WPC m{ړ(*V;2=ZVP(K.U9kG<~ή˷BzK>G]XJ]kwLlPMd#vuD\F#)ȅ@h,\S':f -[~CL6n2=, [gnjY4NR\s~:`4r+ouH>08Q[\{R+M'ޕMt]UO*' !! z3ð]էe^QbxZZ0,A@hM杒rNکH^D$R7xLmD-q7J;oIxW]peG"=[GC|eU`݀TYؐ!'[ež-lCk Zގo8g"(ّf /?-b#\ % UN# 0q UN ^ G wS zW  4   m   k 1 0DN;={Exzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzb 0 Buu 0 D36 D-i 0K AS4 0 0D AHP LaserJet 4,,,,,,0(hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(L  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptL-(|g D=3|xULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0   R!f$      1  ҄  _Now92AC.J.S. Venue 64,at336(2000). q R!f$      2  ҄  _In McGeev.FirstNationalBank ,No.01A019508CV00341,1996WL11208,at*3(Tenn.Ct.App.  Jan.12,1996)( noperm.app.filed ),wecited HarrisonCommunityHospitalv.Blustein ,255N.W.2d802,803(Mich. x Ct.App.1977),forthepropositionthatincidentaldamagesoccurringintheplaintiffscounty werenotpartof[the] @ plaintiffscauseofaction,exceptaselementsofdamages.Thedamagesrecoverableinamaliciousprosecutionsuit X includethosewhich proximatelyresulttotheplaintiff,hisperson,property,orreputationfromtheprevious   unsuccessfulproceeding. Ryersonv.AmericanSur.Co. ,373S.W.2d436,437(Tenn.1963); accord Pullenv.Textron,  Inc. ,845S.W.2d777,780(Tenn.Ct.App.1992); Peermanv.Sidicane ,605S.W.2d242,245(Tenn.Ct.App.1980). - -(|G2!f$ !.8\dd8         0  ҄ d(|3A$ !.8\dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3A$ !.8\dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8\dd8     _  \8XXdd8  @ \INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#\ #Ԉ ,   April2000Session X XX\ #\XX#LARRYE.PARRISH,etal.v.ROBERTS.MARQUIS,etal.XX\   ` @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforShelbyCounty  h @@No.889634T.D.JamesE.Swearengen,Judge  X @@*AV) ` dE<` A (  @@TTNo.W199902629COAR3CVDecidedJuly31,_2000_Ԁ '  AV) ` dE<` A      X`XXXPlaintiffsLarryE.ParrishandLarryE.Parrish,P.C.(collectively, Parrish),appealthetrialcourts  finalsummaryjudgmentthatdismissedParrishsclaimformaliciousprosecutionagainstDefendants  RobertS.Marquis,McCampbell&Young,P.C.,RonaldC.Koksal,andButler,Vines&Babb,  PLLC.TheDefendantsalsohaveraisedanissueonappeal,contendingthatthetrialcourterredin z denyingtheirmotionstodismissforimpropervenue.WeconcludethattheShelbyCountyCircuit f CourtwasnotthepropervenueforParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaim.Accordingly,weaffirm R thetrialcourtsdismissalofParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaimonthealternativegroundof > impropervenue. *z  #XXXX`##\XXt#XX\Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmedas R Modified;andRemanded  B   #\X#XX.\DavidR.Farmer,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichAlanE.Highers,J.,andHolly " K.Lillard,J.,joined.  JohnJ.Mulrooney,Memphis,Tennessee,fortheappellants,LarryE.ParrishandLarryE.Parrish,   P.C. !  JoeLeeWyattandArchieSanders,III,Memphis,Tennessee,fortheappellees,RobertS.Marquis r#" andMcCampbell&Young,P.C. b$# EugeneJ.Podesta,Jr.,Memphis,Tennessee,fortheappellees,RonaldC.KoksalandButler,Vines B&!