ÿWPC le k~b„u{¡DX)­L5?ïóe›¸ÝJ6y[Çw5…1ú MPÑ[ÿ+rEd+­½EØ*E—SôgñØlO˜÷Ñ“ÖÒûK±I“õP…—ÕB‘â=éâ<ìƒ!d1™ »@¤ô·ÜùMž):F é~ê×°dOÈ“šÖ˜òã(zÈ}ÕÃ=é[ƒ¸©çPºÇØm}¹cô¸?=þ7F1LòÓÃ[æ ÑBB_‚FÁû’{T_ò¡.IÓÓ°r2Îõ Y®ãRù'- /SW ¼x-ô$7¬¾ ÚøÑ¥ÍBæqOWö†œ*Ç^=œÿý6z#3TÅQjn³+TõÙ=´ë­;"è+òI(¿ï¹þÿD®œ¥ 3PG‰'a05”öxjê“~ ä1®™Ó¨éHá*@Yè'kÄk/_j"©à–ÄÉ+ºÎäÇóm‚îCßož„ü‰ä ¥«%Þ©‘kÿá&ôh’U×Üt·eÒ'ÉžF’Í轄 dÁíSÇîq=F¯wóc†óu!}M†ñä±Äü¿›¤ð<ÛT€:²e Š#!B%„´h§ ÑM›-ëÀšˆó]¸ÄA¿Àµ~Ë/‡f¹Ä.Èb K1ýBÇA®º¸‚,b#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë ë N±±±E³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³bµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµ 0ë½½½½ B¨¨ 0¤Å D5i D-ž 0KËË ASÆi 0¤/ 0DÓ A«˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»Eu+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÆyÿ*Xଠ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2» $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Dñ»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôíYò»»Ô d(|3‰h$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Dñ»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‰h$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Dñ»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Dñ»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Dñ»»»ÔÑ8€ýXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îADñÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼Dñ»îîA #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€March€10,€2000Ð üL ÐÔ‡XýX»¼DñÔÌò òÔ#†¼Dñ»XXýþ#ÔFLOYD€CAMPBELL€v.€CORRECTIONS€CORPORATIONÐ úJ ÐOF€AMERICAÔ‡XýX»¼DñÔó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Wayne€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€10306€€€€€€Jim€T.€Hamilton,€ChancellorÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„01082„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€August€7,€Ô_Ô2001Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€an€appeal€by€an€inmate€in€a€prison€operated€by€Corrections€Corporation€of€America€(CCA).€Ð ŒÜ ÐHis€claim€stems€from€the€monetary€loss€he€received€as€a€result,€he€alleges,€of€CCA€employee(s)Ð xÈ Ðadding€an€unauthorized€name€and€number€to€Mr.€Campbellððs€call€list€which€resulted€in€unauthorizedÐ d´ Ðcharges.€€The€court€below€dismissed€Mr.€Campbellððs€complaint€on€the€grounds€that€the€complaintÐ P  Ðdid€not€allege€a€cause€of€action€against€CCA.€€We€disagree.€€Mr.€Campbell€did€sufficiently€allege€aÐ <Œ Ðcause€of€action€against€CCA€for€the€negligence€of€its€employee(s)€in€violating€prison€policies€andÐ (x Ðadding€an€eleventh€name€and€number€to€his€call€list€without€his€permission€or€authorization.€€Further,Ð d ÐCCA€may€be€held€vicariously€liable€for€the€negligent€acts€of€its€employees€and,€therefore,€is€a€properÐ P Ðdefendant.Ð ì< ÐÓËÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ Ä ÐReversed€and€Remandedó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Dñ»àXýŒ#ÔÔ‡XýX.¼DñÔPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBen€H.€Cantrell,€P.J.,€M.S.óó,Ð ˆØ Ðand€William€C.€Koch,€Jr.,€J.,€joined.Ð t Ä ÐÌFloyd€Campbell,€Pro€Se,€Clifton,€Tennessee.Ð L"œ! ÐÌTom€Anderson,€Jackson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Corrections€Corporation€of€America.Ð $$t# ÐÓR ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Dñ»XXý #ÔÔ‡XýX»¼DñÔÐ ü%L!% ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Dñ»XXýJ #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XýX»¼DñÔà  àMr.€Campbell,€an€inmate€of€the€Department€of€Correction,€filed€this€action€against€CorrectionÐ Ô'$#' ÐCorporation€of€America€(ð ðCCAðð),€a€private€prison€contractor€who€operates€the€prison€where€Mr.Ð À($( ÐCampbell€is€incarcerated,€South€Central€Correctional€Center€(ð ðSCCCðð),€alleging€that€his€inmateÐ ¬)ü$) Ðtelephone€account€had€been€accessed€and€utilized€by€an€unknown€person€without€his€knowledge€orÐ ˜*è%* Ðpermission.€€He€alleged€that€CCA€had€a€duty€to€prevent€unauthorized€access€and€that€its€negligenceÐ „+Ô&+ Ðwas€responsible€for€his€loss€of€money.€€CCA€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.Ð p,À', Ð12.02(6)€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€relief€can€be€granted,€on€the€basis€the€complaintÐ \-¬(-ý Ðfailed€to€allege€any€actions€or€inactions€by€CCA€which€would€entitle€Mr.€Campbell€to€relief.€€TheÐ ° Ðtrial€court€granted€the€motion€to€dismiss,€and€Mr.€Campbell€appealed.Ð œì ÐÌà  àA€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€12.02(6)€motion€to€dismiss€for€failure€to€state€a€claim€upon€which€reliefÐ tÄ Ðcan€be€granted€tests€only€the€legal€sufficiency€of€the€complaint,€not€the€strength€of€the€petitionerððsÐ `° Ðproof.€€òòCook€v.€Spinnakerððs€of€Ô_ÔRivergateÔ_Ô,€Inc.óó,€878€S.W.2d€934,€938€(Tenn.€1994).€€The€basis€for€theÐ L œ Ðmotion€is€that€the€allegations€contained€in€the€complaint,€considered€alone€and€taken€as€true,€areÐ 8 ˆ Ðinsufficient€to€constitute€a€cause€of€action€as€a€matter€of€law.€€òòIdóó.€€In€resolving€the€issues€in€thisÐ $ t Ðappeal,€we€are€required€to€construe€the€complaint€liberally€in€the€plaintiffððs€favor€and€take€theÐ  ` Ðallegations€of€the€complaint€as€true.€€òòBell€v.€Icard,€Merrill,€Cullins,€Timm,€Furen€and€Ginsburg,€P.A.óó,Ð ü L  Ð986€S.W.2d€550,€554€(Tenn.€1999).€€Our€standard€of€review€on€appeal€from€a€trial€courtððs€ruling€onÐ è 8  Ða€motion€to€dismiss€is€òòde€novoóó,€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€as€to€the€trial€courtððs€legalÐ Ô$  Ðconclusions.€€òòStein€v.€Davidson€Hotel€Coóó.,€945€S.W.2d€714,€716€(Tenn.€1997).Ð À  ÐÌà  àMr.€Campbellððs€allegations,€which€we€must€accept€as€true€for€purposes€of€the€motion,€are€asÐ ˜è  Ðfollows.€€Inmates€are€given€phone€lists€and€phone€accounts.€€Calls€may€be€placed€only€to€thoseÐ „Ô  Ðpersons€or€numbers€on€the€authorized€list,€and€only€authorized€numbers€are€added€to€the€list.€€UsingÐ pÀ Ðan€access€code€individual€to€the€inmate,€only€the€inmate€is€supposed€to€be€able€to€make€a€call,€andÐ \¬ Ðpayment€comes€from€the€inmateððs€phone€account.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àBeginning€sometime€around€April€13,€1998,€a€telephone€number€appeared€on€Mr.€CampbellððsÐ  p Ðphone€list€that€he€did€not€request€be€added€to€his€list.€€From€about€April€13,€1998€until€May€31,€1998,€Ð  \ Ðtelephone€calls€were€made€to€this€newly„added€telephone€number€by€an€unknown€person€or€persons.€Ð øH ÐThe€total€amount€deducted€from€Mr.€Campbellððs€phone€account€for€these€calls€was€approximatelyÐ ä4 Ð$125.00.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àMr.€Campbell€filed€a€grievance€on€May€25,€1998,€apparently€after€learning€of€the€charges€toÐ ¨ø Ðthe€account.€€He€complained€that€money€was€being€taken€from€his€phone€account€ð ðby€someone€elseÐ ”ä Ðusing€my€Ô_ÔTDOCÔ_Ô€number.ðð€€Among€other€things,€he€asked€for€a€new€secret€number€for€his€phoneÐ €Ð Ðaccount.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àIn€his€grievance,€Mr.€Campbell€alleged€he€had€informed€his€counselor€on€May€20€thatÐ D!” Ðsomeone€had€been€tampering€with€his€phone€account€and€had€asked€her€to€put€a€stop€payment€on€hisÐ 0"€  Ðaccount€and€that€he€had€asked€other€correctional€officers€for€help.€€He€asserted€his€account€hadÐ #l! Ðdropped€from€$392.72€on€May€20€to€$280.71€as€of€the€date€he€filed€his€grievance.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àMr.€Campbell€received€a€response€in€which€the€grievance€board€ð ðconcurred€with€theÐ à%0!$ Ðsupervisorððs€response,€while€recommending€that€this€matter€be€investigated€further.ðð€€TheÐ Ì&"% Ðsupervisorððs€response€referred€to€by€the€board€was€to€the€effect€that€the€supervisor€had€printed€outÐ ¸'#& Ða€summary€of€the€phone€calls€made€on€Mr.€Campbellððs€account.€€He€also€stated:Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà8  àA€majority€of€the€calls€were€made€to€Ms.€Camella€Fulton.€ð ðI€spoke€with€Ms.€FultonÐ |*Ì%) Ð.€.€.€and€she€assured€me€she€knew€and€spoke€with€I/M€Campbell€on€a€regular€basis.€Ð h+¸&* ÐFrom€5„1„98€through€5„25„98€there€were€over€$100.00€worth€of€calls€made€to€Ms.Ð ° ÐFulton€alone.€€I€gave€this€printout€to€Counselor€Richey€to€discuss€with€I/M€Campbell.€Ð œì ÐI€assigned€I/M€Campbell€a€new€access€code€and€feel€there€is€nothing€more€I€can€do.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€warden€reviewed€the€grievance€boardððs€decision,€agreed€with€the€proposed€response,€andÐ `° Ðadded€the€following€statement:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àI€have€personally€done€some€additional€investigating€and€have€found€that€the€personÐ $ t Ðto€whom€counselor€Richie€talked€is€the€wife€of€an€inmate€at€another€facility.€€All€infoÐ  ` Ðwill€be€packaged€and€sent€to€that€facility€for€their€consideration€as€a€disciplinary.Ðü L Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThus,€it€would€appear€there€was€some€question€whether€Mr.€Campbell€had€made€the€calls€orÐ Ô$  Ðwhether€his€access€code€had€been€used€to€make€the€calls€without€his€knowledge.Ð À  ÐÌà  àHe€responded€to€the€response€from€the€grievance€committee€by€stating€that€he€wanted€proofÐ ˜è  Ð(recordings)€of€the€calls€he€supposedly€made€to€Camella€Fulton.€€He€notes€that€he€eventually€saw€theÐ „Ô  Ðwarden€regarding€this€grievance€and€that€Camella€Fulton€was€not€on€his€phone€list;€it€was€RhondaÐ pÀ ÐAllen€who€had€been€added€to€his€list€by€someone€unknown.€€He€also€asked€to€be€informed€whyÐ \¬ ÐRhonda€Allen€had€been€added€to€his€phone€list€on€April€15€as€his€sister€when€she€was€not€his€sisterÐ H˜ Ðand€he€had€not€requested€she€be€added.€€Adding€that€name€made€his€list€longer€than€the€maximumÐ 4„ Ðallowed€(ten).€€He€also€submitted€a€copy€of€his€phone€list€for€April,€which€did€not€include€RhondaÐ  p ÐAllen€or€Camella€Fulton.€€The€form€included€instructions€that€changes€to€the€list€could€only€be€madeÐ  \ Ðduring€the€first€full€week€of€April,€July,€October,€and€January,€except€in€emergencies.Ð øH ÐÌà  àIn€his€brief,€Mr.€Campbell€explains€his€claim€clearly:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€proper€procedure€for€Inmate€Telephone€Accounts€is€for€the€inmate€to€submit€aÐ ¨ø Ðrequest€that€a€certain€telephone€number€be€added€to€the€inmateððs€list.€€Once€approvedÐ ”ä Ðby€the€prison€administration,€the€number€is€added€to€the€computer€system€under€theÐ €Ð Ðinmateððs€access€code.€€When€an€inmate€wishes€to€make€a€telephone€call,€the€inmateÐ l¼ Ðis€required€to€input€the€telephone€number€and€then€the€access€code.€€The€computerÐ X ¨ Ðdetermines€if€the€number€is€on€the€inmateððs€approved€telephone€list€and,€if€so,Ð D!” Ðconnects€the€number.€€If€the€inmate€has€not€called€collect,€the€cost€of€the€call€isÐ 0"€  Ðautomatically€deducted€from€monies€previously€deposited€by€the€inmate€and/or€theÐ #l! Ðinmateððs€family€in€the€inmateððs€Telephone€Account.Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àThe€access€code€assigned€to€an€inmate€is€the€inmateððs€T.D.O.C.€number,€which€isÐ à%0!$ Ðstamped€on€the€inmateððs€clothing€and€listed€on€the€inmateððs€identification€card.€€ThisÐ Ì&"% Ðidentification€card€is€required€to€be€placed€in€the€window€of€the€cell€door€during€eachÐ ¸'#& Ðinstitutional€count,€in€full€view€of€all€inmates€and€staff.€€The€identification€card€isÐ ¤(ô#' Ðalso€required€to€be€submitted€to€other€inmates€when€checking€out€such€items€asÐ )à$( Ðcleaning€supplies€and€library€books.€€Therefore,€the€access€code€of€each€inmate€is€notÐ |*Ì%) Ðconfidential.€€Any€inmate€can€determine€the€T.D.O.C.€number,€and€therefore€theÐ h+¸&* Ðtelephone€access€code,€of€another€inmate€with€ease.€€The€telephone€numbersÐ ° Ðthemselves,€however,€are€supposed€to€remain€confidential.€€Only€the€inmateÐ œì Ðrequesting€the€addition€of€the€telephone€number€and€the€prison€officials€responsibleÐ ˆØ Ðfor€approving€and€entering€the€telephone€number€on€the€computer€system€would€haveÐ tÄ Ðaccess€to€the€number.Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà@oo(ìà.€.€.ˆÐ L œ ÐÌà8  àLogically,€this€negligence€could€only€have€been€accomplished€by€employees€ofÐ $ t ÐAppellee,€through€a€lack€of€training€and/or€supervision€on€the€part€of€Appellee.€Ð  ` ÐTherefore,€Appellant€alleged€actions€on€behalf€of€Appellee€that€sustain€the€legalÐ ü L  Ðtheory€of€negligence.€€Since€any€number€of€Appelleeððs€employees€could€haveÐ è 8  Ðperformed€the€negligence,€Appellant€also€put€forth€the€legal€theory€of€respondentÐ Ô$  Ðsuperior.€€Appellee€is€responsible€for€the€negligence€on€any€of€its€employeeððs€partÐ À  Ðtoward€the€inmates€under€Appelleeððs€supervision.€€See€òòShell€Petroleum€CorporationÐ ¬ü  Ðv.€Magnolia€Pipe€Line€Companyóó,€85€S.W.2d€829.€€Appellee€is€also€liable€for€injuriesÐ ˜è  Ðdone€to€the€property€or€monies€of€inmates€under€Appelleeððs€supervision€resultingÐ „Ô  Ðfrom€the€acts€of€any€of€Appelleeððs€employees.€€See€òòMid„Continent€Pipeline€CompanyÐ pÀ Ðv.€Ô_ÔCrauthersÔ_Ô,€Oklahomaóó,€267€F.2d€568.Ð\¬Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àCCAððs€motion€to€dismiss€and€its€position€on€appeal€is€that€Mr.€Campbellððs€complaint€is€thatÐ 4„ Ðhis€inmate€phone€account€has€been€accessed€and€utilized€without€his€knowledge€or€permission,Ð  p Ðð ðpresumably€by€another€unknown€inmate.