ÿWPC" …# VUNa %¯ 0µw@¹ 4ù   0H$ 0Dl {å° 0J• 0Tß 0^3 0h‘ 0rù 0|k 0†ç 0m 1uý 0drU>Ö BB)1DCZ AMU*êy v~˜ D3vÓI 0@ AO\ Æ« 0Dq! D/µ! Bä!˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(Ü¢9$¡¡Ò°°ÒÒ°°ÒÑJDÑÑJDÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓÔ€X®•XXXÔÔ€T"û TXX®•Ô vVwVxDyPzD{D|D}~Ó€ˆDÒ 3|xˆ(ø(3EÙ$¤¤Ý ƒ¢9!ÝÒ°°ÒÒ°°ÒÑJ°ÑÑJ°ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓÓÔ€X5sXXXÔÔ€T•ZTXX5sÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(½“$¡¡Ñ°°ÑѰ°ÑÒ°°ÒÒ°°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓÔ€X.ÜXXXÔ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial oÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€!ÔÑ J ÑÑ J ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€&ÔÔ€&ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€&XÔÌÌDecemberÏ6,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.ÏCrowsonÌAppellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÑ J ÑÑ J ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÓÓIt€should€be€noted€that€the€trial€court€was€not€presented€with€theÏissue€of€whether€Azbell€or€J€&€R€was€in€contempt€of€court€for€violation€ofÏthe€injunction;€consequently,€we€do€not€address€that€issue.€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h""""'ÿÿdxdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÑ J ÑÑ J ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔT€ Ôò òÓÓÓ  Ó›à@ àÞ ÞÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌà@ àò òWESTERN€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌóóÌÌKNOTTððS€WHOLESALE€FOODS,€INC.à à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àó óPlaintiff/Appelleeò òà àà à)à àó óCoffee€Chancery€No.€93„19Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àò ò)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌBILLY€L.€AZBELL€and€€€€à àà à)ó óAppeal€No.€01„A„01„9510„CH„00459Ìò òœÙ€€ÙÙ€€ÙßR€%'$A1-j|4d` 2 `€€@ÿRß›J€&€R€FOODS,€INC.€€€à à€€€ó ó€ò òà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìó óà àDefendants/Appellants.à àò òà à)à àÌòòó óÌò òóóÌ€€€ÌÌÌà@ àó óAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€COFFEE€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€MANCHESTER,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€JOHN€W.€ROLLINS,€CHANCELLORÌòòÌÌÌFor€the€Plaintiff/Appelleeóó:òòà àà àà àFor€the€Defendants/Appellantsóó:òòÌóóÌWilliam€R.€Neese€€€à àà àà àà àLawrence€D.€WilsonÌDresden,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€ÌDoyle€E.€Richardsonà àà àà àà àKline€PrestonÌManchester,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€H.€Norton,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àShelbyville,€TennesseeÌò òÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PARTÌœAND€REMANDED›ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àó óHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌòòÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÇØØÙ  ÙÑ7€5sXXdìTTdè7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌà àIn€this€case,€Defendant€Billy€Azbell€(Azbell)€appeals€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€granting€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Plaintiff€Knottððs€WholesaleÏFoods,€Inc.€(Knottððs),€finding€that€Azbell€breached€his€fiduciary€duty€ofÏloyalty€as€an€employee.€€The€trial€court€issued€injunctive€relief€againstÏAzbell€and€subsequently€found€that€Azbell€and€defendant€J€&€R€Foods€(J€&ÏR)€engaged€in€a€civil€conspiracy€to€circumvent€the€injunction.€InjunctiveÏrelief€was€issued€against€Azbell€and€€J€&€R,€and€both€defendants€were€heldÏliable€for€compensatory€damages,€punitive€damages,€and€œattorneysðð›€fees.€€€ÏAzbell€and€J€&€R€appeal.