% &Babb,PLLC. 2'"& R  OPINION #\XX #XX\ )b$( #\XXa #  XX\X`XXX  In1997,ParrishfiledthisactionformaliciousprosecutionagainsttwoKnoxvilleattorneys, *B&* MarquisandKoksal,andtheirrespectivelawfirms,McCampbell&Young,P.C.,andButler, +.'+ Vines&Babb,PLLC.Parrishscomplaint,whichwasfiledintheCircuitCourtforShelbyCounty, ,(, containedthefollowingallegations.ThebasisofParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaimwasalegal -)- malpracticeactionthatwasfiledagainstParrishinKnoxCountyin1993.Theplaintiffinthat  action,JennieB.CainCorumMiller,wasalimitedpartnerintheCainPartnership,Ltd.,which  Parrishrepresentedfrom1989to1993.Inessence,Millerslegalmalpracticecomplaintallegedthat  shehadsuffereddamagesasaresultofParrishsnegligentrepresentationofthepartnership.Koksal t wastheattorneyofrecordforMillerinthelegalmalpracticeaction.MarquiswasMillerspersonal ` attorney,andheallegedlyadvisedMillerandKoksaltofilethelegalmalpracticeactionagainst L  Parrish.TheKnoxCountyCircuitCourtdismissedMillersclaimwithprejudiceinJuly1996when 8  itgrantedParrishsmotionforsummaryjudgment.Inamemorandumopinion,thecourtruledthat $ t Millersactionwasbarredbytheoneyearstatuteoflimitationsapplicabletolegalmalpractice  ` actions. See Tenn.CodeAnn.28-3-104(a)(2)(Supp.1995).ThecourtalsoruledthatMillerhad  L  standingtosueParrishonlyasalimitedpartnerassertingaderivativecauseofactionandthatshe  8  hadfailedtostatesuchacauseofaction. See Tenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6).Millerdidnotappealthe $  courtsorderofdismissal.InassertinghismaliciousprosecutionclaimagainsttheDefendantsin   thepresentaction,ParrishallegedthattheDefendantskneworshouldhaveknownthatMillers   complaintfailedtostateacauseofactionagainstParrish,thattheDefendantslackedprobablecause   tobelievethatParrishhadengagedinlegalmalpractice,andthattheDefendantsbroughttheaction   fortheimproperpurposeofintimidatingandembarrassingParrish. p   Marquisandhislawfirm(collectively, Marquis)initiallyrespondedtoParrishscomplaint H byfilingamotiontodismissforimpropervenue. See Tenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(3).Citingthe 4 allegationsofParrishscomplaint,Marquispointedoutthatthelegalmalpracticeactionthatformed  p thebasisofParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaimwasfiledinKnoxCounty,thattheDefendants  \ werepracticingattorneysinKnoxCounty,andthatnoneoftheDefendantsresidedinShelbyCounty, H whereParrishfiledhismaliciousprosecutionaction.Subsequently,Koksalandhislaw 4 firm(collectively, Koksal)alsofiledamotiontodismissonthegroundofimpropervenue.The   trialcourtdeniedbothmotionstodismiss.ThetrialcourtlatergrantedtheDefendantsrespective   motionsforpermissiontoseekaninterlocutoryappealonthisissue,butthiscourtdeniedthe  Defendantsapplications. See Tenn.R.App.P.9(a).    Thepartiesproceededtoconductdiscoveryand,inJuly1998,Marquisfiledamotionfor l summaryjudgmentonthemeritsofParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaim.Koksalalsofileda X  motionforsummaryjudgmentastoParrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaim.Afterconsideringthe D! affidavitsanddiscoverymaterialsfiledbytheparties,thetrialcourtentereditsordergrantingthe 0"  Defendantsrespectivemotionsforsummaryjudgment. #l!   