n g W

er t z v. Al len , 3 1 3 Ga. Ap p . 2 0 2 , 2 0 5 (1 ) (7 2 1 SE2 d 1 2 2 ) (2 0 1 1 ).

9In an em ai l t o a Co u n t y o ffi ci al

, McCal l i st er al leg ed t h at W reck er 1 “ h ad n o

m o ral s ” an d ch aract eri zed t h e Ri ch ard s o n s as “ m ean , v u l g ar, d em ean in g [] cro o k [s ] .”

Th es e s t at em en t s are n o t act i o nab l e b ecau s e t h ey are ex p res s i o n s o f o p i n i o n

.

[A] d efam at i on act i o n wi l l l i e o n l y fo r a s t at em en t o f fact

. T h is i s

b ecau s e a s t at em en t t hat refl ect s an o p i n io n o r s ub ject iv e as ses s m en t

, as

t o wh i ch reas o n ab l e m i nd s co u l d d i f f e r, can n o t be p ro v ed fal s e. As a

res u lt

, a p l ai n t i ff wh o cl ai m s t h at a p ub l is h ed o p i n io n d efam ed hi m wi l l

g en eral l y b e u nab l e t o carry h i s bu rd en o f p ro v i n g t h e es s en t i al el em en t

o f fal s i t y

. St i ll

, t here i s n o wh o l es al e d efam at i o n ex cep t i o n fo r an y t h i n g

t h at m i g h t b e l ab el ed o p i n i o n

. 1 3

W i t h reg ard t o i m

p li cat i o n s o f cri m i n al act i v i t y ,

t h e wo rd s at is s u e m

u s t ch arg e t h e co m

m is s io n of a s peci fi c cri m e

p u n i s h ab l e b y l aw. W h ere t h e p l ai n i m p ort o f t he wo rd s s p o ken i m p ut e

n o cri m i n al o ffen s e, t h ey can n o t h av e th ei r m ean i n g en l arg ed b y

i n n u en d o

. In d eed

, t he st at em en t m u s t g i v e t h e i m

pres s i o n t h at t h e cri m e

i s act u al ly b ei n g ch arg ed ag ai n s t t h e i nd i v i d u al an d co u ch ed i n l an g u ag e

as m i g h t reas o nab l y be ex p ect ed t o co nv ey s u ch m ean i n g t o a h earer o f

t h e s t at em en t; a vag u e st at em en t o r ev en a d ero g at o ry o n e d o es n o t

am o u nt t o s l an d er per s e wh en a p ers o n can n o t reas o n ab l y co n cl u de

1 3 (Pu n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .) Co t t r el l v. S mi t h

, 29 9 Ga. 5 1 7

, 5 2 3 (II) (A) (7 8 8 SE2 d 7 7 2 ) (2 0 1 6 ), q u o t i n g Get t n er

v. Fi t z g er a l d , 2 9 7 Ga. Ap p . 2 5 8, 2 6 1 (6 7 7 SE2 d 1 49 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

10fro m wh at i s s ai d t h a t t h e c o m m en t s are i m

p u t i n g a cri m e t o th e

p l ai n t i ff. 1 4

Here, t h e defen d an ts ’ s t at em en t s ch aract eri zi n g t h e pl ai n t i ffs a s w ithout m o ral s

an d as “ m ean , v u l gar, d em ean i n g [] cro o k [s ] ” d o n o t al l eg e a s peci fi c cri m e. In s t ead

,

t h ey co n s t i t u t e ex p res s i o n s o f o p i n i on , wh i ch are n o t act i o n ab l e. 1 5

(b ) S t a t emen t

s eq u a t i ng W

r ecker 1 wi t h S i l e nt Ni

gh t

. Si m i larl y , t h e d efen d an t s ’

s t at em en t s eq u at i n g W reck er 1 wi t h Si l en t Ni g h t are n o t act i on ab l e. Th e p l ai n t i ffs d o

n o t p o in t t o a s p eci fi c s t at em en t b y t h e d efen d an t s , b u t i n st ead al l eg e g en eral l y t h at

t h e st at em en t s th at ch aract e r i z e W reck er 1 as a co n t i n u at i o n o f Si l en t Ni g h t are

d efam at o ry

. Bu t th e d efen d an t s d i d n o t s t at e t h at t h e t w o co m p a n i e s are t h e s am e

l eg al en t i t y

. In s t ead

, th ey al leg ed t h at W reck er 1 “ u s ed to b e u n der t h e nam e o f Si l en t

Kn i gh t [s i c] an d g o t i n H OT w a t e r w i t h t h e [PSC] (wh i ch i s p u bl i c reco rd o n t h e

1 4 (Ci t at i o n an d p u nct u at io n o m i tt ed ). Co t t r el l , 2 9 9 Ga. at 5 2 4 (II) (A).