€€We€affirm€in€part€and€reverse€in€part.Ìà àThe€facts€in€this€case€are€largely€undisputed.€€Knottððs,€a€TennesseeÏcorporation,€is€a€wholesale€snack€food€distributorship€owned€by€JerryÏKnott.€€Knottððs€distributes€its€snack€foods€primarily€to€convenience€andÏgrocery€stores.€€On€August€6,€1990,€Knottððs€hired€Azbell€as€a€routeÏsalesman.€€Azbell€was€an€employee€at€will€with€no€employment€agreement.€ÏHe€was€never€asked€to€sign€an€agreement€regarding€confidentialÏinformation€or€restricting€his€ability€to€compete€with€Knottððs€in€the€eventÏhis€employment€terminated.€€Ìà àAzbell€worked€on€a€sales€route€known€as€Route€40€for€over€a€year,Ïuntil€Knottððs€promoted€him€to€district€manager€and€replaced€him€on€RouteÏ40€with€another€route€salesman.€€Azbell€worked€as€district€manager€forÍapproximately€a€year.€€€Knottððs€then€reinstated€him€as€a€route€salesman€onÏRoute€40.€€Ìà àWhen€Azbell€returned€to€work€on€Route€40€as€a€route€salesman,€heÏbecame€dissatisfied€with€his€compensation€and€began€contemplating€goingÏinto€business€for€himself,€in€competition€with€Knottððs.€€During€this€time,ÏAzbell€had€conversations€with€many€of€Knottððs€customers€on€Route€40Ïregarding€whether€they€would€buy€from€him€if€he€went€into€business€forÏhimself.€€On€October€4,€1992,€Azbell€approached€J€&€R,€a€TennesseeÏcorporation€and€a€competitor€of€Knottððs,€and€asked€if€J€&€R€would€beÏwilling€to€supply€him€with€merchandise€for€a€sales€route€if€he€left€KnottððsÏand€became€self„employed.€€Jim€and€Rick€Campbell,€the€owners€of€J€&€R,Ïtold€Azbell€that€they€would€be€able€to€supply€him€with€products€once€heÏleft€Knottððs€employment.Ìà àIn€his€deposition,€Azbell€admitted€that,€while€employed€by€Knottððs,Ïhe€told€customers€along€Route€40,€€ð ðIððm€going€to€be€going€into€business€forÏmyself€here€in€a€couple€of€weeks€and€I€would€appreciate€you€doing€someÏbusiness€with€me.ðð€€Azbell€testified,€€ð ðI€just€told€some€of€the€customersÏthat€I€was€going€to€be€leaving€Knottððs€and€when€I€came€back€in€a€week€orÏso,€I€would€be€in€business€for€myself€and€I€would€appreciate€them€buyingÏfrom€me.ðð€€When€questioned€as€to€whether€he€asked€Knottððs€customers€toÍbuy€from€him,€Azbell€said,€ð ð[Y]es,€I€did€ask€for€their€business.ðð€€Usually,Ïthe€customers€would€then€ask€whether€Azbell€would€be€able€to€provideÏthem€with€the€same€products€that€Knottððs€provided€at€competitive€prices.€ÏAzbell€assured€the€customers€that€he€would€be€able€to€provide€the€sameÏproducts€at€the€same€prices.€€Azbell€stated€that€he€felt€ð ðfairly€confidentððÏthey€would€do€business€with€him.Ìà àOn€Sunday,€October€11,€1992,€Azbell€terminated€his€employmentÏwith€Knottððs.€€On€the€following€day€he€went€into€business€for€himself,Ïcalling€on€many€of€Knottððs€former€customers€with€products€supplied€toÏhim€by€J€&€R.€€Immediately€thereafter,€Knottððs€lost€to€Azbell€Ïapproximately€two„thirds€of€its€customers€and€business€on€Route€40.€ÏKnottððs€then€filed€a€lawsuit€against€Azbell,€alleging€that€he€breached€hisÏfiduciary€duty€of€loyalty€as€an€employee€by€wrongfully€soliciting€itsÏcustomers€during€his€employment.€€In€its€complaint,€Knottððs€soughtÏinjunctive€relief,€compensatory€damages,€and€punitive€damages.€€After€aÏhearing,€the€trial€court€issued€a€temporary€injunction€against€Azbell,Ïprohibiting€him€from€soliciting€those€customers€on€Route€40€that€he€hadÏwrongfully€solicited€for€himself€while€he€was€still€employed€by€Knottððs.€€Ìà àOn€the€day€the€trial€court€issued€the€injunction,€Azbell€called€J€&€RÏFoods€and€left€a€message€on€the€telephone€answering€machine€for€someoneÍto€return€his€call.€€After€speaking€with€Jim€and€Rick€œCampbell›€andÏinforming€them€of€the€injunction,€Azbell€and€the€Campbells€agreed€that€JÏ&€R€would€try€to€solicit€the€customers€on€Route€40€that€Azbell€had€beenÏenjoined€from€soliciting.