Onappeal,ParrishcontendsthatthetrialcourterredingrantingtheDefendantsmotionsfor $D # summaryjudgmentonParrishsclaimformaliciousprosecution.Inresponse,theDefendantsinsist %0!$ thatthetrialcourtproperlyenteredsummaryjudgmentintheirfavor,buttheycontendthat,evenif &"% thegrantofsummaryjudgmentwaserror,Parrishsclaimstillshouldhavebeendismissedfor '#& impropervenue. (#'   Weconcludethatthiscourtsdecisionin McGeev.FirstNationalBank ,No.01A019508 |*%) CV00341,1996WL11208(Tenn.Ct.App.Jan.12,1996)( noperm.app.filed ),controlsthe h+&* dispositionofthisappealandthat,inaccordancewith McGee ,ShelbyCountywasnottheproper  venueforParrishtofilethismaliciousprosecutionaction.Accordingly,weaffirmthetrialcourts  judgmentdismissingParrishsclaim,butwedosoonthealternativegroundofimpropervenue. See    ContinentalCas.Co.v.Smith ,720S.W.2d48,50(Tenn.1986)(indicatingthatcourtwillaffirm t decree correctinresult,butrenderedupondifferent,incomplete,orerroneousgrounds). `   Likeanactionforabuseofprocess,amaliciousprosecutionactionisatransitoryaction. See  8   McGee ,1996WL11208,at*1.InTennessee,venueoftransitoryactionsisgovernedbythe $ t followingstatute:  ` 8   ` Inallcivilactionsofatransitorynature,unlessvenueisotherwiseexpressly  8  providedfor,theactionmaybebroughtinthecountywherethecauseofactionarose $  orinthecountywherethedefendantresidesorisfound.    Tenn.CodeAnn.20-4-101(a)(1994).Inthepresentcase,alloftheDefendantsresideormaybe   foundinKnoxCounty.Inaccordancewiththeforegoingstatute,therefore,ShelbyCountywasnot   thepropervenueforParrishsmaliciousprosecutionactionunlessthecauseofactionarosethere. p   In McGee ,thiscourtwasfacedwiththeanalogousissueofthepropervenueforanabuseof H processaction. See  McGee ,1996WL11208,at*1.Inthatcase,thedefendantspreviouslyhadsued 4 theplaintiffshusbandinaHickmanCountyCircuitCourtandhadobtainedasubstantialjudgment  p againsthim. See  id .InthecourseofpostjudgmentdiscoveryproceduresinHickmanCounty,the  \ defendantscausedvarioussubpoenastobeissuedandservedontheplaintiffandothersinMaury H County. See  id .Pursuanttothesesubpoenas,thedefendantstookdepositionsduringwhichthey 4 attemptedtoascertaintheexistenceofanyassetsthatmightbeusedtosatisfythejudgmentagainst   theplaintiffshusband. See  id .TheplaintifflatersuedthedefendantsintheMauryCountyCircuit   Court,alleging thateachprocessissuedfromtheHickmanCountyCircuitCourttobeservedin  MauryCountywasmaliciouslyissuedandwasacalculatedattempttoharassandembarrass  [plaintiff]intopayingthedebtincurredbyherhusband. Id .    Thedefendantsfiledmotionstodismissonthegroundofimpropervenue,andthetrialcourt X  grantedthemotions. See McGee ,1996WL11208,at*1.Onappeal,thiscourtaffirmedthetrial D! courtsorderofdismissal. See  id .,at*4.Notingthatthedefendantsneitherresidednorwerefound 0"  inMauryCountyascontemplatedbythevenuestatute,weconcludedthatthedeterminativeissue #l! waswheretheplaintiffscauseofactionforabuseofprocessarose. See  id .,at*1.Inaffirmingthe $X" trialcourtsdismissalorder,werejectedtheplaintiffscontentionthathercauseofactionforabuse $D # ofprocessarosewhenandwhereprocesswasservedinMauryCountybecausethatwaswhenthe %0!