ÿWPC8 ¥m84Õ/âðµ]rüÎ'™éNdwú* xãp4àš.ïB±ï`QO1W™9Ÿ…PËG[—̱7†1¨(Iµ.pëË8å/Én£Âj¯E÷¢ƒäx0ÏHFg0ôkÛãü̉—‡¤}bÞ*Ëwd…eñi*8£üí#3M¦D¥vÓ½*ÌÁQµ4!8¦úÞ„X\íÿ¥'=llÙž´ó¡–¤Õ›52-ZhêÈ¢%»Š¹.tÏÖž°}õÎô3—£ç) -ÙÉo„Ã5f bœoc€Œ’¿<1|O;ýjÍ·W`ö>(»eIS…Úî¬môé1«§r×>Éê­%³’Få5þlæ¦pòîkÿCWÈúµ¬ saºEejMb’TÄ)K U¦&$D¨-æ÷•&šà¹­ë˜zåA}X‚ƒó3Ñ„»TúO:ñËÍÄGöænëg 2y¢]ùa,µURÿÍLCG~bœÂ/4ú™7…am›`?Ù´ÜCýGVþý¼þµ{̦×}¯˜Îz]8ܵø;:š×s{çù€1O*UÞãU"Å Hˆ‚¦¢±…!—?ä‰5)í‰Àú\aª†Áê$ñédVÀñc4y¦FÆXøŒ:ú`#Á@ULN %O 0(U w} 4 • ¤ ¾ bÆ 72Î N 0P ^ R ^ m` 0 ³w b* 0 D. 1‡r 1uù 0cn -Ñ U Nþ U#NL š U N¢ uð  e½hE%Ñ'ø$+'=* 0âS*<5+- q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q,q, 0Dž6ž6ž6ž6ž6 Bâ6â6â6â6 Aÿ6 D?€7 BG¿7˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5eÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡õ}|)tttttt3|xwaiver- ù-i)((3/Q$««Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ d ÔZw) ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(c(2ƒ%$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ  ÑÑÑà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ù(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÀCEKQW]cioAutoList1i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à #Ñ#€CXÿÿd#Ñ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular (í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular kÝ ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔThe€federalòò€óórulesòò€óóhave€been€similarly€interpreted.€òò€See€Ô_ÔDussouyÔ_Ô€v.€Gulf€Coast€Inv.Corp.,óó€660€F.2d€at€597Ð ° Ð("[R]ule€15(a)€severely€restricts€the€judge's€freedom,€directing€that€leave€to€amend€ððshall€be€freely€given€when€justiceÐ tÄ Ðso€requires.ðð€€It€evinces€a€bias€in€favor€of€granting€leave€to€amend.ðð).€€Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠTš#Ô ùÝ ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôŠT òXXv¨ÔFederal€courts€have€generally€interpreted€the€Federal€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€as€requiring€that€a€judgmentÐ ° Ðof€dismissal€be€set€aside€before€a€complaint€can€be€amended:Ð tÄ  Їà8  àWhere€.€.€.€€a€complaint€is€dismissed€without€leave€to€amend,€the€plaintiff€can€appeal€the€judgment,€orÐ ° Ðalternatively,€seek€leave€to€amend€under€€Rule€15(a)€after€having€the€judgment€reopened€under€either€Ð tÄ ÐRule€59€or€€60.€€€Unless€post„judgment€relief€is€granted,€the€district€court€lacks€power€to€grant€a€motionÐ 8ˆ Ðto€amend€the€complaint€under€Rule€15(a).òò€See€Public€Citizen€v.€Lagged€Group,€Inc.óó,€858€F.2d€775,Ð üL Ð781€(1st€Cir.1988),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€488€U.S.€1030,€109€S.Ct.€838,€102€L.Ed.2d€970€(1989);€see€also€3Ð À ÐMoore€supra€ðð€15.10€at€15-107€("[After€a€judgment€of€dismissal€plaintiff€must€move€under€€RulesÐ „Ô Ð59(e)€or€€60(b)€to€reopen€the€judgment.");€6€Charles€A.€Wright€&€Arthur€R.€Miller,€òòFederal€PracticeÐ H ˜ Ðand€Procedureóó€ðð€1489€at€692-93€(1990)€("[O]nce€judgment€is€entered€the€filing€of€an€amendmentÐ  \ Ðcannot€be€allowed€until€the€judgment€is€set€aside€or€vacated€under€Rule€59€or€Rule€60.")ððÐÐ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòÔ_ÔAcevedoÔ_Ô„Villalobos€v.€Hernandez,óó€22€F.3d€384,€389€(1òòstóó€Cir.€1994);€òòsee€also€Figgie€Int'l,€Inc.óó,€966€F.2d€at€1179€("It€isÐ X ¨  Ðwell€settled€that€after€a€final€judgment,€a€plaintiff€may€amend€a€complaint€under€Rule€15(a)€only€with€leave€of€court€afterÐ  l  Ða€motion€under€€Rule€59(e)€or€€Rule€60(b)€has€been€made€and€the€judgment€has€been€set€aside€or€vacated.");€€òòAmendolaÐ à 0  Ðv.€Bayeróó,€907€F.2d€760,€765€n.€4€(7th€Cir.1990)€("In€this€circuit,€after€a€judgment€has€been€entered,€a€party€must€haveÐ ¤ô  Ðthe€judgment€reopened€pursuant€to€Federal€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€59(e)€or€60(b)€and€then€request€leave€to€amendÐ h¸  Ðpursuant€to€Rule€15(a).").€€ ³Ý ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€ôŠT òXXv¨ÔTenn€Code€Ann.€ðð€47-50-109,€which€provides€damages€for€procurement€of€a€breach€of€contract,€states:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àIt€is€unlawful€for€any€person,€by€inducement,€persuasion,€misrepresentation,€or€other€means,€to€induceÐ 8ˆ Ðor€procure€the€breach€or€violation,€refusal€or€failure€to€perform€any€lawful€contract€by€any€partyÐ üL Ðthereto;€and,€in€every€case€where€a€breach€or€violation€of€such€contract€is€so€procured,€the€person€soÐ À Ðprocuring€or€inducing€the€same€shall€be€liable€in€treble€the€amount€of€damages€resulting€from€orÐ „Ô Ðincident€to€the€breach€of€the€contract.€The€party€injured€by€such€breach€may€bring€suit€for€the€breachÐ H ˜ Ðand€for€such€damages. ÇÝ ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔAt€least€one€judge€has€distinguished€between€those€two€types€of€motions.€€òòSee€Grissim€v.€Grissim,óó€637€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð873,€875€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1982)€(Conner,€J.,€dissenting).Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠTš#ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨Ô€€Judge€Conner€has€commented€that€ð ðT.R.C.P.€59€clearlyÐ tÄ Ðdifferentiates€between€a€ððMotion€for€New€Trialðð€and€a€ððMotion€to€Alter€or€Amend€Judgment.ðð€€Ô‡ôŠT ò òôŠTÔÔ#†Xv¨X òôŠT›#ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔObviously,€the€purposeÐ 8ˆ Ðof€the€former€is€to,€in€effect,€start€the€trial€proceeding€anew,€while€the€purpose€of€the€latter€is€to€modify€in€some€respectÐ üL Ðactions€previously€taken€by€the€court€without€returning€to€ððsquare€one.ðððð€òòId.€óó€It€is€clear€that€the€only€way€Mr.€Isbell€canÐ À Ðget€the€relief€he€seeks€on€a€claim€of€invasion€of€privacy€is€if€a€new€trial€is€granted;€however,€his€request€for€new€trial€isÐ „Ô Ðbased€on€a€ruling€by€the€judge€taking€the€case€away€from€the€jury.€€Some€authority€exists€which€would€indicate€that€aÐ H ˜ Ðdirected€verdict€is€not€the€proper€subject€for€a€motion€for€new€trial.€€òòóóòòSeeóó€66€òòC.J.S.,€óóòòNew€Trialóó€ðð€5b.,€p.€66;€òòsee€alsoóó€4Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠT²#ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔÐ  \ ÐÔ#†ôŠT ò òôŠTp#ÔMacLean,€Bonnyman€&€BrandtÔ‡ôŠT ò òôŠTÔ,Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠT#ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨Ôòò€Tennessee€Practiceóó€ðððð€59:6€„€59:9;òò€but€see€Moore€v.€Standard€Life€&€Accident€Ins.Ð Ð  ÐCo.óó,€504€S.W.2d€373,€375€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1972).Ô#†ôŠT ò òôŠTw#ÔÔ#†Xv¨X òôŠTº#Ô Ý ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔWe€note€that€Rule€15.02€(motion€to€amend€to€conform€pleadings€to€the€evidence)€specifically€Ô‡ôŠT ò òôŠTÔ€provides€thatÐ ° Ðthe€motion€to€amend€may€be€made€ð ðat€any€time,€even€after€judgment,ðð€but€Rule€15.01€has€no€similar€language.€€Ô#†ôŠT ò òôŠT#ÔÔ#†Xv¨X òôŠTš#Ô !Ý ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔThis€motion€was€apparently€prompted€by€a€statement€from€the€trial€court€when€it€dismissed€the€case.€€InÐ ° Ðreference€to€Mr.€Travisððs€disclosure€of€the€results€of€confidential€drug€test€results,€the€court€stated,€ð ðà8 @  àI€donððt€feelÐ tÄ Ðcomfortable€dismissing€this€lawsuit.€€This€is€still€within€the€statute€of€limitations.€€Itððs€not€libel.€€Itððs€invasion€of€privacyÐ 8ˆ Ðand€you€may€take€that€Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠTš#ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨Ôapproach€in€another€lawsuit.Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠTª#ÔððÐ üL Ð Ñ À Ñ<SSD ¼:QuickFormat1Ô€XÔÔ€XÿÿXÔÔ  ÔÔcÿÔÔb  ÔòòÔ€XÔÔ€XÿÿXÔÔ  ÔÔcÿÔÔb  Ôóó 2Ý ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔHereinafter,€Travis€Electric€Company€will€be€referred€to€as€ð ðTECðð€and€Milton€Travis€willÐ ° Ðbe€referred€to€as€ð ðMr.€Travis.ðð # Ý ƒƒ%$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€Xv¨XXXÔÑ @ ÑÑ@Ñà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ôŠT òXXv¨ÔThe€federal€courts€have€not€uniformly€resolved€the€issue€of€what€standard€to€apply€in€considering€similarÐ ° Ðmotions€made€after€the€grant€of€a€motion€to€dismiss€prior€to€trial.€€òòSee€Figgie€Intððl,€Inc.óó,€966€F.2d€at€1179„80€(discussingÐ tÄ Ðthe€various€standards€and€finding€it€unnecessary€to€resolve€the€issue€in€that€case).€€Ð 8ˆ ÐÌà8  à€Rule€59(e)€states€that€motions€to€reconsider€should€only€be€granted€if€there€is€a€showing€of€a€manifestÐ À Ðerror€of€law€or€fact€or€if€new€evidence€not€previously€discoverable€is€presented€in€support€of€theÐ „Ô Ðmotion.€€òò€Russel€v.€Delco€Remy€Div.€of€General€Motors€Corp.óó,€51€F.3d€746,€749€(7th€Cir.1995).€€Ð H ˜ ÐHowever,€some€courts€have€held€that,€when€a€motion€for€leave€to€amend€a€complaint€is€presented€inÐ  \ Ðconjunction€with€a€€Rule€59(e)€motion,€the€more€liberal€standards€of€€Rule€15(a)€should€govern.€€€òòSeeÐ Ð  ÐDussouy€v.€Gulf€Coast€Inv.Corp.óó,€660€F.2d€594€(5th€Cir.1981);€òò€Adams€v.€Gouldóó,€739€F.2d€858,€864Ð ” ä  Ð(3d€Cir.1984),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€469€U.S.€1122,€105€S.Ct.€806,€83€L.Ed.2d€799€(1985).€€€These€courtsÐ X ¨  Ðinterpret€the€Supreme€Court's€opinion€in€òòFoman€v.€Davisóó,€371€U.S.€178,€83€S.Ct.€227,€9€L.Ed.2d€222Ð  l  Ð(1962),€to€allow€amendment€of€a€complaint€where€justice€so€requires,€even€if€this€amendment€isÐ à 0  Ðtechnically€sought€post-judgment€by€way€of€a€€Rule€59(e)€motion.