ÿWPCŠ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ 0l 0Dl ° w° 0JÀ 0T 0^^ 0h¼ 0r$ 0|– 0† 0˜ 1u( U, 0dÉ U,-U>YB)—DCÀ AMU*Pÿz‹yv~vÓ‚ D3U Bˆ 0@¥ AOåÆ4 0Dú D/> Bm˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0†(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡»~g 3|xT((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóHÓ€T2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial õÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òMarch€12,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€a€subsequent€affidavit€attached€to€the€response€to€motion€for€summary€judgment,ÏCaptain€Harrald€states€neither€he€nor,€to€his€knowledge,€anyone€in€the€department€conducted€anÏinvestigation,€nor€did€he€express€an€opinion€to€Vance€as€to€probable€cause.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA: T Monaco ÒÒ  BA: T Monaco Ò++++'ÿÿdxd d("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÓ` Ü` p”XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE,€WESTERN€SECTIONÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌà@ à_______________________________________________________ÌÌó óà à)ò òÌNELSON€STAFFORD,ó óà à)à àCarter€County€Circuit€CourtÌà à)à àNo.€6347Ì€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellant.à à)Ìà à)ÌVS.à à)à àC.€A.€No.€03A01„9509„CV„00306ÌÙ€€ÙßL€#%";+'h|ãÿ:` Å `€€Lßà à)Ìò òLARRY€VANCE,ó óà à)Ìà à)Ì€€€€€Defendant/Appellee.à à)Ìà à)Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌFrom€the€Circuit€Court€of€Carter€County€at€Elizabethton.Ìò òHonorable€Thomas€J.€Seeley,€Jr.,€Judge€€ó óÌÌÌÌò òH.€Randolph€Fallinó ó,€Mountain€City,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Plaintiff/Appellant.ÌÌÌÌò òT.€J.€Little,€Jr.ó ó,€Elizabethton,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€Defendant/Appellee.ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:ÌÌò òREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€ó ó:€(Concurs)Ìò òHIGHERS,€J.€ó ó:€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ` Ü` ˜XÓÓÓà àThis€appeal€is€from€the€trial€court's€grant€of€summary€judgment€in€favor€of€theÏdefendant€in€a€suit€for€malicious€prosecution.ÌÌà àIt€is€alleged€in€the€complaint€and€admitted€in€the€answer€that€the€defendant,€Larry€A.ÏVance,€instituted€criminal€proceedings€against€the€plaintiff,€Nelson€Stafford,€charging€him€with€theÏcriminal€offense€of€theft€of€property€under€$500.€€Stafford€was€tried€and€acquitted€of€the€charge.€ÏThe€motion€for€summary€judgment€was€supported€by€five€affidavits€and€the€deposition€of€Vance.€ÏIn€response€to€the€motion,€Stafford€filed€five€affidavits,€including€his€own,€and€the€transcript€of€theÏtrial€on€the€criminal€charges.ÌÌà àOn€September€24,€1994,€Vance€discovered€copper€flashing€missing€from€a€cabin€heÏwas€constructing.€€The€flashing€had€been€specially€fabricated€according€to€specific€measurementsÏand€specifications€in€the€sheet€metal€shop€of€his€business.€€He€then€went€to€Roan€Mountain€andÏconferred€€with€a€Mr.€Morgan€and,€after€inquiry,€was€advised€by€Morgan€that€no€one€had€sold€anyÏscrap€sheet€copper€to€him€recently.ÌÌà àOn€September€26,€1994€at€approximately€11:00€a.m.,€he€went€to€Elizabethton€HerbÏand€Metal€Company,€Inc.€in€Elizabethton€and€inquired€of€the€president,€Mr.€David€Wilson,Ïwhether€anyone€had€recently€sold€any€sheet€metal€copper€there.€€He€advised€Wilson€that€his€copperÏflashing€had€been€fabricated€to€specific€specifications,€had€been€stolen€and€was€easily€recognizableÏby€him€because€of€the€fabrication€measurements.€€Vance€and€Wilson€made€inquiry€of€twoÏemployees,€Mr.€Smalling€and€Mr.€Oliver,€who€stated€that€an€individual€had€sold€twenty„threeÏpounds€of€sheet€copper€to€Elizabethton€Herb€and€Metal€earlier€that€morning.€€Upon€examining€itÏVance€identified€it€as€his.€€Both€Smalling€and€Oliver€stated€that€they€could€identify€when€the€copperÍwas€brought€in€and€sold€because€the€man€who€had€brought€it€in€had€been€there€that€morning€andÏhad€brought€it€in€two€five„gallon€buckets.