$ causeofactionbecamecomplete. See  id .,at*2,*4. &"%   Initially,weobservedthat (#' 8   ` [t]heprocessaboutwhichplaintiffcomplainsconsistsofsubpoenastoobtain |*%) postjudgmentdiscoveryfromvariousbusinessenterprisesandindividuals. h+&* Apparentlyallofthesubpoenaswereproperlyservedandthediscoveryprocess  completed.Thegistofplaintiffscaseisthattheseprocesseswereaformof  extortiontocompelplaintifftopaythejudgmentagainstherhusband.Itis  undisputedthatallofthesubpoenaswereissuedfromtheCircuitCourtinHickman t County,andthatiftherewasanimpropermotiveorpurposebehindtheissuanceof ` thesubpoenas,thatmotiveorimproperpurposewastohaveajudgmentinHickman L  Countypaid.8     McGee ,1996WL11208,at*3.Afterreviewingcaselawfromotherjurisdictions,wereachedthe  ` followingconclusion:  L  8   ` Underplaintiffstheoryinthecaseatbar,ifplaintiffhasacauseofactionfor $  abuseofprocess,thenthatcauseofactionaroseinHickmanCountywherethe   processwasissued.Ifdefendantscommittedawrongfulactinconnectionwiththe   process,thentheycommittedthatactinHickmanCountybyvirtueofhavingthe   processissuedinthefirstplace.Thefactthattheeffectsofthatwrongfulactwere   feltinMauryCountythroughtheallegedlyharassingdiscoveryproceduresdoesnot p causeplaintiffsabuseofprocessactiontoariseinMauryCounty.\    Id .,at*4. 4   Amaliciousprosecutionclaimiscloselyanalogoustoanabuseofprocessclaimbecauseboth  \ claimsconstitutetortactionsthat maybebroughttoobtainredressfortheallegedmisuseoflegal H processbyanother. McGee ,1996WL11208,at*1(quoting Donaldsonv.Donaldson ,557S.W.2d 4 60,62(Tenn.1977)).Inaccordancewiththerationalesetforthin McGee ,weconcludethat   ParrishscauseofactionformaliciousprosecutionaroseinKnoxCounty,thecountywherethelegal   malpracticeactionagainsthimwasprosecuted.IftheDefendantscommittedawrongfulactin  connectionwiththelegalmalpracticeaction,thentheycommittedtheactinKnoxCountybyvirtue  ofpursuingtheactionthere.ThefactthatParrishmayhavefeltsomeoftheeffectsofthewrongful  actinShelbyCountydoesnotcausehisactionformaliciousprosecutiontoariseinShelbyCounty. l Asin McGee ,werejecttheargumentthatParrishsmaliciousprosecutionactionaroseinShelby X  Countybyvirtueofthefactthat,inthelegalmalpracticeaction,Parrishwasservedwithprocessin D! ShelbyCounty. 0"    Althoughourresearchrevealednopublisheddecisionaddressingthepreciseissueraised $X" here,webelievethatourdispositionofthisissueisconsistentwithoursupremecourtsvenueand $D # maliciousprosecutiondecisions.Oursupremecourthasindicatedthatthedeterminationofwhere %0!$ acauseofactionaroseforvenuepurposesdependsuponthetypeofactionbeingasserted. See  Mid &"% SouthMillingCo.v.LoretFarms,Inc. ,521S.W.2d586,588(Tenn.1975).Baseduponthetype '#& ofactionbeingasserted,thecourtmustdeterminewhentheactionarosebecause thetimeacause (#' ofactionariseswilldeterminewheretheactionarisesoraccrues. Id .at589; accord  Allied )$(  Wholesale,Inc.v.OrdersTile&Distrib.Co. ,1986WL9571,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.Sept.5,1986) |*%) ( noperm.app.filed ).Thus,the paramountissueasrelatesto...venueisthetimethecauseof  actionaccrues. MidSouthMilling ,521S.W.2dat589.     