WPCR |=c·kkOsXkGU<h~6;w WcuV'ͮpa (LW?&rdь8N##ථ'1ʐS-P+(RO6:pVDOn0#AiEGO@v7xܵ g  HP3U21>YZu?4hdm7٥A'{}뾻vVFwcŪmR55j{~ߦӛшo]3vmwh2=wؕ!j~xVBv1UݪU!Y"|޷q fpW8*m'F9ҽ=bnOm-| /q~Y-HS䇝w[fL119Mm;aG̷e[پ rS;i-^Qkb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m #  W   0DNEK???????????????????bGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG 0OOOO B:: 0W D3 D-. 0K[[ AS 0 0Dc Al-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular9,bk2Х 3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6,,,,0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0    R"$      1  U  _ԀRule10oftheRulesoftheTennesseeCourtofAppealsprovides:  8  8`   TheCourt,withtheconcurrenceofalljudgesparticipatinginthecase,mayaffirm, 8 reverseormodifytheactionsofthetrialcourtbymemorandumopinionwhena L formalopinionwouldhavenoprecedentialvalue.Whenacaseisdecidedby  memorandumopinionitshallbedesignated MEMORANDUMOPINION,shall  notbepublished,andshallnotbecitedorreliedonforanyreasoninasubsequent H  unrelatedcase. A R"$      2  U  _ԀTherecordonappealshowsPlaintiffdidnotfileanamendedcomplaint,butforsimplicityssake,wewill  refertotheComplaint,asamended,asthe Complaint. - -(|G2"$ !.8-dXXd8         0  U d(|3<$ !.8-dXXd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3<$ !.8-dXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8-dd8     _8EXXdd8@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @$ATNASHVILLE  @!May7,2002Session $ XEX #-XXE~#@ELIZABETHANNBAKERv._MERROL_ԀHYDE,etal.    @  XEX-AppealfromtheChanceryCourtforSumnerCounty  4 @  No.2001C110ThomasE.Gray,Chancellor  H #-XXEW#@*AV) ` dE< ` A߈  \  @ XEX-No.M200101752_COA_ԄR3CVFiledAugust7,_2002_Ԉ /  AV) ` dE<` A W  ElizabethAnnBaker( Plaintiff)isaschoolteacher.PlaintiffsuedSteveShepard,theprincipalof > herschool,andSheila_Pryor_,anotherteacher.Plaintiffalsosued_Merrol_ԀHyde,thedirectorof * SumnerCountySchools,andJeff_Helbig_,theschoolsystemsassistantdirector.Plaintiffclaimed  thefourdefendants( Defendants)wereliablefornegligentandintentionalinflictionofemotional  distressandcivilconspiracy.InadditiontoherAnswer,_Pryor_ԀfiledaCounterComplaintagainst  Plaintiffforslander.AllfourDefendantsfiledTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6)MotionstoDismiss.The  TrialCourtgrantedDefendantsMotionstoDismissbutdidnotaddress_Pryor_spendingCounter v Complaint.Plaintiffappeals.Becausethejudgmentappealedfromisnotafinaljudgmentunder b Tenn.R.App.P.3,wedismissandremand. N  @; ; Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;AppealDismissed; b @!!#CaseRemanded.  N D.Michael_Swiney_,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichBenH._Cantrell_,_P.J._,and "! ThomasW.Brothers,_Sp.J._,joined. #" JamesL.Harris,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,ElizabethAnnBaker. % $ WilliamR.WrightandLeahMay_Dennen_,_Gallatin_,Tennessee,fortheAppellees,_Merrol_ԀHyde,Jeff ^'"& _Helbig_ԀandSteveShepard. J(#' RogerA._Sindle_,_Hendersonville_,Tennessee,fortheAppellee,Sheila_Pryor_. "*r%)  ,6(, _ @!MEMORANDUMOPINION  #  1           ` InMarch2001,Plaintiff,asixthgradescienceteacheratWhiteHouseMiddleSchool,  suedtheDefendants.PlaintiffsComplaintallegedDefendantswereliabletoherforcompensatory t andpunitivedamagesformaliciousharassmentunderTenn.CodeAnn.421701andintentional ` andnegligentinflictionofemotionaldistress.PlaintiffallegedShepardandPryorconspiredagainst L  PlaintiffbecausePlaintiffhadsupportedateacherassistantwhohadmadeanunrelatedcomplaint 8  againstShepard.PlaintifffurtherallegedinherComplaintthatShepardandPryorobtained $ t assistanceandparticipationfromstudentsinmakingPlaintiffsworkingconditionsextremely  ` difficultsothatPlaintiffwouldeitherquitorbefired.PlaintiffalsoallegedinherComplaintthat  L  whenshereportedtheseproblemstoHydeandHelbig,shewasgivennoassistance.Plaintifffurther  8  allegedHelbigthreatenedtoterminateheremploymentwhenshereportedtheharassmenttohim. $     ` Shepard,HelbigandHydeeachfiledaTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6)MotiontoDismiss.   