€€Wilson€and€his€employees€showed€Vance€the€salesÏreceipt€for€the€pieces€of€sheet€copper€which€he€had€identified.€€The€ticket€number€was€34276,€datedÏSeptember€26,€1994,€indicating€23€pounds€of€sheet€copper€sold€by€Mr.€Nelson€Stafford,€Box€124,ÏPlum€Tree.€€Wilson€also€advised€Vance€that€a€search€of€the€business€records€of€his€firm€revealedÏno€other€purchases€of€sheet€copper€during€a€one€week€period€prior€to€September€26,€1994.ÌÌà àVance€then€went€to€the€Carter€County€Sheriff's€Department€where€he€met€withÏCaptain€Tom€Harrald.€€He€related€to€Captain€Harrald€what€had€occurred€and€showed€him€a€copy€ofÏthe€sales€receipt.€€Harrald€wrote€out€an€affidavit€of€complaint,€had€it€typed€at€the€sheriff'sÏdepartment€and€instructed€Vance€to€proceed€to€the€circuit€court€clerk's€office€to€secure€a€warrant€toÏprosecute€Stafford€for€the€offense€of€theft€under€$500.× ƒ& ××  ×ÌÌà àThe€documents€filed€in€opposition€to€the€motion€for€summary€judgment€state€thatÏLloyd€McKenney€accompanied€Nelson€Stafford€from€Plum€Tree,€North€Carolina€to€Elizabethton,ÏTennessee€on€September€26,€1994€where€they€sold€a€quantity€of€copper€scrap.€€The€copper€wasÏcontained€in€two€five„gallon€buckets,€neither€more€than€three€quarters€full€and€no€piece€of€copperÏprotruded€over€the€top€of€either€bucket.€€The€employees€of€Elizabethton€Herbs€weighed€the€twoÏbuckets,€then€dumped€the€contents€into€one€of€several€55€gallon€drums,€all€of€which€were€eitherÏfull€or€practically€full€of€scrap€copper.€€According€to€McKenney,€the€copper€that€Stafford€sold€thatÏday€was€copper€that€McKenney€had€seen€him€save€over€approximately€two€years.€€Having€beenÏshown€certain€pieces€of€copper€that€belonged€to€Mr.€Vance,€McKenney€said€these€were€not€in€theÏquantity€of€copper€that€he€and€Stafford€sold€on€September€26,€1994.ÌÌà àNelson€Stafford's€affidavit€adopts€the€facts€contained€in€McKenney's€depositionÏand€further€states€that,€at€no€time€prior€to€being€contacted€by€Captain€Harrald€advising€him€of€theÏcharges,€had€anyone€contacted€him€to€inquire€about€how€or€under€what€circumstances€he€acquiredÏthe€copper€that€he€sold€on€September€26,€1994.€€He€further€states€that€the€copper€identified€byÏVance€at€Stafford's€trial€would€not€fit€into€the€five„gallon€buckets€that€he€used€to€transport€hisÏcopper.ÌÌà àSummary€judgment€is€proper€if€it€is€shown€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€to€anyÏmaterial€fact€and€that€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Rule€56.03ÏT.R.C.P.€€In€determining€whether€or€not€a€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€exists,€the€court€mustÏconsider€the€matter€in€the€same€manner€as€a€motion€for€a€directed€verdict€made€at€the€close€ofÏplaintiff's€proof,€i.e.,€the€trial€court€must€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favorÏof€the€nonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discard€allÏcountervailing€evidence.€€If€there€is€a€dispute€as€to€any€material€fact€or€any€doubt€as€to€theÏconclusions€to€be€drawn€from€that€fact,€the€motion€must€be€denied.€€òòò òByrd€v.€Hallóóó ó,€847€S.W.2dÏ208€(Tenn.€1993).ÌÌà àPrior€to€the€decision€of€òòò òRoberts€v.€Federal€Express€Corp.óóó ó,€842€S.W.2d€246Ï(Tenn.€€1992),€the€question€of€probable€cause€was€held€to€be€a€mixed€question€of€law€and€fact.€ÏWhether€the€circumstances€alleged€to€show€it€are€true€and€existed€was€a€question€of€fact€for€theÏjury.€€Whether€the€facts€found€to€be€true€constitute€probable€cause€was€a€question€of€law€for€theÏcourt.€€òòò òLogan€v.€Kuhn's€Big€K€Corp.óóó ó,€676€S.W.2d€948€(Tenn.€1984);€òòò òLewis€v.ÏWilliamsóóó ó,€618€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1981).€€Our€supreme€court€held€in€òòò òRobertsóóó ó€that€the€questionÏof€probable€cause€is€a€question€to€be€determined€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€The€court€went€on€to€say:ÌÌÓÓà8 àà àProbable€cause€is€established€where€"facts€and€circumstancesÏ[are]€sufficient€to€lead€an€ordinarily€prudent€person€to€believe€theÏaccused€was€guilty€of€the€crime€charged."