€€J€œ&R›€hired€Azbell€as€a€sales€supervisor€forÏsome€of€its€other€routes.€€Azbell€told€J€&€R€the€identity€of€the€customersÏon€Route€40€and€later€gave€J€&€R€a€written€customer€list.€€€J€&€RÏimmediately€began€servicing€the€customers€on€Route€40.€€€Ìà àAfter€calling€on€the€customers€on€Route€40€and€unsuccessfullyÏattempting€to€win€them€back,€Knottððs€amended€its€complaint€to€add€J€&€RÏas€a€defendant€and€to€allege€civil€conspiracy€against€both€Azbell€and€J€&€RÏfor€conspiring€to€violate€the€injunction.€€All€parties€agreed€that€theÏmaterial€facts€were€undisputed€and€moved€for€summary€judgment.€€TheÏtrial€court€granted€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Knottððs,€finding€thatÏAzbell€breached€his€fiduciary€duty€€and€œfinding›€both€Azbell€and€œJ&R,›Ïliable€for€civil€conspiracy.Ìà àAfter€a€hearing€on€damages,€the€trial€court€awarded€Knottððs€$37,526Ïagainst€both€Azbell€and€J€&€R€for€compensatory€damages€and€lossesÏarising€from€the€civil€conspiracy.€€In€addition,€the€trial€court€awardedÏKnottððs€$10,000€in€punitive€damages€and€$19,803€in€attorneysðð€feesÏagainst€both€defendants.€€The€trial€court€further€enjoined€Azbell€and€J€&€R,Íindividually€and€jointly,€from€conducting€any€business€on€Route€40€for€aÏperiod€of€two€years.€€Thereafter,€the€trial€court€modified€its€previousÏorder,€enjoining€Azbell€and€J€&€R€from€soliciting€or€servicing€only€thoseÏstores€on€Route€40€that€Azbell€had€solicited€during€his€employment€withÏKnottððs€and€reducing€the€duration€of€the€injunction€to€one€year.€€Ìà àAzbell€appeals,€arguing€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€a€breachÏof€fiduciary€duty€and€civil€conspiracy.€€Alternatively,€Azbell€appeals€theÏtrial€courtððs€grant€of€the€injunction€and€the€award€of€compensatoryÏdamages,€punitive€damages,€and€attorneysðð€fees.€€J€&€R€joins€with€AzbellÏin€appealing€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€a€civil€conspiracy,€the€issuance€ofÏthe€injunction,€and€the€award€of€damages€and€attorneysðð€fees.€€In€addition,ÏJ€&€R€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€failing€to€consider€whetherÏKnottððs€mitigated€its€damages.€€J€&€R€further€claims€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€finding€that€the€civil€conspiracy€was€the€proximate€cause€ofÏKnottððs€injuries€and€in€admitting€Knottððs€business€records€into€evidence.€Ìà àSummary€judgment€is€proper€when€the€movant€demonstrates€thatÏthere€are€no€genuine€issues€of€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€party€isÏentitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.03.€€The€partyÏmoving€for€summary€judgment€bears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€noÏgenuine€issue€of€material€fact€exists.€€ò òòòByrd€v.€Hallóóó ó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210Í(Tenn.€1993).€€On€a€motion€for€summary€judgment,€courts€must€take€theÏstrongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€the€nonmoving€party,Ïallow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discard€allÏcountervailing€evidence.€€òòò òId.€ó óóóat€210„11.€€In€ò òòòByrdó óóó,€the€Court€stated:ÌÓÓà8 àOnce€it€is€shown€by€the€moving€party€that€there€is€no€genuineÏissue€of€material€fact,€the€nonmoving€party€must€thenÏdemonstrate,€by€affidavits€or€discovery€materials,€that€thereÏis€a€genuine,€material€fact€dispute€to€warrant€a€trial.€€In€thisÏregard,€Rule€56.05€provides€that€the€nonmoving€party€cannotÏsimply€rely€upon€his€pleadings€but€must€set€forth€òòò òspecificÏfactsó óóó€showing€that€there€is€a€genuine€issue€of€material€factÏfor€trial.