Thelawiswellestablishedthataplaintiffscauseofactionformaliciousprosecutiondoes t notaccrueuntiltheunderlyingmalicioussuitisterminatedintheplaintiffsfavor. See  Christianv. ` Lapidus ,833S.W.2d71,73(Tenn.1992); Rosenv.Levy ,113S.W.1042,1044(Tenn.1908); L   Swepsonv.Davis ,70S.W.65,68(Tenn.1902); Grayv.26thJudicialDrugTaskForce ,No. 8  02A019609CV00218,1997WL379141,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.July8,1997( noperm.app.filed ); $ t  Millsapsv.Millsaps ,1989WL44840,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.May3,1989), perm.app.denied   ` (Tenn.Sept.5,1989).Inthepresentcase,thelegalmalpracticeactionwasterminatedinParrishs  L  favorinJuly1996whentheKnoxCountyCircuitCourtentereditsordergrantingParrishsmotion  8  forsummaryjudgmentanddismissingMillersclaimwithprejudice.Accordingly,ifParrishhasa $  causeofactionformaliciousprosecutionbasedupontheDefendantsprosecutionofthelegal   malpracticeclaim,ParrishscauseofactionarosewhentheKnoxCountyCircuitCourtenteredits   orderinJuly1996.Inasmuchasthetimeacauseofactionarisesdetermineswheretheaction   accrues,weconcludethatParrishscauseofactionformaliciousprosecutionaccruedinKnox   County. p   InholdingthatParrishscauseofactionformaliciousprosecutionaroseinKnoxCounty,we H rejectParrishscontentionthatthiscourtsdecisionin Nelsonv.FordMotorCreditCo. ,590S.W.2d 4 457(Tenn.Ct.App.1979),compelsadifferentresult.Inthatcase,theplaintiffsfiledaclaimfor  p outrageousconduct, i.e. intentionalinflictionofemotionaldistress,againstthecompanythat  \ financedtheplaintiffspurchaseofanautomobile. See Nelson ,590S.W.2dat458.Theplaintiffs H allegedthat,overaoneyearperiod,thedefendantsagentsandemployeesconstantlywroteand 4 telephonedtheplaintiffstotellthemthatthedefendanthadnotreceivedtheplaintiffsmonthly   installmentpaymentsandthattheplaintiffspaymentsweredelinquent. See  id .Althoughthe   plaintiffshadmadealloftheirmonthlypayments,thedefendantsagentsandemployeesassessed  latechargesagainsttheplaintiffs,andtheyeventhreatenedtorepossesstheplaintiffsautomobile.   See  id .TheactionsofthedefendantsagentsandemployeestookplaceinKnoxCounty,wherethe  defendanthadanoffice,buttheplaintiffsreceivedthelettersandtelephonecallsattheirresidence l inRoaneCounty. See  id .at459. X    ContendingthattheplaintiffscauseofactionforoutrageousconductaroseinKnoxCounty, 0"  thedefendantfiledamotiontodismissonthegroundofimpropervenue. See  Nelson ,590S.W.2d #l! at458.Thetrialcourtgrantedthedefendantsmotion,butonappeal,thiscourtreversed. See  id . $X" at45859.Indeterminingwheretheplaintiffscauseofactionarose,wefirstexaminedtheelements $D # oftheplaintiffsclaimforoutrageousconduct. See  id .at459.Citing Medlinv.AlliedInvestment %0!$ Co. ,398S.W.2d270(Tenn.1966),weobservedthat,inordertorecoverontheirclaimfor &"% outrageousconduct,theplaintiffswererequiredtoestablish(1)thatthedefendantsagentsand '#& employeesengagedinoutrageousconductand(2)that,asaresultoftheoutrageousconduct,the (#' plaintiffssufferedseriousmentalinjury. SeeNelson ,590S.W.2dat459.Inconcludingthatvenue )$( wasproperinRoaneCounty,wenotedthat,althoughtheoutrageousactsoccurredinKnoxCounty, |*%) thementalinjuryoccurredinRoaneCounty. See  id .Weexplainedthat, [w]herethetortis h+&* committedinonecountyordistrictandtheinjuryoccursinanothercountyordistrict,suitmaybe  broughtineither. Id .