Opinion ID: 2437439
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Remainder of the Claim

Text: In moving for summary judgment, in arguing the motion to the trial court, and in arguing the propriety of the summary judgment in his brief before us, Burgess gave no reason to ignore the allegation that he personally slandered Dr. Selby. The appellant, Dr. Selby, argues that in finding a summary judgment proper with respect to the claim against Eubanks, the court overlooked the fact that Burgess was alleged to have personally slandered him. None of the proof to which the summary judgment motion referred dealt with the claim against Burgess. The testimony of Sam Winstead which was submitted in response to the motion tended to support the claim. Thus, we find the summary judgment to have been entered erroneously. Reversed and remanded. HOLT, C.J., not participating.