€€ð ðIf€he€does€not€so€respond,€summary€judgment€.€.€.Ïshall€be€entered€against€him.ððÌÌò òÓÓòòId.€ó óóóat€211òòò ò€ó óóó(citations€omitted).€€Summary€judgment€is€only€appropriateÏwhen€the€case€can€be€decided€on€the€legal€issues€alone.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€210.€ÏBecause€only€questions€of€law€are€involved,€there€is€no€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€regarding€a€trial€courtððs€grant€of€summary€judgment.€Ïò òòòJohnson€v.€EMPE,€Inc.ó óóó,€837€S.W.2d€62,€68€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Therefore,Ïour€review€of€a€trial€courtððs€order€granting€summary€judgment€is€ò òòòde€novoó óóóÏon€the€record€before€this€Court.€€ò òòòSee€Carvell€v.€Bottomsó óóó,€900€S.W.2d€23,Ï26€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àOn€appeal,€Azbell€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€heÏbreached€his€duty€of€loyalty€as€an€employee€by€soliciting€customers€whileÏemployed€by€Knottððs.€€Ìà àDuring€Azbellððs€employment€with€Knottððs,€there€was€no€agreementÏbetween€the€parties€restricting€Azbellððs€ability€to€compete€with€KnottððsÏupon€termination€of€his€employment.€€Likewise,€there€was€no€agreementÏregarding€Azbellððs€use€of€information€such€as€the€identity€of€KnottððsÏcustomers.€€Azbell€was€an€employee€at€will,€free€to€terminate€hisÏemployment€and€free€to€compete€with€Knottððs€upon€termination€of€hisÏemployment.€€ò òòòSee€óóó óRestatement€(Second)€of€Agency€œ€ðð€396(a).›€€It€isÏundisputed€that€Azbell€made€no€actual€sales€to€Knottððs€customers€untilÏafter€his€employment€with€Knottððs€ended.€€Ìà àDuring€the€employment€relationship,€an€employee€has€a€fiduciaryÏduty€of€loyalty€to€the€employer.€€The€employee€must€act€solely€for€theÏbenefit€of€the€employer€in€matters€within€the€scope€of€his€employment.€ÏThe€employee€must€not€engage€in€conduct€that€is€adverse€to€the€employerððsÏinterests.€€ò òòòSee€ó óóó27€Am€Jur€œ2d›€ò òòòEmployment€Relationshipó óóó€ðð€216€andÏcases€cited€therein.Ìà àThis€duty€of€loyalty€includes,€of€course,€a€duty€not€to€compete€withÏthe€employer€during€the€employment€relationship,€even€in€the€absence€of€aÏnoncompetition€agreement.€€ò òòòSee€Eaves€v.€Hillard€œCo.ó óóó,€No.€88„37„II,€›Ï1988€WL€49959,€at€*3€(Tenn.€App.€œMay€18,€1988);›€Restatement€(Second)€ofÏAgency€ðð€393.ÌThe€law€distinguishes€between€solicitation€by€an€employee€during€theÏemployment€relationship€and€solicitation€after€the€employment€has€beenÏterminated:€€ÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÓÓAfter€the€termination€of€his€agency,€in€the€absence€of€aÏrestrictive€agreement,€the€agent€can€properly€compete€withÏhis€principal€as€to€matters€for€which€he€has€been€employed€.€.€.Ï.€Even€before€the€termination€of€the€agency,€he€is€entitled€toÏmake€arrangements€to€compete,€except€that€he€cannot€properlyÏuse€confidential€information€peculiar€to€his€employerððsÏbusiness€and€acquired€therein.€€Thus,€before€the€end€of€hisÏemployment,€he€can€properly€purchase€a€rival€business€andÏupon€termination€of€employment€immediately€compete.€€He€isÏnot,€however,€entitled€to€solicit€customers€for€such€rivalÏbusiness€before€the€end€of€his€employment€nor€can€he€properlyÏdo€other€similar€acts€in€direct€competition€with€theÏemployerððs€business.€€ÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒRestatement€(Second)€of€Agency€ðð€393,€cmt.€eòò.óóÌÌÓÓà àThis€case€centers€on€whether€Azbellððs€conduct€while€employed€byÏKnottððs€amounted€to€a€solicitation€of€Knottððs€customers€in€breach€of€hisÏcommon€law€duty€of€loyalty.€€This€issue€was€addressed€in€ò òòòEaves€v.ÏHillard€Co.