(quoting92C.J.S. Venue 66,at767 #  1      ).    Inourview,theholdingandrationaleof Nelson donotapplytothecaseatbar.In Nelson , t theallegedtortarguablytookplaceintwocountiesbecause,althoughthedefendantsagentsand ` employeeswrotethelettersandplacedthetelephonecallsinKnoxCounty,theyintentionally L  directedtheircommunicationstotheplaintiffsattheirRoaneCountyresidence.Theplaintiffscause 8  ofactiondidnotarisemerelyupontheoccurrenceoftheoutrageousconductinKnoxCounty,but $ t upontheinflictionofmentalinjuryinRoaneCounty.Seriousmentalinjuryandoutrageousconduct  ` constitutedistinctelementsofthetortofintentionalinflictionofemotionaldistress. See  Millerv.  L  Willbanks ,8S.W.3d607,613(Tenn.1999).Ourholdingin Nelson thatvenuewasproperinRoane  8  Countywasconsistentwiththegeneralrulethat, whereatortiscontinuousandtakesplaceintwo $  counties,[the]actionmaybebroughtineither.92AC.J.S. Venue 64,at335(2000).     Incontrast,inthepresentcase,thelawisclearthatParrishscauseofactionformalicious   prosecutionaroseinKnoxCountywhentheCircuitCourtdismissedtheunderlyingclaimforlegal   malpractice. See  Christianv.Lapidus ,833S.W.2d71,73(Tenn.1992); Rosenv.Levy ,113S.W. p 1042,1044(Tenn.1908); Swepsonv.Davis ,70S.W.65,68(Tenn.1902); Grayv.26thJudicial \ DrugTaskForce ,No.02A019609CV00218,1997WL379141,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.July8, H 1997( noperm.app.filed ); Millsapsv.Millsaps ,1989WL44840,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.May3, 4 1989), perm.app.denied (Tenn.Sept.5,1989).Inordertoestablishaclaimformalicious  p prosecution,Parrishwasrequiredtoshowthat(1)thepriorlegalmalpracticesuitwasbrought  \ againstParrishwithoutprobablecause,(2)theDefendantsbroughtsuchprioractionwithmalice, H and(3)theprioractionwasfinallyterminatedinParrishsfavor. See  Christian ,833S.W.2dat73; 4  Swepsonv.Davis ,70S.W.at67; seealso  Robertsv.FederalExpressCorp. ,842S.W.2d246,247   48(Tenn.1992); Lantroopv.Moreland ,849S.W.2d793,797(Tenn.Ct.App.1992).Unlikethe   outrageousconductclaimassertedin Nelson ,alloftheelementsofParrishsmaliciousprosecution  actionoccurredinonecounty,KnoxCounty.Parrishsmaliciousprosecutionclaimdidnotarisein  ShelbyCounty,despitethefactthathewasservedwithprocessthereorthathemayhavesuffered  somedamagesthere.X #  2      ׀InasmuchasParrishscauseofactionaccruedinKnoxCounty,andinasmuch l asalloftheDefendantsresideormaybefoundinKnoxCounty,weconcludethatKnoxCountywas X  thepropervenueforthisaction. D!   0"    Thetrialcourtsjudgmentofdismissalisaffirmedonthealternativegroundofimproper   venue.Inlightofourdispositionofthevenueissue,wepretermittheotherissueraisedonappeal,  andweremandthiscauseforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.Costsofthisappeal  aretaxedtotheappellants,LarryE.ParrishandLarryE.Parrish,P.C.,andtheirsurety,forwhich t executionmayissueifnecessary.#XXXX` # `    `     h     ___________________________________  l    `     h     DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE