ÿWPC£ Z~ù+-èçö•g7p—ü…r3®"¥/„¾S”õ°_aÕâËJN‚”¨¢Ù=ËÄ^å·Ç;~§$í ]àèÄT·öÿdd²€ÖP0ز^X¦éIQoœY‚\Ê,¤ØX>}ûÓkžHÏq½Ç‡ù®…‹ì.è'ÀJÜèZÑC"¨¶ùÌ’Æ$TíÃMž°™*i=Ú {½ù™'³qQø”yŸê?ç ˆd¯QÖ˜¬… ÛûaGÁÌ~¾zóL¬Ìö„§T%e›çšŽJÑ/¢±“]ãšô}í7SÚ©ªNÓ.¾Û×€ínX‰h‚ªØ”³ò9ù¶•0†¥ñºñ*ƒ«×>¨g;¦µÓÉ4‚®`èžÞóØ»Ûíê€pèÞ»uÖDÖÏàKͺ_yÿ?îÀi‰¡iBZ…Szìå~{“CÓþŸ$ÔêÒºŽyýžê>œå§†ý®¾-?8¡I®À¸Þ£9yFµ×Óî(ÏýЀÕ6Í‚o&&t2°Rèßw\å°<õuE¥È>Á2væ%Ôê-&ŒýzTŸ\K$:.Ö¿q{×Ò2€¼îºë¾¬$ÙÝ­ÌQ×rßéÁÓM»´ae7*Z=’‘§8&·-e,†Mmit8ÁžžHÉcÛb…4F Z 0(i ‘ w@™ ¦Ù UN 0lÍ 0D9 UN} Ë U:è è è è è è è è è è è è è UB" %dddddddddddd Bjjjj D3‡‡‡ 0Dºººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººº AOþÆMM 0D D/W B†ýhµ&ÔøÔô3|xe($¡¡ QDRSDTUDVWXYZÓ€ œÝ ƒúÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÐ  ÐÒܰÒÔ€ X€AXXXÔÔ€ &6á&X X€AÔà 4 àThe€scope€of€insurance€coverage€and€the€insurerððs€duty€to€defend€present€questions€of€law.€Ð Š‚ ÐòòStandard€Fire€Ins.€Co.€V.€Chester„OððDonley€&€Assoc.€Inc.,óó€972€S.W.2d€1,5€(Tenn.€App.€1998).Ð `X Ð(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular((3úÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular Ô€ X{X XXXÔÔ€ î½± î X X{XÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ Ãá  î î½±ÔÐ  ÐÌò òJune€8,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ ôkÀ ô  ÃáÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX d&&&&'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝñZñ›ñZñѰÑÒܰÒÑ ý ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€:\XXdÈXXdð7ÑÔ€X€AXXXÔÔ€Š´•ŠXX€AÔñZñßr€ *<,(j 8 `€€@E  tt0"H¨Órß›ñZñ€€€€à@j j ‚àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  ÐÌà@>>%‚àAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌó óÌÌÌHOMER€R.€(TOBY)€BARNES,€et€al.,à ì à)€C/A€NO.€03A01„9812„CH„00403Ð   Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)Ìà 4 àPlaintiff„Appellee,à < àà ” àà ì à)€SEVIER€CHANCERYÐ  Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)Ìv.à 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€HON.€TELFORD€E.€FOGETY,€JR.,Ð   Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à)€CHANCELLORÌEMPLOYERS€MUTUAL€CASUALTYà ì à)Ð   ÐCOMPANY,à Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àœ)€AFFIRMED›Ð   Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àœ)€AND›Ìà 4 àDefendant„Appellant.à ” àà ì àœ)€REMANDED›Ð  ÐÌÌÌJAMES€H.€RIPLEY,€SHARP€&€RIPLEY,€Sevierville,€for€Plaintiff„Appellee.ÌÌFRANK€Q.€VETTORI,€OððNEIL,€PARKER€&€WILLIAMSON,€Knoxville,€forÏDefendant„Appellant.ÌÌÌÌÌà@%‚àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óˆÐ " ÐÌÌà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àà D àà œ àFranks,€J.ÌÌÌÌÓÓà 4 àà Œ àIn€this€Declaratory€Judgment€action,€the€Trial€Judge€entered€summaryÏjudgment€against€Employers€Mutual€Casualty€Company,€in€favor€of€the€plaintiffs,Ïdeclaring€ð ð[t]he€defendant€owes€the€plaintiffs€a€duty€of€defense€of€the€action€pendingÏin€the€Circuit€Court€for€Sevier€County,€Tennessee,€captioned€Devin€Phillips€v.€TobyÏBarnes€.€.€.€and€further€owes€indemnity€coverage€respecting€such€claim,€pursuant€toÏthe€policies€of€insurance€in€question€.€.€.