ó óóó:ÌÓÓÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒAlso,€an€employee€not€bound€by€covenant,€and€absent€any€breachÏof€trust,€may€anticipate€the€future€termination€of€employmentÏand,€while€still€employed,€make€arrangements€for€some€newÏemployment€by€a€competitor,€or€the€establishment€of€his€ownÏbusiness€in€competition€with€his€employer.€€However,€he€mayÏnot€solicit€his€employerððs€customers€for€his€own€benefit,Ïbefore€he€has€terminated€his€employment.€€This€wouldÏconstitute€a€breach€of€the€undivided€loyalty€which€theÏemployee€owes€to€his€employer€while€he€is€still€employed.€€ÌÓÓÓÓÌÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓò òòòEavesó óóó,€1988€WL€49959,€at€*3€(citing€ò òòòUnited€Bd.€&€Carton€Corp.€v.ÏBrittingó óóó,€164€A.2d€824,€828€(N.J.€œSuper.€Ct.€Ch.€Div.€1959),€ò òòòaffððdó óóó,€160ÏA.2d€660€(N.J.€Super.€Ct.€App.€Div.€1960)›€(emphasis€omitted)).€€In€ò òòòEavesó óóó,Ïtwo€employees€sued€their€former€employer€for€breach€of€an€oralÏemployment€agreement.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€*1.€€The€employer€filed€a€counterclaimÏalleging€that,€during€their€employment,€€the€employees€engaged€in€unfairÏcompetition€and€breached€their€duty€of€loyalty€by€operating€a€competingÏbusiness€and€soliciting€the€employerððs€customers.€€ò òòòId.€€óóó óTo€determineÏwhether€there€had€been€a€breach€of€the€duty€of€loyalty,€the€court€examinedÏthe€conversations€that€the€two€employees€had€with€two€of€theirÏemployerððs€largest€customers.€€ò òòòId.€ó óóóat€*2.€€The€court€noted€that€anÏemployee€stated€to€one€customer,€ð ðIððm€going€to€start€my€new€business€andÏI€want€you€to€go€bring€your€business€with€me.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€To€another€customer,Ïan€employee€said,€ð ðIððm€leaving.€€Iððm€going€to€form€my€new€company.€€I€wantÏyour€business.ðð€€ò òòòId.€€óóó óThe€Court€concluded€that€the€employees€wrongfullyÏsolicited€the€employerððs€customers€and€breached€their€fiduciary€duties.€Ïò òòòId.€€óóó ó€Ìà àIn€another€unpublished€case,€ò òòòBaker€v.€œBattershelló óóó,€Madison€EquityÏNo.€5,€1986›€WL€7602€(Tenn.€œApp.€July€9,€1986),›€this€Court€addressedÏwhether€a€travel€agency€employee,€Battershell,€€breached€her€duty€ofÍloyalty€by€wrongfully€soliciting€her€employerððs€customers€before€leavingÏthe€travel€agency.€€ò òòòId.€€óóó óat€*2„4.€€In€ò òòòBakeró óóó,€during€her€employment,€theÏemployee€made€plans€to€leave€and€open€a€competing€business.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€*1.€ÏShe€discussed€her€plans€to€leave€with€some€of€the€agencyððs€customers.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€ÏTwo€of€these€customers€testified€about€their€conversations€withÏBattershell.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€One€said€that€Battershell€discussed€her€reasons€forÏleaving€but€did€not€solicit€his€business.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€The€other€customer€saidÏBattershell€talked€about€her€reasons€for€the€move€and€asked€if€she€wouldÏdo€business€with€her,€but€did€not€ask€the€customer€to€follow€her.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€ÏInstead€Battershell€ð ðsimply€asked€how€the€client€felt€about€the€move.ðð€ò òòòId.ó óóó€€ÏThe€trial€court€found€that€Battershell€had€not€actively€solicited€theÏcustomersðð€business.€€œò òòòId.ó óóó€at€*3.›€€This€Court€agreed,€reasoning€thatÏBattershell€ð ðmerely€notified€the€customersðð€as€to€her€intentions€to€leaveÏher€employer€and€to€start€a€competing€business.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€*4.€€Accordingly,Ïthe€Court€found€that€the€evidence€did€not€preponderate€against€the€trialÏcourtððs€finding.