ðð€€Therefore,€CCA€contends,€the€allegations€ð ðare€forÐ  \ Ðactions€or€inactions€on€behalf€of€certain€unidentified€individuals,€but€do€not€include€any€specificÐ øH Ðallegations€against€the€Defendant,€CCA.ðð€Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àTo€the€contrary,€we€interpret€the€complaint€to€allege€negligence€by€employees€of€CCA€in,€atÐ ¼  Ðleast,€allowing€an€unauthorized€person€and€phone€number€to€be€added€to€Mr.€Campbellððs€list,€thusÐ ¨ø Ðmaking€the€charging€of€these€calls€to€his€account€possible.€€According€to€his€allegations€andÐ ”ä Ðdocuments€submitted€in€support€thereof,€the€adding€of€that€name€and€number€was€contrary€to€twoÐ €Ð Ðprison€policies.€€In€addition,€he€alleges€he€asked€for€a€stop€payment€on€his€telephone€account€and€forÐ l¼ Ðhelp€regarding€the€charges€eleven€days€before€the€situation€was€corrected€and€that€additional€callsÐ X ¨ Ðwere€charged€to€him€during€that€time.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àTherefore,€we€conclude€Mr.€Campbell€has€sufficiently€alleged,€for€purposes€of€a€Tenn.€R.Ð #l! Ð12.02(6)€motion,€negligent€conduct€by€employees€of€CCA€which€may€have€resulted€in€his€loss€ofÐ $X" Ðmoney.€€The€question,€therefore,€is€whether€these€allegations€against€CCA€employees,€someÐ ô$D # Ðidentified€and€some€not,€constitute€allegations€against€CCA,€the€only€defendant.€€We€believe€theyÐ à%0!$ Ðdo.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àIt€is€well€established€in€Tennessee€that€an€employer€is€vicariously€liable€for€the€actions€of€its€Ð ¤(ô#' Ðemployees€under€the€doctrine€of€respondeat€superior€as€long€as€the€employee€is€acting€within€theÐ )à$( Ðscope€of€his€duties.€€òòTennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.€Co.€v.€American€Mut.€Ô_ÔLiabÔ_Ô.€Ins.€Co.óó,€840€S.W.2dÐ |*Ì%) Ð933,€937€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);€òòBowers€v.€Ô_ÔPottsÔ_Ôóó,€617€S.W.2d€149,€156€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1981);€òòSmithÐ h+¸&* Ðv.€Ô_ÔKeyportÔ_Ô€Self„Storageóó,€No.€W1998„00810„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2000€WL€558604€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ° ÐMay€5,€2000)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).€€Moreover,€Ð œì ÐÌà8  à[Ô_Ôt]heÔ_Ô€right€of€a€person€who€has€been€injured€or€whose€property€has€been€damaged€byÐ tÄ Ðnegligence€of€an€employee€to€sue€the€employer€without€joining€the€employee€as€aÐ `° Ðdefendant€has€been€well€established€in€Tennessee€by€an€opinion€of€this€Court€inÐ L œ ÐòòWilliams€v.€Ô_ÔPritchardÔ_Ôóó,€(1957),€43€Tenn.€App.€140,€306€S.W.2d€46,€wherein€the€CourtÐ 8 ˆ Ðquoted€with€approval€from€Volume€2€Am.€Ô_ÔJurÔ_Ô.€as€follows:Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àOn€the€question€of€joinder€of€principal€and€agent€as€parties€defendantÐ ü L  Ðin€actions€predicated€upon€the€tort€of€the€agent,€there€is€some€lack€ofÐ è 8  Ðharmony€in€the€decisions.€€According€to€the€general€rule,€if€the€tort€forÐ Ô$  Ðwhich€the€plaintiff€sues€was€committed€by€an€agent€so€that€there€isÐ À  Ðliability€upon€both€the€agent,€for€the€commission€of€the€tort,€and€uponÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€principal,€for€the€act€of€the€agent€within€the€scope€of€hisÐ ˜è  Ðemployment,€both€principal€and€agent€may€be€joined€as€partiesÐ „Ô  Ðdefendant.