ðð.€€The€judgment€was€entered€pursuant€toÏT.R.C.P.€Rule€54.02,€and€the€insurance€company€has€appealed€that€decision€to€thisÏCourt.Ìà 4 àà Œ àThe€action€mentioned€in€the€judgment€arose€due€to€a€Complaint€forÏmalicious€prosecution€which€was€filed€against€plaintiff€Barnes€and€The€ChristmasÐ ;þ34ýS ÐPlace,€Inc.,€by€œPhillips,€a›€former€employee€of€The€Christmas€Place.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àAn€employee€of€The€Christmas€Place€told€Barnes€that€Phillips€wasÏobserved€taking€three€100€dollar€bills€out€of€the€cash€register€at€the€store,€and€PhillipsÏtold€the€employee,€ð ðYou€didnððt€see€this.ðð€€A€$300€discrepancy€in€the€cash€drawer€wasÏdiscovered€on€November€30,€1996.€€Barnes€investigated€the€discrepancy,€withoutÏsuccess.€€On€December€5,€1996,€Barnes€terminated€Phillipsðð€employment€with€TheÏChristmas€Place.€€The€next€day,€on€December€6,€1996,€Barnes€presented€the€facts€toÏthe€Deputy€Clerk€of€the€Trial€Justice€Court,€and€an€arrest€warrant€was€issued€forÏPhillips€for€misdemeanor€theft.€€On€March€11,€1997,€Phillips€was€acquitted€of€the€theftÏcharge,€and€on€June€19,€1997,€Barnes€was€served€with€the€Complaint€for€maliciousÏprosecution.€€He€gave€notice€of€the€suit€to€the€insurer€of€The€Christmas€Place€on€JuneÏ20,€1997.€€He€explained€that€prior€to€the€filing,€he€had€no€warning€or€notice€of€anyÏkind€that€Phillips€intended€to€bring€the€action.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àMr.€Barnes€stated€that€in€initiating€the€prosecution€of€Phillips,€he€wasÏacting€out€of€his€œduty›€as€director€and€manager€of€The€Christmas€Place€and€not€out€ofÏany€personal€concerns.€€He€stated€that€The€Christmas€Place€did€not€make€a€regularÏpractice€of€prosecuting€its€employees€or€former€employees,€and€that€Phillips€status€as€aÏformer€employee€was€irrelevant€to€the€decision€to€prosecute€because€any€person€takingÏmoney€from€the€cash€register€would€have€been€prosecuted.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àSummary€Judgment€is€appropriate€where€there€are€no€genuine€issues€ofÏmaterial€fact€and€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.€€òòByrd€v.Ð /(( ÐHallóó,€847€S.W.2d€208€(Tenn.€1993).€€Since€only€a€question€of€law€is€involved€in€thisÐ 1** Ðcase,œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€the€review€of€the€grant€of€summary€judgment€is€òòde€novoóó,€without€a€presumptionÐ 3,, Ðof€correctness.€€òòBain€v.€Wellsóó,€936€S.W.2d€618€(Tenn.€1997).€Ð 5.. Ðà 4 àà Œ àAn€insurance€policy€must€be€construed€in€a€reasonable€and€logicalÏmanner€to€determine€the€intent€of€the€parties.€€òòSetters€v.€Permanent€General€Assur.Ð   ÐCorpóó.,€937€S.W.2d€950,€953€(Tenn.€App.€1996).€€The€language€of€the€policy€must€beÐ   Ðgiven€its€plain€and€ordinary€meaning€as€a€layman€would€understand€it.€€òòPaul€v.Ð (  ÐInsurance€Co.€of€North€Americaóó,€675€S.W.2d€481,€483„484€(Tenn.€App.€1984).€Ð 0(  ÐWhere€an€ambiguity€exists€in€an€insurance€policy,€the€ambiguity€is€to€be€construedÏstrongly€against€the€insurer€in€favor€of€the€œinsureñMñdñMññNñdñNññOñ.