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó̜Ǜà àThe€parties€have€cited€cases€from€other€jurisdictions€evaluatingÏwhether€conversations€of€current€employees€with€customers€constitutedÏactive€solicitation€or€merely€preparation€for€post„employmentÏcompetition.€€€€In€òòò òNilanððs€œAlley,€Inc.€›€v.€Ginsburgó óóó,€430€S.E.2d€368€œ(Ga.ÏCt.›€œApp.›€1993),€the€employee€asked€his€employerððs€customers€if€they€wouldÏconsider€doing€business€with€him€if€he€were€to€leave€and€form€his€ownÏbusiness.€€ò òòòId.€ó óóóat€369.€€The€court€noted€that€the€employeeððs€conversationsÏwere€ð ðbrief,€non„specific,€and€strictly€hypotheticalðð€and€found€that€theyÏwere€not€a€€breach€of€his€fiduciary€duty.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€370.€€In€ò òòòSanitary€FarmÏDairies,€Inc.€v.€Wolfó óóó,€112€N.W.2d€42€(Minn.€1961),€a€salesman€discussedÏhis€intentions€to€leave€with€some€of€his€employerððs€customers.€€ò òòòId.€ó óóóat€48.€ÏIn€the€last€few€days€of€his€employment,€the€salesman€advisedÏapproximately€half€of€his€customers€that€he€would€return€later€in€theÏweek€to€solicit€their€business€on€his€own€behalf.€€ò òòòId.€ó óóó€€The€court€notedÏthat€although€ð ðan€employee€may€take€steps€to€insure€continuity€in€hisÏlivelihood€in€anticipation€of€resigning€his€position,€he€cannot€feather€hisÏown€nest€at€the€expense€of€his€employer€while€he€is€still€on€the€payroll.ðð€Ïò òòòId.€€ó óóóThe€court€reasoned€that€an€employee€is€not€furthering€his€employerððsÏinterests€by€suggesting€that€its€customers€should€transfer€their€businessÏelsewhere€in€the€immediate€futureò ò.€€òòId.ó óóó€at€48„49.€€Therefore,€the€courtÍconcluded€the€salesmanððs€actions€amounted€to€wrongful€solicitation.€€ò òòòId.ó óóóÏat€50.Ìà àIn€this€case,€Azbell€admits€that€he€told€customers,€ð ðIððm€going€to€beÏgoing€into€business€for€myself€here€in€a€couple€of€weeks€and€I€wouldÏappreciate€you€doing€some€business€with€me.ðð€€€Azbell€states€that€ð ðI€justÏtold€some€of€the€customers€that€I€was€going€to€be€leaving€Knottððs€andÏwhen€I€came€back€in€a€week€or€so,€I€would€be€in€business€for€myself€and€IÏwould€appreciate€them€buying€from€me.ðð€€He€admits,€€ð ð[Y]es,€I€did€ask€forÏtheir€business.ðð€€€Moreover,€he€assured€the€customers€that€he€wouldÏprovide€the€same€products€as€Knottððs€at€the€same€prices.€Ìà àAzbellððs€conversations€with€customers€went€beyond€merelyÏnotifying€Knottððs€customers€of€his€intentions€or€posing€ð ðbrief,€non„specific,€strictly€hypotheticalðð€queries.€€He€asked€for€their€business€andÏeven€assured€them€he€could€supply€the€same€products€at€the€same€pricesÏas€Knottððs.€€This€is€active€solicitation.€€Azbellððs€conduct€was€a€breach€ofÏhis€fiduciary€duty€to€his€employer€to€refrain€from€actions€adverse€to€theÏemployerððs€interests€and,€in€particular,€the€duty€not€to€compete€with€theÏemployer€during€the€employment€relationship,€even€in€the€absence€of€aÏnoncompetition€agreement.€€ò òòòSee€Eavesó óóó,€1988€WL€49959,€at€*3;ÏRestatement€(Second)€of€Agency€ðð€393.€€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€trialÍcourtððs€order€granting€summary€judgment€on€this€issue.Ìà àAzbell€and€J€&€R€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summaryÏjudgment€as€to€the€existence€of€a€civil€conspiracy€to€violate€theÏinjunction.€€A€civil€conspiracy€is€a€ð ð€ððcombination€between€two€or€moreÏpersons€to€accomplish€a€purpose€not€in€itself€unlawful€by€unlawful€means.ððÏðð€€ò òòòDale€v.€Thomas€H.€Temple€Co.ó óóó,€186€Tenn.€69,€208€S.W.2d€344,€347Ï(1948)€(quoting€ò òòòMcKee€v.€Hughesó óóó,€133€Tenn.€455,€œ459,›€181€S.W.€930Ï(1915)).€€ð ðThe€essence€of€a€civil€conspiracy€is€concert€or€combination€toÏdefraud€or€cause€other€injury€to€person€or€property,€which€results€inÏdamage€to€person€or€property€to€the€plaintiff.ðð€€€ò òòòKirksey€v.€OvertonÏPub.,€Inc.