ThesethreedefendantsjointlyfiledaMemorandumofLawinsupportoftheirMotionstoDismiss.   Theremainingdefendant,Pryor,filedanAnswerandaCounterComplaintinwhichsheclaimed   PlaintiffwasliabletoherforslanderforstatementsPlaintiffmadeonthelocaltelevisionnewsabout p Pryorscharacter.PryoralsofiledaTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6)MotiontoDismissandadoptedthe \ otherdefendantsMemorandumofLaw.Thereafter,PlaintifffiledaMotiontoAmendseekingto H amendherComplainttoaddaclaimforcivilconspiracytomaliciouslyinterferewithPlaintiffs 4 employment.Plaintiffalsoconceded,inherMotiontoAmend,thatherclaimformalicious  p harassmentwasnotaviableclaim.  \    ` TheTrialCourt,inJuly2001,enteredanOrdergrantingPlaintiffsMotiontoAmend, 4 therebyallowingPlaintifftoaddherclaimforcivilconspiracy.TheTrialCourtalsogranted   DefendantsMotionstoDismiss. #  2      ׀InthisOrder,theTrialCourtdismissedPlaintiffsclaimsof   intentionalandnegligentinflictionofemotionaldistressandthenewlyaddedcivilconspiracyclaim,  findingPlaintiffsComplaintfailedtostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.TheTrial  CourtalsodismissedPlaintiffsclaimformaliciousharassmentstating,initsOrder,Plaintiff  concededatthemotionhearingthatshenolongerwaspursuingthatclaim.TheOrder,however,did l notaddressPryorsCounterComplaintagainstPlaintiff.Thereafter,PlaintifffiledaNoticeof X  Appeal.ThetechnicalrecordonappealshowsPlaintiffdidnotfileanAnswertoPryorsCounter D! ComplaintuntilaftershefiledherNoticeofAppeal.Basedupontherecordbeforeus,theTrial 0"  CourtneveradjudicatedPryorsCounterComplaintagainstPlaintiff.     ` Uponourreviewoftherecordinitsentirety,andalthoughnoneofthepartiesraised  thisasanissueonappeal,weconcludetheOrderappealedfromisnotafinaljudgmentforpurposes t ofTenn.R.App.P.3,whichprovidesinrelevantpartthat: ` 8  8`   ExceptasotherwisepermittedinRule9andinRule54.02Tennessee 8  RulesofCivilProcedure,ifmultiplepartiesormultipleclaimsfor $ t reliefareinvolvedinanaction,anyorderthatadjudicatesfewerthan  ` alltheclaimsortherightsandliabilitiesoffewerthanalltheparties  L  isnotenforceableorappealableandissubjecttorevisionatanytime  8  beforeentryofafinaljudgmentadjudicatingalltheclaims,rights, $  andliabilitiesofallparties. ` x` x    ` NoapplicationforpermissiontotakeaninterlocutoryappealpursuanttoTenn.R.   App.P.9wasfiled.Likewise,therewasnoexpressdirectionforentryofjudgmentbytheTrial   Courtoradeterminationthattherewasnojustreasonfordelay,asrequiredinTenn.R.Civ.P. p 54.02.Sincethejudgmentappealedfromdoesnotadjudicatealltheclaims,rights,andliabilities \ ofalltheparties,namelyPryorsCounterComplaintagainstPlaintiff,and,therefore,isnot H appealable,thisappealisdismissedandthecaseisremandedforfurtherproceedings,asnecessary, 4 toresolvetheremainingclaimsoftheparties.CostsoftheappealaretaxedtotheAppellant,  p ElizabethAnnBaker,andhersurety.  \ 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#    ___________________________________h(#h(#    `     h     D.MICHAELSWINEY,JUDGE