ñOññQññPñ,ñPñ›€ñQññRñ,€ñRñòòTravelers›€Ins.€Co.€v.€Aetna€Cas.€&Ð @8 ÐSur.€Co.óó,€491€S.W.2d€363,€366€(Tenn.€1973);€€òòRyan€v.€MFA€Mut.€Ins.€Co.óó,€610€S.W.2dÐ H@ Ð428,€437€(Tenn.€App.€1980),€and€the€Supreme€Court€has€said€that€ambiguities€inÏð ðexceptions,€exclusions,€and€limitations€in€policies€of€insurance€are€to€be€mostÏstrongly€construed€against€the€insurer.ðð€€òòTravelers€Ins.€Co.óó,€491€S.W.2d€at€367.Ð `X Ðà 4 àà Œ àIn€the€contract€of€insurance€before€us,€under€the€title€ð ðWHO€IS€ANÏINSURED,ðð€the€contract€provides€coverage€for€the€named€insured,€The€ChristmasÏPlace,€Inc.€€Coverage€œalso€extends›€to€œthe›€corporationððs€executive€officers€andÏdirectors,€but€only€with€respect€to€their€duties€as€officers€or€directors.€€Coverage€alsoÏextends€to€employees€other€than€officers€and€directors,€but€only€for€acts€within€theÏscope€of€their€employment.€€Excluded€from€coverage€of€an€employee€acting€within€theÏscope€of€employment€is€personal€injury€to€a€co„employee€ð ðwhile€in€the€course€of€hisÏor€her€employment€or€while€performing€duties€related€to€the€conduct€of€yourÏbusiness.ðð€Ìà 4 àà Œ àDefendant€concedes€that€Barnes€was€a€director,€managing€officer,€andÏmanager€of€The€Christmas€Place,€Inc.,€and€Barnes,€in€his€affidavit€stated€that€at€allÏtimes€he€was€acting€in€his€capacity€as€director€and€manager€of€the€Christmas€Place.€ÏBarnes€testimony€was€not€disputed,€and€under€the€policy€œhis›€coverage€œis€that€of›€anÏofficer€and€director,€and€not€just€as€a€ð ðco„employeeðð.Ð Ð9È22 Ðà 4 àà Œ àThe€policy€states€that€it€applies€to€bodily€injury,€property€damage,Ïpersonal€injury,€and€advertising€injury.€€At€issue€is€œð ðpersonal›€œinjury.ð𛀀The€policyÏapplies€to€personal€injury€ð ðcaused€by€an€offense€arising€out€of€your€business,€.€.€.€.ðð€Ïð ðPersonal€injuryðð€is€defined€as€an€ð ðinjury€other€than€ððbodily€injury,ðð€arising€out€of€oneÏor€more€of€the€following€offenses:ððÌÓÓà 4 àà0 Œ àò òa.ó ó€€False€arrest,€detention€or€imprisonment;Ð0( Œ (#Œ (# Ðà 4 àà0 Œ àò òb.ó ó€€Malicious€prosecution;Ð4, Œ (#Œ (# ÐÓˆÓÓÓà 4 àà0 Œ àò òc.ó ó€.€.€.€Ð80 Œ (#Œ (# Ðò òà8 4 àà0Œ 4Ð 4Ð àd.ó ó€€Oral€or€written€publication€of€material€that€slanders€or€libels€aÐ <4  Ðperson€or€organization€or€disparages€a€personððs€or€organizationððsÏgoods,€products€or€services;€orÐ Œ Ð Œ Ð  ÐÓpÓà 4 àò òà0 Œ àe.ó ó€.€.€.€.ÐH@Œ (#Œ (# ÐAccordingly,€the€policy€specifically€provides€coverage€to€the€insured€for€suits€againstÏthe€insured€for€malicious€prosecution.Ìà 4 àà Œ àWhile€the€policy€specifically€provides€coverage€for€maliciousÏprosecution,€it€also€contains€an€exclusion€which€the€defendant€claims€excludesÏcoverage€in€this€case.€€In€an€amendment€to€the€policy,€titled€ð ðEMPLOYMENT„¼RELATED€PRACTICES€EXCLUSION,ðð€the€policy€states:Ìà8 4 àà0Œ 4Ð 4Ð àThis€insurance€does€not€apply€to:Ð Œ Ð Œ Ð  Ðà 4 àà0 Œ à1.€€ð ðBodily€injuryðð€or€ð ðpersonal€injuryðð€to:Ð Œ (#Œ (# ÐÓÓà 4 à€€€€€à0 Œ àa.