ó óóó,€739€S.W.2d€230,€236€(Tenn.€App.€1987).€€The€elements€of€civilÏconspiracy€are€ð ðcommon€design,€concert€of€action,€and€an€overt€act.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóóÏ(citing€ò òòòKoehler€v.€Cummingsó óóó,€380€F.€Supp.€1294,€1313€(M.D.€TennÏ(1974)).€€In€addition,€ð ðthe€primary€purpose€of€the€agreement€must€be€toÏcause€injury€to€another;€incidental€injuries€resulting€from€a€pursuit€of€theÏpartiesðð€own€fair€interest€are€not€actionable.ðð€€ò òòòNational€Med.€Care,€Inc.Ïv.€Gardineró óóó,€œNo.€85„154„II,€1986›€WL€3157€(Tenn.€œApp.€March12,›€1986)Ï(citing€16€Am.€Jur.€2d€òòò òConspiracyó óóó€ðð€49);€ò òòòsee€also€Smoky€MountainsÏBeverage€Co.€v.€Anheuser„Busch,€Inc.ó óóó,€182€F.€Supp.€œ326,€332„33›€(E.D.ÏTenn.€1960)€(noting€that€the€essence€of€a€civil€conspiracy€is€an€agreementÍbetween€two€or€more€persons€to€do€injury€to€another€person).€€In€addition,Ïœò òòòsee›€Ungaro€v.€Desert€Palace,€Inc.ó óóó,€732€F.Supp.€1522,€1532€(D.€Nev.Ï1989)€(ð ðAn€act€may€also€be€the€basis€for€a€civil€conspiracy€when,€althoughÏdone€without€a€direct€intention€to€injure€another,€it€is€ððdone€to€benefit€theÏœconspirators,›€[and]€its€natural€and€necessary€œconsequence[]›€œis€›€.€.€œ.€›€theÏoppression€of€individuals.ðð€œðð)€(citation›€omitted).Ìà àIn€this€case,€Knottððs€amended€complaint€alleged€that€Azbell€and€J€&ÏR€conspired€ð ðfor€the€purpose€of€subverting,€avoiding,€and€violating€theÏinjunction.ðð€€Therefore,€the€alleged€underlying€unlawful€act€to€beÏdetermined€in€this€case€is€whether€J€&€R€and€Azbell€conspired€to€violateÏthe€injunction€against€Azbell.€€Ìà àIn€the€absence€of€any€injunction,€J€&€R€was,€of€course,€free€toÏcompete€with€Knottððs€for€customers€along€Route€40€or€anywhere€else.€ÏEven€after€the€injunction€was€issued,€J€&€R€remained€free€to€compete€withÏKnottððs;€the€injunction€did€not€entitle€Knottððs€to€have€all€competition€forÏthose€customers€eliminated.Ìà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€ordered€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 à.€.€.€Defendant€[Azbell]€is€hereby€restricted€from€continuing€toÏdo€business€with€the€places€of€business€that€he€solicited€whileÏin€the€employ€of€the€Plaintiff€and,€further,€that€no€other€personÏmay€service€the€aforementioned€customers€in€concert€orÏparticipation€with€the€Defendant,€BILLY€L.€AZBELL,€for€theÏbenefit€of€BILLY€L.€AZBELL.€€ÌÌÓÓTherefore,€although€J€&€R€was€free€to€compete€with€Knottððs,€the€injunctionÏprohibited€J€&€R€from€servicing€the€customers€ð ðin€concert€or€participationÏwith€.€.€.€Azbell,€for€the€benefit€of€.€.€.€Azbell.ðð€€ò òòòSee€alsoó óóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.Ï65.02(2)€(providing€that€injunctions€are€ð ðbinding€upon€the€parties€to€theÏaction,€their€.€.€.€€agents€.€.€.€and€upon€other€persons€in€active€concert€andÏparticipation€with€them€who€receive€actual€noticeðð).Ìà àOn€the€day€the€injunction€was€issued,€Azbell€called€Jim€and€RickÏCampbell€at€J€&€R€and€informed€them€of€the€injunction.€€As€a€result€ofÏtheir€conversations,€Azbell€immediately€became€employed€by€J€&€R,Ïworking€routes€other€than€Route€40,€and€J€&€R€received€from€Azbell€a€listÏof€the€customers€he€serviced€along€Route€40.€€Although€there€is€no€proofÏthat€the€list€of€customers€was€confidential,€it€was€evidently€of€value,Ïbecause€Azbell€described€at€least€one€potential€customer€on€Route€40€asÏnot€being€ð ða€stop€I€really€wanted€to€fool€with.ðð€€Azbellððs€being€hired€in€theÏsame€conversation€gives€the€appearance€of€a€quid€pro€quo.€€Under€theseÏcircumstances,€it€is€apparent€that€J€&€R€acted€ð ðin€concert€or€participationÏwithðð€Azbell€and€that€Azbell€benefitted€by€becoming€immediatelyÏemployed€by€J€&€R.