€€òò€Dussouyóó,€660€F.2d€at€597;€òò€Adamsóó,Ð ¤ô  Ð739€F.2d€at€864.Ðh¸ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòChavez€v.€Farmington€Foods,€Inc.óó,€No.€97„C„1910,€1997€WL€631173€at€*3€(N.D.€Ill.€Oct.€1,€1997).Ô#†Xv¨X òôŠTš#ÔÐ ð@  ÐÌà  àÔ€ôŠT òXXv¨ÔTennessee€appears€to€have€adopted€the€more€liberal€standard€where€the€complaint€is€dismissed€on€a€Tenn.€R.Ð  ð  ÐCiv.€P.€12€motion,€at€least€where€no€amendment€has€taken€place€prior€to€dismissal.€€òòSee€Richland€Country€Club,€Inc.€v.Ð d´ ÐCRC€Equities,€Incóó.,€832€S.W.2d€554,€559€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991)€(where€court€grants€motion€to€dismiss€for€failure€to€stateÐ (x Ða€claim,€only€extraordinary€circumstances€would€prohibit€plaintiff€from€exercising€the€right€to€amend€its€complaint).(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý dT^yúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d dÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXÔÔ‡¼Å¢»XXv¨ÔÑ  ÑÑ€zãÑÑ€#?cÑà@ü ü ìàÔ#†Xv¨X»¼Å¢J#ÔÔ‡îÈcîXXv¨ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†Xv¨XîîÈcÌ#ÔÔ‡¼Å¢»XXv¨ÔˆÐ Ö& ÐÓ  ÓNovember€1999€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ#†Xv¨X»¼Å¢f#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼Å¢»XXv¨ÔTIMOTHY€E.€ISBELL€v.€TRAVIS€ELECTRIC€COMPANYÐ úJ ÐAND€MILTON€TRAVISÔ#†Xv¨X»¼Å¢ø#Ôó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€97C„475€€€€€€Hamilton€V.€Gayden,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€Y) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„00052„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€13,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€Y) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨+#ÔAfter€Plaintiff€resigned€from€his€job€and€attempted€to€start€his€own€competing€business,€his€formerÐ ŒÜ Ðmanager€informed€a€mutual€client€of€the€circumstances€surrounding€his€resignation.€€Plaintiff€suedÐ xÈ Ðhis€former€employer€and€its€service€manager,€alleging€slander,€libel,€defamation,€and€tortiousÐ d´ Ðinterference€with€contract.€€The€trial€court€directed€a€verdict€for€Defendants,€and€Plaintiff€appeals,Ð P  Ðarguing€that€the€trial€court€misapplied€the€substantial€truth€doctrine,€failed€to€apply€the€doctrine€ofÐ <Œ Ðimplication,€and€€was€incorrect€in€its€finding€that€no€contract€existed€between€Plaintiff€and€his€newÐ (x Ðcompanyððs€main€client.€€Plaintiff€also€insists€that,€by€failing€to€grant€a€new€trial€so€that€he€could€addÐ d Ðan€allegation€of€invasion€of€privacy,€the€court€ignored€the€proper€legal€consequences€arising€fromÐ P Ðthe€disclosure€of€a€confidential€drug€test.€€For€the€following€reasons,€we€affirm€the€decision€of€theÐ ì< Ðtrial€court.Ð Ø( ÐÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔÌò òà@SSìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€CourtˆÐ ° Ðà@ ìàAffirmed€and€Remandedó óˆÐ œì ÐÌòòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,€óóandÐ t Ä ÐòòWilliam€B.€Cainóó,€JJ.,€joined.Ð `!°  ÐÌChristopher€K.€Thompson,€Murfreesboro,€Tennessee,€Shelley€I.€Stiles,€Brentwood,€Tennessee,€forÐ 8#ˆ" Ðthe€appellant,€Timothy€E.€Isbell.Ð $$t# ÐÌThomas€C.€Corts,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Travis€Electric€Company€and€MiltonÐ ü%L!% ÐTravis.Ð è&8"& ÐÌò òÐ  À($( ÐÑzãÑâ âÑ8€v¨XXdìdÈ8Ñâ âÑ  Ñà@66'ìàOPINIONó óÔ‡¼Å¢»XXv¨ÔˆÐ ° ÐÔ#†¼Å¢»»¼Å¢K #ÔÔ#†Xv¨X»¼Å¢° #ÔÌà  àTimothy€E.€Isbell€sued€his€former€employer,€Travis€Electric€Company,€and€its€serviceÐ ˆØ Ðmanager,€Milton€Travis,€alleging€slander,€libel,€defamation,€and€tortious€interference€with€contract.׃%×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РtÄ ÐA€jury€was€empaneled€to€hear€the€case.€€At€the€close€of€Plaintiffððs€proof,€the€trial€court€directed€aÐ `° Ðverdict€for€TEC€and€Mr.€Travis.€We€first€review€the€facts€as€established€by€Plaintiffððs€proof.Ð L œ ÐÌÓ  ÓI.€€BackgroundÐ $ t ÐÓcÓÌà  àMr.€Isbell€worked€as€an€electrician€at€TEC€for€approximately€three€years.€€Over€the€courseÐ ü L  Ðof€his€employment,€much€of€Mr.€Isbellððs€work€involved€installing€electrical€cable€at€various€FirstÐ è 8  ÐAmerican€Bank€branches.€€During€Mr.€Isbellððs€third€year€of€employment,€TEC€initiated€drug€testingÐ Ô$  Ðat€the€request€of€its€workersðð€compensation€carrier.€€Mr.€Isbell€underwent€his€first€test€on€FebruaryÐ À  Ð6,€1996,€and€tested€positive€for€marijuana.€€Mr.€Isbell€testified€that€when€he€came€in€to€take€the€test,Ð ¬ü  Ðð ðit€was€kind€of€a€common€known€element,€a€joke,€because€everybody€was€laughing.€€Everybody€wasÐ ˜è  Ðaware€that€I€was€not€going€to€pass€the€test.ðð€€He€admitted€that€he€told€a€supervisor,€in€front€of€aÐ „Ô  Ðsecretary,€that€he€would€not€pass€the€test€that€day.€€Mr.€Isbell€did€fail€that€test.€€He€was€notÐ pÀ Ðdisciplined€for€failing€the€test,€but€was€told€he€could€take€a€second€test€thirty€days€later,€which€heÐ \¬ Ðtook€and€passed.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àMr.€Isbellððs€marijuana€use€was€known€by€his€coworkers.€€He€admitted€that,€prior€to€the€firstÐ  p Ðdrug€test,€he€had€often€used€marijuana,€that€he€had€smoked€marijuana€in€the€presence€of€coworkers,Ð  \ Ðand€that€he€regularly€smoked€just€prior€to€having€an€apprentice€drive€him€to€out„of„town€jobs€inÐ øH Ðcompany€trucks.€€He€also€admitted€to€smoking€marijuana€in€hotel€rooms€paid€for€by€his€employerÐ ä4 Ðwhile€on€out„of„town€jobs.€€Further,€on€one€occasion€he€helped€a€coworker€purchase€a€sufficientÐ Ð  Ðamount€of€marijuana€to€resell.€€In€addition,€he€assisted€an€employee€of€First€American€Bank€in€aÐ ¼  Ðpurchase€of€marijuana.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àIn€November€1996,€two€TEC€employees€purportedly€told€Mr.€Travis€that€Mr.€Isbell€was€usingÐ €Ð Ðmarijuana€again.€€One€employee€had€asked€not€to€be€assigned€to€go€on€an€out„of„town€job€with€Mr.Ð l¼ ÐIsbell€because€Mr.€Isbell€was€using€marijuana€again€and€the€employee€didnððt€want€to€be€around€it.€Ð X ¨ ÐAnother€employee€was€assigned€to€go€on€that€out„of„town€job€with€Mr.€Isbell.€€Upon€his€return,€thatÐ D!” Ðemployee€told€Mr.€Travis€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€smoked€marijuana€in€the€truck€on€the€way€to€the€jobÐ 0"€  Ðand€in€the€motel€while€on€the€out„of„town€assignment.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Mr.€Travis€told€Mr.€IsbellÐ #l! Ðthat€he€would€no€longer€have€access€to€his€company€truck,€telephone,€and€pager.€€When€Mr.€IsbellÐ $X" Ðpressed€him€about€the€reason€for€this€action,€Mr.€Travis€stated,€ð ðWeððve€heard€youððre€using€thatÐ ô$D # Ðmarijuana€again.ðð€€At€that€point,€Mr.€Isbell€purportedly€asked€to€take€another€drug€test.€€Then€heÐ à%0!$ Ðð ðstormed€outðð€and€went€home€for€the€day.€€When€he€returned,€Mr.€Isbell€was€reassigned€to€work€atÐ Ì&"% Ðthe€company€headquarters€and€received€a€decrease€in€his€pay.€€At€that€time,€Mr.€Isbell€quit.€€The€dayÐ ¸'#& Ðthat€he€left€TEC€he€again€smoked€marijuana,€ð ðjust€like€someone€would€have€a€drink.ððÐ ¤(ô#' Їà  àOn€Mr.€Isbellððs€first€or€second€day€of€his€new€employment,€his€employer,€Harlan€Electric,Ð ° Ðrequired€him€to€take€a€drug€test.€€He€informed€that€employer€that€he€probably€wouldnððt€pass€the€test,Ð œì Ðbut€took€it.€€Rather€than€wait€for€the€results,€he€told€Harlan€Electric€that€he€was€taking€a€leave€ofÐ ˆØ Ðabsence€while€his€wife€had€surgery€and€then€did€not€return.€€He€decided€to€set€up€his€own€company.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àAround€the€day€Mr.€Isbell€quit€TEC,€a€representative€of€First€American€Bank,€JohnnyÐ L œ ÐDudley,€called€Mr.€Travis€in€an€attempt€to€locate€Mr.€Isbell€to€check€on€a€project€he€had€beenÐ 8 ˆ Ðworking€on€for€the€bank.€€During€that€conversation,€Mr.€Travis€informed€Mr.€Dudley€that€Mr.€IsbellÐ $ t Ðno€longer€worked€for€TEC.€€According€to€Mr.€Dudley,€Mr.€Travis€said€that€ð ðTim€had€failed€to€takeÐ  ` Ða€drug€test€and€that€they€had€took€his€responsibility€of€driving€a€vehicle€away€from€him,€and€he€hadÐ ü L  Ðgotten€mad€and€left€the€company.ðð€€Mr.€Dudley€also€testified€that€Mr.€Travis€ð ðsaid€that€it€was€aÐ è 8  Ðpolicy€of€Travis€to€give€each€employee€a€drug€test€and€that€Tim€had€some€problems€earlier€in€the€yearÐ Ô$  Ðbefore€that€and€he€had€ð!ð€he€had€kind€of€talked€to€him€about€it€and€then€they€had€asked€him€to€takeÐ À  Ðanother€test€and€he€refused€it.ðð€€When€asked€if€Mr.€Travis€said€that€Mr.€Isbell€was€asked€to€take€aÐ ¬ü  Ðdrug€test€in€February€of€1996,€Mr.€Dudley€answered€in€the€affirmative€and€stated€that€he€was€toldÐ ˜è  Ðthat€Mr.€Isbell€ð ðhad€took€a€drug€test€and€not€passed€it€earlier.ðð€€He€later€agreed€that€Mr.€Travis€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àdidnððt€tell€.€.€.€[him]€basically€anything€other€than,€at€one€time,€heððd€[Mr.€Isbell]Ð \¬ Ðflunked€a€drug€test€and€that€there€was€some€suspicion€that€there€might€have€beenÐ H˜ Ðsome€further€use€and€[TEC]€took€him€off€the€truck€and€he€quit.Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€early€December,€Mr.€Isbell€formed€Isbell€Contracting€Electric€and€started€performingÐ  \ Ðspecific€jobs€for€First€American€Bank.€€Just€before€Christmas,€Mr.€Travis€visited€a€representative€ofÐ øH ÐFirst€American€Bank,€Paul€Carothers,€to€deliver€a€complimentary€calendar.€€According€to€Mr.Ð ä4 ÐCarothers,€Mr.€Travis€mentioned€ð ðthat€Tim€had€been€taken€off€the€road,€brought€back€into€the€shopÐ Ð  Ðbecause€of€failing€a€drug€test€at€the€time€he€was€still€working€for€Travis.ðð€€Mr.€Carothers€alsoÐ ¼  Ðrecalled€that:€Ð ¨ø ÐÌà8  àMilton€[Travis]€brought€up€the€subject€of€Timothy€Isbell€doing€some€work€for€FirstÐ €Ð ÐAmerican.€.€.€He€mentioned€that€Tim€had€failed€a€drug€test€while€at€Travis€Electric.€Ð l¼ ÐAs€a€result,€Tim€ha[d]€been€reassigned€to€the€shop.€€My€recollection€of€the€story€wasÐ X ¨ Ðthat€other€employees€traveling€with€him€on€out„of„town€jobs€complained€of€TimÐ D!” Ðusing€drugs€in€the€company€truck€and€while€they€were€present€in€the€motels€at€night.€Ð 0"€  ÐThis€was€the€cause€for€the€drug€test.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àMr.€Carothers€could€not€recall€whether€Mr.€Travis€informed€him€that€Mr.€Isbell€hadÐ ô$D # Ðsubsequently€passed€a€drug€test.€€He€had€heard€that,€but€could€not€remember€the€source.€€Mr.Ð à%0!$ ÐCarothers€stated€that€he€had€learned€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€failed€a€drug€test€before€talking€to€Mr.€TravisÐ Ì&"% Ðand€had€previously€known€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€left€TEC€because€of€some€drug€problems€that€hadÐ ¸'#& Ðsurfaced.€€He€stated€that€Mr.€Isbellððs€marijuana€use€was€ð ðkind€of€already€known.ðð€€About€a€monthÐ ¤(ô#' Ðafter€his€discussion€with€Mr.€Travis,€€Mr.€Carothers€sent€an€e„mail€to€his€supervisor,€Mr.€Meacham,Ð )à$( Ðasking€advice€on€whether€to€permit€Mr.€Isbell€to€do€any€work€for€them.€€The€e„mail€stated,€in€part:€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ЇÌà8  àRecently€Tim€Isbell€surfaced€as€a€contractor€for€cabling.€€Ameristar€[a€First€AmericanÐ œì Ðsubsidiary€or€affiliate]€has€requested€to€use€him€as€they€have€been€very€satisfied€withÐ ˆØ Ðhis€work.€€I€talked€to€him€and€got€a€proposal€for€some€standard€pricing€which€isÐ tÄ Ðcheaper€than€Travis€.€.€.Ð`°Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àEnter€Milton€Travis.€€Milton€came€by€to€pay€a€courtesy€call€and€brought€Tim€up€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€conversation.€€He€repeated€an€allegation€(which€Johnny€Dudley€had€already€toldÐ $ t Ðme€about)€that€Tim€had€tested€positive€for€drugs€while€with€Travis.€€He€wasnððt€fired,Ð  ` Ðbut€was€reassigned,€which€caused€him€to€quit.€€I€asked€him€whether€he€hadÐ ü L  Ðdocumented€proof€which€he€could€share€with€me.€€Of€course€he€doesnððt;€privacyÐ è 8  Ðissues.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àSo,€Iððm€in€a€quandry€whether€I€should€permit€Tim€to€do€any€work€for€us€or€not.€€WeÐ ¬ü  Ðhave€a€much€delayed€initiative€to€do€regional€RFPs€for€cabling€work,€but€in€theÐ ˜è  Ðmeantime€what€should€I€do?€€And€could€Timððs€company€be€considered€for€the€RFP?€Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà  àMr.€Meacham€testified,€ð ðPaul€had€communicated€to€me€that€we€had€a€subcontractor€doingÐ \¬ Ðwork€and€that€he€had€received€some€information€regarding€some€type€of€substance€abuse€issue.€€IÐ H˜ Ðdonððt€recall€what€the€„€„€in€my€mind,€it€stuck€as€a€substance€abuse€issue.€.€.ðð€€He€shared€the€issue€withÐ 4„ Ðother€managers,€one€of€whom€responded€with€other€concerns.€€She€told€Mr.€Meacham,€ð ðI€have€aÐ  p Ðlarger€issue.€€How€is€an€electrical€subcontractor€doing€work€at€First€American€Bank€and€I€donððt€knowÐ  \ Ðabout€it?ðð€€She€was€in€charge€of€managing€the€facility,€and€stated€that€she€normally€had€knowledgeÐ øH Ðof€subcontractors€and€that€the€bank€needed€to€fine„tune€the€policy.€€She€stated€her€concerns€inÐ ä4 Ðanother€e„mail€about€Mr.€Isbell€or€any€other€contractor€working€for€the€bank€without€certainÐ Ð  Ðprocedures€being€followed:Ð ¼  ÐÌà8  àIn€response€to€the€Tim€Isabell€[sic]€question:€we€cannot€have€anyone€work€in€the€FirstÐ ”ä ÐAmerican€Center€without€obtaining€landlord€approval.€€Also,€I€am€not€comfortableÐ €Ð Ðhaving€an€uncertain€number€of€contractors€working€on€our€systems.€€When€somethingÐ l¼ Ðgoes€wrong,€it€will€be€no€oneððs€fault.€€Choosing€contractors€to€work€on/in€buildingÐ X ¨ Ðsystems€needs€to€stay€centralized€through€Facilities€.€.€.ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àIf€we€are€dissatisfied€with€Travisðð€rates€.€.€.€then€we€need€to€put€an€RFP€together€andÐ #l! Ðqualify€another€company€to€work€for€us.€€The€parameters€of€qualification€wouldÐ $X" Ðinclude€experience,€references,€insurance,€and€company€depth€since€we€often€needÐ ô$D # Ðthem€in€more€than€one€place€at€once.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àOne€additional€consideration€is€that€we€are€on€a€program€of€strategic€alliance€withÐ ¸'#& Ðour€good€banking€customers.€€That€means€they€get€preference.€.€.€over€any€other€RFPÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrespondent.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  à€Let€me€know€if€your€guys€want€to€go€through€the€RFP€and€qualification€process€withÐ h+¸&* Ðus,€to€try€to€qualify€someone€other€than€Travis€to€do€their€work.€€In€any€event,€weÐ ° Ðshould€not€have€a€process€that€allows€non„Facilities€employees€to€hire€electrical€orÐ œì Ðmechanical€contractors€to€work€in€our€owned€or€leased€space.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àAs€a€result€of€this€e„mail€and€his€conversations€with€the€facilities€manager,€Mr.€MeachamÐ `° Ðissued€an€e„mail€directive€to€Mr.€Carothers,€who€forwarded€it€to€others,€stating:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àPlease€donððt€extend€any€offers€of€contract€work€to€Tim€Isbell€until€you€hear€backÐ $ t Ðfrom€me.€€Is€anyone€else€(AmeriStar?)€contemplating€using€Tim?€€If€so,€please€informÐ  ` Ðthem€that€Tim€is€not€yet€approved€to€perform€electrical€work€for€us.€€FYI,€it€is€notÐ ü L  Ðcertain€that€Tim€would€be€a€ð ðFANB„approvedðð€electrician.€€Iððll€keep€you€posted.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àMr.€Meacham€testified€that€the€reason€for€his€e„mail€was€the€facilities€managerððs€concernsÐ À  Ðand€the€issues€she€raised€in€her€e„mail.€€He€agreed€that€the€bank€needed€to€make€sure€that€anyÐ ¬ü  Ðcontractor€used€was€on€the€bankððs€approved€contractor€list.€€He€also€€testified€that€this€action€did€notÐ ˜è  Ðð ðclose€the€doorðð€on€Mr.€Isbell€or€anyone€else€doing€work€for€the€bank€in€the€future€if€properÐ „Ô  Ðprocedures€were€followed.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAfter€Dave€Dozier,€an€employee€of€Ameristar,€First€American€Bankððs€investment€servicesÐ H˜ Ðgroup,€received€this€communication,€he€told€Mr.€Isbell€that€it€appeared€that€Mr.€Travis€was€tryingÐ 4„ Ðð ðcut€the€legs€out€from€underðð€him.€€Mr.€Isbell€received€no€new€work€at€the€bank€after€the€e„mail€fromÐ  p ÐMr.€Meacham.Ð  \ ÐÌà@22$ìàII.€€SlanderˆÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àAt€the€close€of€Mr.€Isbellððs€case,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€only€two€claims€actuallyÐ ¼  Ðasserted€in€this€case€were€slander€and€tortious€interference€with€contract.€€It€€granted€TEC€and€Mr.Ð ¨ø ÐTravisððs€motions€for€directed€verdict€on€both.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àBecause€the€trial€court€directed€verdicts€€for€TEC€and€Mr.€Travis,€this€case€primarily€involvesÐ l¼ Ðquestions€of€law€rather€than€fact.€€òòSee€Norman€v.€Southern€Ry.óó,€119€Tenn.€401,€422,€104€S.W.€1088,Ð X ¨ Ð1093-94€(1907).€Thus,€we€must€review€the€record€to€determine€whether€Mr.€Isbell's€evidence€wasÐ D!” Ðsufficient€to€create€an€issue€for€the€jury€to€decide.€€òòSee€Underwood€v.€Waterslides€of€Mid-America,Ð 0"€  ÐInc.óó,€823€S.W.2d€171,€176€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991).€€In€conducting€this€review,€we€may€not€weigh€theÐ #l! Ðevidence€or€evaluate€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses.€€òòSee€Conatser€v.€Clarksville€Coca-Cola€BottlingÐ $X" ÐCoóó.,€920€S.W.2d€646,€647€(Tenn.€1995);€òò€Benson€v.€Tennessee€Valley€Elec.€Coopóó.,€868€S.W.2d€630,Ð ô$D # Ð638-39€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1993).€€Instead,€viewing€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theÐ à%0!$ Ðnonmovant,€we€must€give€that€party€the€benefit€of€all€reasonable€inferences€from€the€evidence,€andÐ Ì&"% Ðdisregard€all€evidence€contrary€to€that€party's€position.€òòSee€Eaton€v.€McLain,óó€891€S.W.2d€587,€590Ð ¸'#& Ð(Tenn.€1994);€òòGann€v.€International€Harvester€Co.óó,€712€S.W.2d€100,€105€(Tenn.€1986).Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àDirected€verdicts€are€appropriate€only€when€reasonable€minds€can€reach€no€other€conclusion.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐòòSee€Williams€v.€Brownóó,€860€S.W.2d€854,€857€(Tenn.€1993);€òòCrosslin€v.€Alsupóó,€594€S.W.2d€379,€380Ð h+¸&* Ð(Tenn.€1980).€€The€jury€should€decide€cases€where,€even€if€the€facts€are€undisputed,€reasonableÐ ° Ðpersons€could€draw€conflicting€conclusions€from€the€facts.€€òòSee€Gulf,€M.€&€O.R.R.€v.€Underwood,óóÐ œì Ð182€Tenn.€467,€474,€187€S.W.2d€777,€779€(1945);€òòPettus€v.€Hurstóó,€882€S.W.2d€783,€788€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð ˆØ ÐApp.€1993).€Such€conclusions,€however,€must€be€based€on€more€than€speculation,€conjecture,€andÐ tÄ Ðguesswork.€òòSee€Daniels€v.