€€Under€this€rule,€the€principal€and€agent€may€be€suedÐ pÀ Ðseparately€or€as€joint€tortfeasors,€at€the€election€of€the€one€injured.€€ItÐ \¬ Ðis€not€necessary€to€join€principal€and€agent€as€joint€tortfeasors€orÐ H˜ Ðtrespassers.Ð4„` x` x ÐÌòòÔ_ÔRankhornÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔSealtestÔ_Ô€Foodsóó,€479€S.W.2d€649,€652€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1971).Ð  \ ÐÌà  àIn€òòÔ_ÔRankhornÔ_Ôóó,€this€court€held€that€the€employer€was€not€released€from€liability€even€thoughÐ ä4 Ðthe€plaintiff€had€taken€a€voluntary€non„suit€as€to€the€employee€defendant.€€479€S.W.2d€at€652.€€ThisÐ Ð  Ðcourt€held€that€the€employer€was€still€liable€under€a€òòrespondeat€superioróó€theory€for€the€employeeððsÐ ¼  Ðactions€even€if€the€plaintiff€chose€not€to€proceed€against€the€employee€and€only€against€the€employer.€Ð ¨ø ÐòòIdóó.€€This€is€exactly€what€Mr.€Campbell€has€done€in€this€case.€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€test€for€holding€an€employer€liable€requires€the€plaintiff€to€prove€ð ð(1)€that€the€person€whoÐ l¼ Ðcaused€the€injury€was€an€employee,€(2)€that€the€employee€was€on€the€employerððs€business,€and€(3)Ð X ¨ Ðthat€the€employee€was€acting€within€the€scope€of€his€employment€when€the€injury€occurred.ðð€Ð D!” ÐòòTennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.€Co.€v.€American€Mut.€Ô_ÔLiabÔ_Ô.€Ins.€Co.óó,€840€S.W.2d€at€937.€€Taking€theÐ 0"€  Ðallegations€of€the€complaint€as€true,€Mr.€Campbell€has€alleged€negligence€on€behalf€of€CCAÐ #l! Ðemployees€by€allowing€the€unauthorized€name€and€number€to€be€added€to€Mr.€Campbellððs€list€andÐ $X" Ðfailing€to€take€action€to€prevent€further€loss.€€Therefore,€he€has€met€the€requirements€to€allege€anÐ ô$D # Ðaction€against€the€employer,€CCA.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€previously€held€that€CCA€is€the€proper€defendant€for€negligence€claims€or€tortsÐ ¸'#& Ðarising€from€CCAððs€operation€of€correctional€facilities€or€the€acts€of€its€employees.€€òòMartin€v.€StateÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€Tennesseeóó,€No.€M1999„01642„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2001€WL€747640€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July€5,€2001)Ð )à$( Ð(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed);€òòGreer€v.€Corrections€Corp.€of€Americaóó,€No.€01A01„9604„Ð |*Ì%) ÐCH„00150,€1996€WL€697942€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€6,€1996)€(no€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11Ð h+¸&* Ðapplication€filed)€(appellate€court€reinstated€claim€against€CCA€for€conversion€of€inmateððs€personalÐ ° Ðproperty,€holding€that€CCA€could€be€liable€for€the€actions€of€its€employees€under€the€doctrine€ofÐ œì Ðòòrespondeat€superioróó).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWe€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€order€dismissing€Mr.€Campbellððs€complaint€and€remand€thisÐ `° Ðcause€for€further€actions€not€inconsistent€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€theÐ L œ Ðappellee,€Ô_ÔCCA.Ô_ÔÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPATRICIA€J.€COTTRELL,€JUDGE