1 5 See i d

. at 5 29 (II) (A) (2 ) (h ol d i n g t hat al l e g a t i o n s th at t he pl ai n t i ff was “ n o t

t ru s t wo rt h y ” an d t h a t “ h i s act i v i t i es wi t h t h e wo m en h e h as d ecei v ed an d tak en m o n ey fro m are cri m i n al ” co n s t i t u t e o p i n i o n ). See al s o Ga s t v. Br i t t a i n , 2 77 G a. 3 4 0

, 3 4 1 (5 8 9
SE2 d 6 3 ) (2 0 0 3 ) (“ as s ert io n s reg ard i ng ‘ i m m o ral i t y ’

. . . are p l ai n l y th e s o rt s o f o p i n i o n s

t h at are in cap ab l e o f b ei n g pro v ed fal s e”); Ja n et Ri cker B u i l d er
, In c. v. Ga r d

ner , 2 4 4 Ga. Ap p

. 7 5 3

, 7 5 5 (4 ) (5 3 6 SE2 d 7 7 7 ) (2 00 0 ) (h o l d i ng t h at a s ig n in a h o m eo wn er’ s wi n d o w

s t at i n g t h at h er h o u se was a “ lem o n ” i s “ a co ns t i t u t i o n al l y p ro t ect ed ex p res si o n o f o p i n i o n ”

t h at co u l d n o t s up p o rt a cl ai m fo r t o rt i o u s i n t erferen ce wi t h b u s i n es s rel at i o n s ).

11In t ern et fo r y o u t o see) so t hey c h a n g e d t h ei r n am e t o W reck er 1 .” It i s u n d i s p u t ed

t h at t h e PSC rev o ked Si len t Ni g h t ’ s t owi n g p erm i t

, an d t h erefo re t h is p o rt i o n o f t h e

s t at em en t i s t ru e, as i s t h e fact t h at th e o wn ers o f b o t h co m p an i es are m arri ed t o each

o t h er. To t he ex t en t t hat t h e d efen d an t s ch aract eri ze W reck er 1 as a co n ti n u at i o n o f

Si l en t Ni g h t

, in co rp o rat ed in an at t em p t t o ev ad e t h e n e g a t i v e rep u t at i o n of Si l en t

Ni g ht an d t o o bt ai n a t owi n g p erm i t

, t hat i s an “ ex p res s i o n of o p i n io n o n m at t ers wi th

res p ect t o wh i ch reas o n ab l e m en m i g h t en t ert ai n d i fferi n g o p i n io n s. . . .” 1 6

(c) Al l eg a t i on s th at W

r ecker 1 o v e r c h a r

g ed cu s t omer

s

. Fi n al l y , to th e ex t en t

t h at t h e p l ai n t i ffs al leg ed t h at t h e d efen d a n t s ’ a ccu s at i o ns reg ard i n g W reck er 1

o v erch arg i ng cu s t o m ers were d efam at o ry , su ch cl ai m s fai l

. As afo rem en t i o n ed

, t h e

Co u n t y co ncl u d ed t h at W reck er 1 h ad

, i n fact

, o v erch arg ed t ru ck o wn ers

. Th u s , t h e

p l ai n t i ffs fai l ed t o es t ab l i sh th at t h e accu s at i o n s reg ard i n g o v e rch arg i n g were n ot

t ru e. 1 7

1 6 (Pu n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .) Ga s t

, 2 7 7 Ga. at 3 4 1

, q uo t i n g Be r g en v. Ma r t in d

a l eHu b b el l

, 1 7 6 Ga. Ap p

. 7 45

, 7 4 7 (3 3 7 SE2 d 7 7 0 ) ( 1 9 85 ). See al s o Co l l i n s v. Co x En t er pr i s es , 2 1 5 Ga. A p p. 6 7 9

, 6 80 (4 5 2 SE2 d 2 26 ) (1 9 9 4 ) (n ews p ap er ed i t o ri al s t at i n g

t h at PSC can d i dat e was t ry i n g t o “ fo o l v o ters ” b y ch an g i n g h i s n am e “ d o es n o t i m p l y an

as s ert io n o f o b

j ect iv e fact t h at m i gh t b e p ro v ed fal s e; rat h er, i t i s m erel y s p ecu l at i o n as t o [t h e can d i d at e’ s ] m o t i ve b as ed o n h i s b eh av i o r”).

1 7 See i d . at 8 4 6 (1 ) (a).

12Acco rd i ng l y , t h e t ri al co u r t erred b y d en y i n g t h e defen d an t s ’ m o t i o n fo r

s u m m ary ju d g m en t as t o t h e p l ai n t i ffs ’ d efam at i o n cl ai m s

.

Ju d g men t r ever sed . Mi l l er

, P. J., a nd

Rees e, J., co n cu r

.

13