€White€Consol.€Indus.,€Inc.óó,€692€S.W.2d€422,€425€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1985).€Ð `° ÐDirected€verdicts€are€appropriate€when€the€plaintiff's€evidence€fails€to€establish€a€òòprima€facie€óócase.Ð L œ ÐòòSee€Eaton€v.€McLainóó,€891€S.W.2d€at€590-91€n.3.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àWe€will€first€review€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€slander€claim.€€Regarding€the€slanderÐ  ` Ðclaim,€the€trial€court€stated:€Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  àSecondly,€the€truth€is€a€defense€to€slander.€€I€think€thereððs€some€exceptions,€but€thisÐ Ô$  Ðis€not€one€of€them,€and€everything€that€was€said€was€true€and€he€did€refuse€to€take€aÐ À  Ðtest.€€One€time€he€did€fail€a€test€subsequently€and€passed€the€test€one€time,€but€theÐ ¬ü  Ðupshot€of€it€is€ð!ð€the€overview€was€there€was€a€problem€with€marijuana€and€the€CourtÐ ˜è  Ðgrants€the€verdict€on€the€grounds€of€slander.€Ð„Ô Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€statement€that€ð ðtruth€is€a€defenseðð€is€a€reference€to€one€of€the€well„settledÐ \¬ Ðprinciples€of€the€law€of€defamation.€€€In€this€State,€both€slander€and€libel€are€considered€to€be€formsÐ H˜ Ðof€defamation.€€òòSee€Quality€Auto€Parts€Co.,€Inc.€v.€Bluff€City€Buick€Co.,€Inc.óó,€876€S.W.2d€818,€820Ð 4„ Ð(Tenn.€1994).€€ð ðThe€basis€of€an€action€for€defamation,€whether€it€be€for€slander€or€libel,€is€theÐ  p Ðdefamation€resulted€in€an€injury€to€the€person's€character€and€reputation.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Libel€involves€writtenÐ  \ Ðdefamation€and€slander,€at€issue€here,€involves€defamatory€language€that€is€spoken.€òò€See€id.óóÐ øH ÐÌà  àTo€establish€a€òòprima€facieóó€case€of€defamation,€the€plaintiff€must€prove€that€(1)€a€partyÐ Ð  Ðpublished€a€statement;€(2)€with€knowledge€that€the€statement€was€false€and€defaming€to€the€other;€Ð ¼  Ðor€(3)€with€reckless€disregard€for€the€truth€of€the€statement€or€(4)€with€negligence€in€failing€toÐ ¨ø Ðascertain€the€truth€of€the€statement.€€€òòSee€Sullivan€v.€Baptist€€Memððl€Hosp.óó,€995€Ô‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔS.W.2dÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨U#Ô€569,€571Ð ”ä Ð(Tenn.€1999)€(relying€on€òòRestatement€(Second)€of€Tortsóó€ðð€580€B€(1977)).€€ð ðPublicationðð€is€aÐ €Ð Ðterm€of€art€meaning€the€communication€of€defamatory€matter€to€a€third€person.€€òòSee€id.€€óóÐ l¼ ÐÌà  àTruth€is€an€absolute€defense€ð ðwhen€the€defamatory€meaning€conveyed€by€the€words€is€true.ðð€Ð D!” ÐòòMemphis€Publððg€Co.€v.€Nicholsóó,€569€S.W.2d€412,€420€(Tenn.€1978).€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà8  àThe€damaging€words€must€be€factually€false.€If€they€are€true,€or€essentially€true,€theyÐ $X" Ðare€not€actionable,€even€though€the€published€statement€contains€other€inaccuraciesÐ ô$D # Ðwhich€are€not€damaging.€Thus,€the€defense€of€truth€applies€so€long€as€the€ð ðstingðð€(orÐ à%0!$ Ðinjurious€part)€of€the€statement€is€true.€€ð ð.€.€.€it€is€not€necessary€to€prove€the€literalÐ Ì&"% Ðtruth€of€the€accusation€in€every€detail,€and€that€it€is€sufficient€to€show€that€theÐ ¸'#& Ðimputation€is€substantially€true,€or,€as€it€is€often€put,€to€justify€the€'gist,'€the€'sting,'€orÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€'substantial€truth'€of€the€defamation.ðð€Ð)à$(Ð Ð  ÐÌòòStones€River€Motors,€Inc.€v.€Mid-South€Publððg€Co.,€óó651€S.W.2d€713,€719„20€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983).Ð h+¸&* ÐTo€be€actionable,€the€statement€at€issue€must€ð ðconstitute€a€serious€threat€to€the€plaintiffððs€reputation.ðð€Ð ° ÐòòId.€óóat€719.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àMr.€Isbellððs€first€argument€in€defense€of€his€defamation€claim€is€that€the€trial€court€misappliedÐ tÄ Ðthe€substantial€truth€doctrine€because€the€ð ðgistðð€of€Mr.€Travisððs€statements,€as€well€as€some€of€theÐ `° Ðexact€words,€were€false.€He€maintains€that€the€gist€of€Mr.€Travisððs€comments€was€that€he€had€aÐ L œ Ðcontinuing€drug€problem€when,€in€truth,€he€failed€one€drug€test€but€passed€a€second.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àThe€record,€viewed€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€Mr.€Isbell,€shows€that€Mr.€TravisÐ  ` Ðerroneously€told€Johnny€Dudley€that€ð ðTim€had€failed€to€take€a€drug€test.ðð€€The€remainder€of€Mr.Ð ü L  ÐTravisððs€statements€to€Mr.€Dudley,€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€failed€a€drug€test€and€that€ð ðthere€was€someÐ è 8  Ðsuspicion€that€there€might€have€been€some€further€use€and€[TEC]€took€him€off€the€truck€and€he€quit,ððÐ Ô$  Ðwere€true.