€€A€person€arising€out€of€any:Ð)ˆ""Œ (#Œ (# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà0 ä à(1)€Refusal€to€employ€that€person;Ð ä (#ä (# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà0 ä à(2)€Termination€of€that€personððs€employment;€orÐ ä (#ä (# Ðà8 4 àà Œ àà0ä 4Ð 4Ð à(3)€Employment„related€practices,€policies,€acts€orÏomissions€such€as€coercion,€demotion,€evaluation,Ïreassignment,€discipline,€defamation,€harassment,Ïhumiliation€or€discrimination€directed€at€that€person;€.€.€.€Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌÓˆ"ÓœñSñFindingñSññTñUsingñTñ›€the€definition€of€personal€injury€set€forth€in€the€policy,€the€defendant€seems€toÏœrewrite›€this€exclusion€in€their€brief€to€say,€ð ðThis€insurance€does€not€apply€to€falseÏarrest€or€malicious€prosecution€claims€of€a€person€arising€out€of€any€refusal€to€employÏthat€person;€termination€of€that€personððs€employment;€or€employment„relatedÏpractices,€policies,€acts€or€omissions€.€.€.€.ðð€€The€defendant€then€argues€that€if€theÐ Ð9È22 Ðindividual€is€insured€under€the€policy€due€to€being€either€an€officer€or€employee€ofÏThe€Christmas€Place,€and€that€individual€fires€an€employee€of€the€business€for€allegedÏtheft€out€of€the€cash€register€during€his€employment,€then€later€has€an€arrest€warrantÏissued€for€the€employee€and€prosecutes€that€employee€for€the€alleged€theft,€then€theÏresultant€false€arrest€and€subsequent€malicious€prosecution€must€arise€out€of€theÏemployment„related€practices,€policies€or€acts€or€omissions,€which€are€excluded€fromÏpolicy€coverage.€€œÌà 4 àà Œ àð ðPersonal›€Injuryðð€is€defined€in€the€policy€as€meaning€false€arrest€andÏmalicious€prosecution,€among€other€things.€€The€exclusion€does€not€attempt€to€alterÏthe€definition€of€ð ðpersonal€injury.ðð€€It€simply€excludes€coverage€for€ð ðpersonal€injuryððÏarising€out€of€certain€employment„related€situations.€€This€part€of€the€exclusion€is€notÏambiguous,€but€what€is€ambiguous€is€one€of€the€limited€situations€to€which€theÏpersonal€injury€exclusion€applies.€€The€injury€in€this€case€did€not€arise€out€of€a€refusalÏto€employ€a€person,€nor€did€it€arise€out€of€termination€of€employment,€because€PhillipsÏbrought€suit€against€the€plaintiff€for€malicious€prosecution€due€to€his€arrest€andÏsubsequent€prosecution,€not€his€termination€of€employment.€€The€question€thusÏbecomes€whether€the€alleged€malicious€prosecution€arose€out€of€ð ðemployment„relatedÏpractices,€policies,€acts€or€omissions,€such€as€coercion,€demotion,€evaluation,Ïreassignment,€discipline,€defamation,€harassment,€humiliation€or€discriminationÏdirected€at€that€person.ðð€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àPlaintiffs€œargue›€that€the€prosecution€of€Phillips€was€not€an€employment„¼related€practice,€policy,€act,€or€omission.€€They€assert€that€The€Christmas€Place€wouldÏprosecute€any€person€for€stealing,€whether€that€person€were€an€employee€or€merely€aÏcustomer.€€Barnes€asserted€that€this€is€the€only€instance€he€can€remember€where€aÏformer€employee€was€prosecuted.€€Thus€the€prosecution€could€not€be,€he€contends,€aÏð ðpracticeðð€or€ð ðpolicy.