× ƒ( ××  ×Ìà à€€Under€our€case€law,€however,€the€primary€purpose€of€a€civilÏconspiracy€must€be€to€cause€injury€to€another.€€In€its€amended€complaint,ÏKnottððs€alleged€that€J€&€R€and€Azbell€conspired€to€violate€the€injunctionÏand€ð ðto€damage€[Knottððs]€by€depriving€it€of€business€unlawfully€taken€fromÏit€by€Azbell.ðð€€In€its€motion€for€summary€judgment,€however,€Knottððs€notedÏthat€the€owners€of€J€&€R€stated€that€soliciting€the€customers€on€Route€40Ïafter€the€trial€court€issued€the€temporary€injunction€ð ðwas€a€businessÏdecision.ðð€€Therefore,€there€appears€to€be€a€genuine€issue€as€to€whetherÏthe€primary€purpose€of€the€actions€of€Azbell€and€J€&€R€were€to€causeÏinjury€to€Knottððs.€€The€primary€purpose€of€the€alleged€conspiracy€is,€ofÏcourse,€a€material€fact.€Consequently,€Knottððs€failed€to€carry€its€burden€asÏthe€moving€party,€and€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€summary€judgmentÏon€the€issue€of€civil€conspiracy.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððsÏorder€granting€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€Knottððs€on€this€issue.€€ÌœÇ›à àBoth€J€&€R€and€Azbell€have€appealed€the€issuance€of€the€injunction;Ïhowever,€we€note€that€the€injunction€has€lapsed€and€that€the€issue€is€nowÏmoot.€€€ò òòòSee€Federated€Mut.€Implement€&€Hardware€Ins.€Co.€v.ÏJohnsonó óóó,€53€Tenn.€App.€288,€298„99,€œ382›€S.W.2d€214,€218€(1964).€€OurÏruling€regarding€civil€conspiracy€pretermits€the€issues€raised€by€J€&€RÏregarding€mitigation€of€Knottððs€damages€and€admission€of€Knottððs€businessÏrecords€as€evidence.Ìà àThe€trial€court€awarded€compensatory€and€punitive€damages€againstÏboth€defendants.€€The€award€was€based,€at€least€in€part,€on€the€finding€of€aÏcivil€conspiracy.€€The€award€of€damages€against€Azbell€is€reversed€andÏremanded€for€trial€on€the€allegations€of€civil€conspiracy.€€As€to€Azbell,€ifÏit€is€ultimately€determined€that€the€elements€of€a€conspiracy€are€not€metÏin€this€case,€the€award€of€damages€must€be€reconsidered€to€determine€theÏamount€caused€by€Azbellððs€breach€of€his€duty€of€loyalty.€€The€award€ofÏdamages€against€J€&€R€is€reversed€and€remanded€for€trial€on€the€civilÏconspiracy€allegation.€Ìà àThe€trial€court€also€found€both€Azbell€and€J€&€R€liable€for€KnottððsÏœattorneysðð›€fees.€€ð ðThe€general€rule€in€Tennessee€is€that€attorneyððs€feesÏmay€not€be€recovered€unless€provided€for€by€statute€or€by€contractÏbetween€the€parties.ðð€€ò òòòFifth€Third€Co.€v.€Mooreland€EstatesÍHomeowners€Assððnóóó ó,€639€S.W.2d€292,€298€(Tenn.€App.€1982).€€While€thereÏare€a€few€exceptions€to€this€public€policy,€no€such€exceptions€areÏapplicable€in€this€case.€€ò òòòSee€id.ó óóó€(providing€an€exception€for€when€thereÏare€funds€before€the€court€that€have€been€preserved€by€a€party).€ÏAccordingly,€the€award€of€œattorneysðð›€fees€is€reversed.€Ìà àIn€sum,€the€trial€courtððs€order€granting€summary€judgment€againstÏAzbell€on€the€issue€of€breach€of€the€duty€of€loyalty€is€affirmed.€€The€trialÏcourtððs€entry€of€summary€judgment€against€Azbell€and€J€&€R€on€the€issueÏof€civil€conspiracy,€and€consequently€the€award€of€compensatory€andÏpunitive€damages,€are€reversed€and€remanded€for€further€proceedingsÏconsistent€with€this€Opinion.€€The€award€of€œattorneysðð›€fees€against€AzbellÏand€J€&€R€is€reversed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€equally€to€Appellant€andÏAppellees,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ìœ›ÓÓœà à›à àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àò òóóHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌœCONCUR:›ÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.€J.,€W.S.ÌÌœòò›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€œJ.ó ó›