€€Mr.€Travis€told€Mr.€Carothers€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€failed€a€drug€test€and€that€€employeesÐ À  Ðtraveling€with€him€on€out„of„town€jobs€had€complained€of€his€drug€use.€€€These€statements€were€true.€Ð ¬ü  ÐThus,€the€only€untrue€statement€Mr.€Travis€made€was€that€Mr.€Isbell€had€refused€to€take€a€drug€test.Ð ˜è  ÐThe€truth€was€that€he€had€taken€a€drug€test€and€failed.€Taking€his€testimony€in€the€best€light,€he€alsoÐ „Ô  Ðoffered€to€take€another€test€when€he€was€reassigned.€€The€question€presented,€then,€is€whether€theÐ pÀ Ðstatement€that€Mr.€Isbell€failed€to€take€a€drug€test,€while€€not€the€literal€truth,€€is€sufficiently€closeÐ \¬ Ðto€the€truth€ð ðto€show€that€the€imputation€is€substantially€true,€or,€as€it€is€often€put,€to€justify€the€ððgist,ððÐ H˜ Ðthe€ððsting,ðð€or€the€ððsubstantial€truthðð€of€the€defamation.€.€.€.ðð€€òòAli€v.€Mooreóó,€984€Ô‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔS.W.2dÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨þb#Ô€224,€229Ð 4„ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).Ð  p ÐÌà  àMr.€Isbellððs€second€argument€addresses€a€separate€but€related€principle,€defamation€byÐ øH Ðimplication.€Tennessee€law€recognized€the€doctrine€of€defamation€by€innuendo€or€implication€inÐ ä4 ÐòòMemphis€Publððg€Co.€v.€Nicholsóó,€569€Ô‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔS.W.2dÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨©d#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨Ô€at€412.€€In€òòNicholsóó,€a€newspaper€was€held€liable€forÐ Ð  Ðdefamation€for€printing€a€story€which€truthfully€stated€that€upon€finding€her€husband€at€the€plaintiffððsÐ ¼  Ðhome,€the€wife€shot€the€plaintiff.€€The€article€failed€to€mention€that€other€individuals,€in€addition€toÐ ¨ø Ðplaintiffððs€husband,€€were€present€when€the€shooting€occurred€and€that€the€shooting€occurred€in€theÐ ”ä Ðafternoon.€€These€omissions,€which€were€said€to€give€rise€to€the€implication€that€the€plaintiff€and€theÐ €Ð Ðshooterððs€husband€were€having€an€affair€when€caught€by€the€shooter,€were€the€basis€for€reversing€theÐ l¼ Ðtrial€courtððs€decision€to€grant€the€newspaperððs€motion€for€summary€judgment.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àThe€òòNicholsóó€court€observed:€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà8  àThe€proper€question€is€whether€the€òòmeaningóó€reasonably€conveyed€by€the€publishedÐ $X" Ðwords€is€defamatory,€ð ðwhether€the€libel€as€published€would€have€a€different€effect€onÐ ô$D # Ðthe€mind€of€the€reader€from€that€which€the€pleaded€truth€would€have€produced.ðð€Ð à%0!$ Ð(citations€omitted.)€€The€publication€of€the€complete€facts€could€not€conceivably€haveÐ Ì&"% Ðled€the€reader€to€conclude€that€[plaintiff]€and€[shooterððs€husband]€had€an€adulterousÐ ¸'#& Ðrelationship.€€The€published€statement,€therefore,€so€distorted€the€truth€as€to€make€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðentire€article€false€and€defamatory.€€It€is€no€defense€whatever€that€individualÐ )à$( Ðstatements€within€the€article€were€literally€true.€€Truth€is€available€as€an€absoluteÐ |*Ì%) Ðdefense€only€when€the€defamatory€meaning€conveyed€by€the€words€is€true.Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  ЇòòòòóóId.óó,€569€S.W.2d€at€420.€€Ô#†Xv¨XXXv¨ñd#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨Ô€In€essence,€òòNicholsóó€stands€for€the€proposition€that€ð ðstatements€literally€trueÐ ° Ðmay€be€actionable€if€they€imply€facts€that€are€not€true.ðð€Robert€D.€Sack€&€Sandra€S.€Baron,€òòLibel,Ð œì ÐSlander€&€Related€Problems€óóðð€3.6€(2d€ed.€1994).€€ð ðÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨‰l#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔThe€rationale€behind€this€rule€is€that,€whenÐ ˆØ Ðtruthful€statements€carry€a€defamatory€innuendo,€the€factual€implication€should€also€be€true€to€justifyÐ tÄ Ðthe€implication.ðð€òòFitzgerald€v.€Tuckeróó,€737€So.2d€706,€717€(La.€1999).€€ð ðThe€proper€question€isÐ `° Ðwhether€the€meaning€reasonably€conveyed€by€the€published€words€is€reasonably€understood€in€aÐ L œ Ðdefamatory€sense€by€the€reader€or€listener.ðð€€òòPate€v.€Service€Merchandise€Co.,óó€Ô#†Xv¨XXXv¨ðm#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨Ô959€Ô#†Xv¨XXXv¨8p#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔS.W.2dÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨~p#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨Ô€569,€574Ð 8 ˆ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996).Ô#†Xv¨XXXv¨Æp#ÔÔ‡Xv¨XXXv¨ÔÐ $ t ÐÔ#†Xv¨XXXv¨