ðð€€Further€a€criminal€prosecution€is€not€related€to€normalÐ Ð9È22 Ðemployment€sanctions,€like€discipline€or€reassignment.€€While€defendant€here€does€notÏexplicitly€state€its€position,€it€indicates€that€because€Phillips€was€an€employee€when€heÏallegedly€took€the€money,€his€subsequent€prosecution€was€employment„related.€€€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àA€reasonable€interpretation€of€this€exclusion€is€that€the€employment„¼related€practices,€policies,€acts,€or€omissions€are€limited€to€the€types€of€things€listed€inÏthe€provision.€€By€providing€such€a€list,€which€includes€ð ðcoercion,€demotion,Ïevaluation,€reassignment,€discipline,€defamation,€harassment,€humiliation€orÏdiscrimination,ðð€the€policy€indicates€that€only€these€types€of€employment„relatedÏmatters€are€covered.€€Situations€in€which€the€employment€relationship€is€more€tenuousÏwould€not€be€covered.€€This€œanalysis›€is€consistent€with€òòAllstate€Ins.€Co.€v.€Wattsóó,€811Ð PH ÐS.W.2d€883,€887„888€(Tenn.€1991),€where€the€Supreme€Court€said€that€the€broadÏphrase€ð ðarising€out€ofðð€should€not€include€any€causal€relationship.€€Ìà 4 àà Œ àConsidering€the€policy€wording€in€the€light€of€the€foregoing,€theÏprosecution€of€Phillips€œwould€not›€be€considered€œto›€be€the€type€of€employment„relatedÏpractice,€policy,€act€or€omission€which€is€included€in€this€provision.€€Prosecution€forÏalleged€theft€cannot€be€brought€into€the€realm€of€ñTñœñTñœthe›€provision€merely€because€itÏincidentally€causes€humiliation,€which€could€be€employment„related€practice,€if€theÏprosecution€did€not€arise€out€of€the€employment€practice.€€The€provision€at€issue€isÏambiguous,€because€the€plain€and€ordinary€meaning€of€the€language€does€not€clearlyÏindicate€whether€malicious€prosecution€of€a€former€employee€is€excluded.Ìà 4 àà Œ àAccordingly,€œñUñmalicious›€ñUñprosecution›€of€a€former€employee€for€theft€does€not€appearÏto€be€the€type€of€employment„related€practice,€policy,€act€or€omission€to€which€theÏexclusion€applies,€since€the€insurance€policy€explicitly€provides€coverage€forÏmalicious€prosecution.€€Moreover,€any€ambiguities,€especially€those€in€exclusions,Ïmust€be€construed€strongly€against€the€insurer,€and€on€this€basis,€we€affirm€the€grantÏof€summary€judgment€declaring€œcoverage›€under€the€policy.Ð Ð9È22 Ðà 4 àà Œ àFinally,€defendant€argues€that€it€does€not€have€the€duty€to€defend€andÏindemnify€because€Barnes€did€not€comply€with€the€notice€provision€in€the€policy.€€TheÏcontract€of€insurance€provides:Ìà0 4 àà0Œ 4(#4(#à2.€€Duties€in€the€Event€of€Occurrence,€Offense,€Claim€or€SuitÐ Œ (#Œ (# ÐÓÓà8 4 àà0Œ 4Ð 4Ð àà0ä Œ Ð Œ Ð àa.€€You€must€see€to€it€that€we€are€notified€as€soon€asÏpracticable€of€an€ð ðoccurrenceðð€or€an€offense€which€mayÏresult€in€a€claim.€€To€the€extent€possible,€notice€shouldÏinclude:Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌÓY9ÓÓÓà8 4 àà Œ àà0ä 4Ð 4Ð à1.€How,€when€and€where€the€ð ðoccurrenceðð€or€offense€tookÏplace;Ð ä Ð ä Ð  Ðà 4 àà Œ àà0 ä à2.€€The€names€and€addresses€of€any€injured€persons€andÏwitnesses,€andÐ ä (#ä (# Ðà „ àà8 Ü àà04ÜÐ ÜÐ àà0Œ 4Ð 4Ð àà0ä Œ Ð Œ Ð à3.