€€òòò òSee€Logan€v.€Kuhn'sÏBig€K€Corp.óóó ó,€676€S.W.2d€948,€951€(Tenn.1984);€òòò òLewis€v.ÍWilliamsóóó ó,€618€S.W.2d€299,€303€(Tenn.1981).€€However,€thisÏCourt€has€also€stated€that€"[t]he€prosecutor€must€in€good€faith€haveÏhonestly€believed€the€accused€was€guilty€of€the€crime€charged."€Ïòòò òSee€Loganóóó ó,€676€S.W.2d€at€951;€òòò òLewisóóó ó,€618€S.W.2d€at€303.€€WeÏnow€conclude€that€the€existence€of€probable€cause€does€not€dependÏon€the€subjective€mental€state€of€the€prosecutor.ÌÌà8 àà àA€malicious€prosecution€is€one€brought€in€the€absence€ofÏprobable€cause,€and€with€malice.€€These€two€elements€are€distinct.€ÏWhereas€malice€concerns€the€subjective€mental€state€of€theÏprosecutor,€appraisal€of€probable€cause€necessitates€an€objectiveÏdetermination€of€the€reasonableness€of€the€prosecutor's€conduct€inÏlight€of€the€surrounding€facts€and€circumstances.€€òòò òAccordÏSheldon€Appel€Co.€v.€Albert€&€Olikeróóó ó,€47€Cal.3d€863,€765ÏP.2d€498,€506,€254€Cal.Rptr.€336,€344„45€(1989);€Dobbs,€òòò òBeliefÏand€Doubt€in€Malicious€Prosecution€and€Libelóóó ó,€21ÏAriz.L.Rev.€607€(1979)€(rejecting€Restatement€(Second)€of€Torts€ððÏ662€comment€c.€(1977)).ÌÌà8 àà àProperly€defined,€probable€cause€requires€only€the€existenceÏof€such€facts€and€circumstances€sufficient€to€excite€in€a€reasonableÏmind€the€belief€that€the€accused€is€guilty€of€the€crime€charged.€ÏWhile€a€mind€"beclouded€by€prejudice,€passion,€hate€and€malice"€isÏnot€"reasonable,"€òòò òsee€Poster€v.€Andrewsóóó ó,€183€Tenn.€544,€554,Ï194€S.W.2d€337,€341€(1946),€the€question€whether€a€particularÏprosecutor€is€so€motivated€goes€only€to€the€element€of€malice.€ÏProbable€cause€is€to€be€determined€solely€from€an€objectiveÏexamination€of€the€surrounding€facts€and€circumstances.ÌÌÌÌÓÓòòò òRobertsóóó ó,€842€S.W.2d€at€248.ÌÌà àSignificant€to€the€case€before€us,€the€òòò òRobertsóóó ó€court€further€says€that€"PlaintiffÏasserts€that€a€reasonable€preprosecution€investigation€would€have€revealed€certain€exculpatoryÏfacts.€€Where€such€an€allegation€is€made€and€there€is€evidence€to€support€it,€the€jury€is€to€determineÏthe€facts€a€reasonable€investigation€would€have€disclosed,€and€then€base€its€probable€causeÏdetermination€considering€those€facts."€€òòò òIdóóó ó.€at€249.ÌÌà àStafford€contends€that€a€reasonable€preprosecution€investigation€would€haveÏincluded€interviewing€Stafford€and€Lloyd€McKenney.€€According€to€their€affidavits,€this€wouldÏhave€revealed€that€the€copper€Stafford€sold€on€September€26€was€copper€that€he€had€saved€andÏwhich€McKenney€had€observed€him€save€over€an€approximate€two€year€period.€€That€had€theyÍbeen€shown€certain€pieces€of€copper€that€Mr.€Vance€identified,€they€could€have€stated€positivelyÏthat€those€pieces€were€not€among€the€quantity€of€copper€that€Stafford€sold.€€In€addition,€Vance'sÏsheets€of€copper€would€not€have€fit€into€the€two€five„gallon€buckets€used€by€Stafford€to€transportÏhis€copper€to€Elizabethton€Herb.ÌÌà àBased€on€the€holding€in€òòò òRobertsóóó ó,€we€have€determined€that€there€is€evidence€toÏsupport€an€assertion€that€a€reasonable€preprosecution€investigation€would€have€revealed€certainÏexculpatory€facts.€€The€trier€of€fact€is€to€determine€the€facts€a€reasonable€investigation€would€haveÏdisclosed,€and€then€base€its€probable€cause€determination€considering€those€facts.ÌÌà àIt€results€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€granting€summary€judgment€in€favor€ofÏthe€defendant€is€reversed€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€trial€on€the€merits.€ÏCosts€Ìof€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellee,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌÓ` Ü` È“XÓÓÓà à___________________________________Ìà àFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.€(Concurs)ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌHIGHERS,€J.€(Concurs)