€€The€nature€and€location€of€any€injury€or€damage€arisingÏout€of€the€ð ðoccurrenceðð€or€offense.Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌÓƒ:ÓÓÓà8 4 àà0Œ 4Ð 4Ð àà0ä Œ Ð Œ Ð àb.€€If€a€claim€is€made€or€ð ðsuitðð€is€brought€against€anyÏinsured,€you€must:Ð ä Ð ä Ð  ÐÌà8 4 àà Œ àà0ä 4Ð 4Ð à1.€€Immediately€record€the€specifics€of€the€claim€or€ð ðsuitððÏand€the€date€received;€andÐ ä Ð ä Ð  Ðà0 4 àà0Œ 4(#4(#àÐ Œ (#Œ (# Ðà 4 àà Œ àà0 ä à2.€€Notify€us€as€soon€as€practicable.Ð ä (#ä (# ÐÌÓÓà 4 àà Œ àð ðOccurrenceðð€is€defined€in€the€policy€as€ð ðan€accident,€includingÏcontinuous€or€repeated€exposure€to€substantially€the€same€general€harmfulÏconditions,ðð€but€ð ðoffenseðð€is€not€defined.€Ìà 4 àà Œ àDefendant€concedes€that€provision€(b)€was€complied€with,€becauseÏBarnes€gave€notice€of€the€suit€immediately€after€receiving€the€Complaint€for€maliciousÏprosecution,€but€it€claims€that€provision€(a)€was€not€complied€with,€because€BarnesÏdid€not€give€notice€of€an€ð ðoccurrence.ðð€€Since€the€policy€defines€ð ðoccurrenceðð€as€anÏaccident,€and€this€case€involves€an€œñVñalleged€ñVñintentional›€tort€instead€of€an€accident,€noÏð ðoccurrenceðð€happened€in€this€case€for€Barnes€to€report.€€œThus€the€issue€becomes›Ïwhether€an€offense€took€place€which€Barnes€should€have€reported.Ìà 4 àà Œ àAn€insured€has€a€duty€to€give€notice€œwhenñWñ,ñWñ›€œñXñð ðñXñan›€ordinarily€or€reasonablyÏprudent€person€would€have€known€of€the€occurrence€of€œan›€event€œthat›€œmight›€reasonablyÐ Ð9È22 Ðbe€expected€to€produce€a€claim€against€the€insurance€œcompany.ñYñððñYñ›€€òòAllstate€Ins.€Co.€v.Ð  ÐWilsonóó,€856€S.W.2d€706,€709€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€Admittedly,€€Barnes€knew€that€heÐ   Ðwas€prosecuting€Phillips€for€theft,€but€he€stated€that€he€believed€that€Phillips€did€stealÏthe€money€and€that€he€was€justified€in€prosecuting€him.€€It€is€reasoned€that€if€theÏprosecution€was€justified,€there€would€be€no€reason€to€expect€œsuch›€prosecution€œwould›Ïgive€rise€to€a€malicious€prosecution€claim.€€œÌà 4 àà Œ àOn€these€facts,€this›€is€not€the€type€of€ð ðoffenseðð€which€a€reasonablyÏprudent€person€would€expect€to€give€rise€to€a€claim.€€Accordingly,€we€hold€that€BarnesÏdid€not€violate€the€insurance€policy€by€failing€to€inform€the€insurance€company€that€heÏwas€about€to€prosecute€Phillips€for€theft.€€His€first€notice€of€a€claim€or€a€potentialÏclaim€was€when€the€Complaint€was€filed,€and€then€he€gave€notice€immediatelyÏthereafter,€as€required€under€the€policy.Ìà 4 àà Œ àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court,€and€remand€with€the€cost€ofÏthe€appeal€assessed€to€the€appellant.ÌÓÓÌà 4 àÌÌñXñœñXñà@‚‚+‚àòòˆà D àÐ „&| Ðóóà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì à__________________________Ð ˆ'€  Ðà 4 àà Œ àà ä àà < àà ” àà ì àHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌñXñœñXñÌ___________________________ÌHouston€M.€Goddard,€P.J.ÌÌÌñXñœñXñÌÌ___________________________ÌH.€David€Cate,€Sp.J.Ì