ÿWPCÁ\ }ÊöLÁÓŠ]„ZAa+šÓ¡E°]–‚åxûºâ›fÝ\8Üó GþäÙv§¶Ò,1ÒÈÞ´¦$Hž§„ª­iÚ’òA¥`šÚ«Ú´ë¸·¥Ã+ ôe.[±ÍðÉ=Ó‰–ü=ÜH׸ó?…”.™å ÅÞÏ,79à™ógç¹CÙp‡µïy  ÞÄr¥\4Z¼|ËsQÙŸ½â4ñ8·w^÷}#è‚gBP¾¹}ÃÝÃëç´Q¯t¹&±‘LçË[†Ña=IË»ríÊÒm ‰âD°µGMn–’2Š RéZ¿ {Á0Êæ;•,«°h³Ù*U0)–r|?él3¥X6 ?šƒØ7Øœn¯8þµÛ*Ÿ‚™wíøMƒ«©fäiÃ_ï3£ÖVŒ9ûÕ¨›e·œ"ou~Ôcˆ«$šN=UEƒJcû髱Р¯Œw‘?&`ÖÍ:ÌB“tÝ -m c]nPü\–$Laèè aå,ÍzŠþˆÊ}”·=¯ósT#Êzâú£äÊ4ÃÏ‘(Ëã!YJ|¯š5- Äãº&¥#V%ÐX&À ¹.VáìÆ­5eoÊ^8J§^QáÿòÚ«(ûœ|F  ~Íé²>Ò$ñj x#µcY=>¥¬ %h ^ n 0ˆz UN wP 4T h zw Òñ à mÅ #ÁÜ Æ¥ÆkÆ1Æ÷ 0D½NßeâEGŸIUôNèÓ6Y  0Ub 0ã· 0àš 0Ýz 0ÚW 0×1! 0Ô" 0ÑÜ" 0έ# 0C{$ 0Ѿ$ 0Î% 0Ë]& 0È(' 0Åð' 0µ( 0¿w) 0º6* 0@ð*b0+ 0Î8+ 0Ë, 0ÈÑ, 0Å™- 0Â^. 0¿ / 0¼ß/ 0·›0U>R1U>1fÎ142vG4ä½5M¡7UJî8Õ89 1‡ ; 72”; 1uÆ; 72;< 0cm< 1‡Ð< 72W= 1‡‰= 72> 1‡B> 72É> 1‡û> 72‚? 1‡´? 72;@ 1‡m@ 72ô@ä&A 0ë DU<õDÜ1E  F B-GõJG 0¤?H D5ãH D-I 0KEI›I AS+KÆ~K 0¤DL 0DèL A«,Më×MÅÂRè‡V‡VËoY 04:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:Z:ZSnZ».}“+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular‰Q‡+Hì£3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt#ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0 Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÕÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Like€the€original€confidentiality€agreement,€the€consulting€agreement€provided€an€exception€for€informationÐ ° Ðwhich€was€or€became€publicly€available.€€While€the€agreement€prohibited€the€use€or€disclosure€of€any€confidentialÐ tÄ Ðinformation,€it€acknowledged€Grisoniððs€participation€in€developing€a€competing€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler.€€TheÐ 8ˆ Ðagreement€provides€ð ðWMT€hereby€acknowledges€and€approves€that€you€are€currently€and€will€continue€to€be€engagedÐ üL Ðindividually€and€with€another€corporation€in€the€field.ðð [Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€letter€provides€that€ð ðconfidential€information€would€include€the€production€process€for€creating€theÐ ° ÐOSTEOSETðð€hemi„hydrate€alpha€crystals.€€Also€confidential€is€such€non„public€information€as€the€510(k)€forÐ tÄ ÐOSTEOSET,€the€companyððs€regulatory€strategy€for€OSTEOSET,€the€dissolution€curve€for€each€of€the€OSTEOSETÐ 8ˆ Ðproducts,€how€to€attain€such€curves,€the€ability€to€vary€the€curves,€the€type€and€the€source€of€the€raw€material€for€theÐ üL Ðoriginal€OSTEOSET,€the€difference€and€similarities€between€the€original€and€subsequent€OSTEOSET€products,€and€theÐ À Ðprocess€for€creating€OSTEOSET....ððÐ „Ô ÐÓ  Ó •Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€had€conducted€a€dissolution€test€in€1995€comparing€the€dissolution€rates€of€alpha„type€Ô_ÔhemihydrateÔ_ÔÐ ° Ðand€beta„type€hemihydrate€and€concluded€that€the€two€had€equivalent€dissolution€rates.€€(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular ÉÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Court€takes€judicial€notice€that€lawyers€can€be€pugnacious€witnesses.€ OÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔGrisoniððs€allegation,€that€Haltomððs€statement€constitutes€a€threat€of€criminal€prosecution€that€violates€the€rulesÐ ° Ðof€ethics€which€govern€attorneys,€is€not€pertinent€to€this€action.€*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..à*D+J ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*A+J ÿÿ(_24Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>+J ÿÿ(_23Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;+J ÿÿ(_22Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8+J ÿÿ(_21Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5+J ÿÿ(_20Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*2+J ÿÿ(_19Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*/+J ÿÿ(_18Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó* ÿÿ(_17Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô€*DJ ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*AJ ÿÿ(_15Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>J ÿÿ(_14Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;J ÿÿ(_13Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8J ÿÿ(_12Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5J ÿÿ(_11Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*2J ÿÿ(_10Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(/J ÿÿ&_9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó( ÿÿ&_8Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô- ù-(DJ ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(AJ ÿÿ&_6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(>J ÿÿ&_5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(;J ÿÿ&_4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(8J ÿÿ&_3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(5J ÿÿ&_2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(2J ÿÿ&_1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó&/J ÿÿ$_Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Óô\  `&Times New Romanô\  `&Times New Roman \Ñ\R3Ø' Letter\Ñ Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSubsequently,€in€March€1997,€Wright€€received€FDA€clearance€on€the€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô€plaster€kit.€€However,€theÐ ° Ðapproved€kit€required€the€surgeon€to€first€mold€and€dry€the€paste€into€small€pellets€before€implantation.€€This€device€wasÐ tÄ Ðapproved€using€€Osteoset€pellets€(approved€in€June€1996)€and€not€Ethicon€as€the€predicate€device. lÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€In€September€1998,€in€response€to€these€allegations€Grisoni€submitted€a€letter€to€the€FDA€explaining€that€heÐ ° Ðintended€the€term€ð ðidenticalðð€to€mean€ð ðessentially€alikeðð€or€ð ðsubstantially€equivalent.ðð€ ÚÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔRule€65.04(7)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€provides:€ò òó óð ðBefore€or€after€the€commencement€of€theÐ ° Ðhearing€of€an€application€for€a€preliminary€injunction,€the€Court€may€order€the€trial€of€the€action€on€the€merits€to€beÐ tÄ Ðadvanced€and€consolidated€with€the€hearing€of€the€application.ððò òó ó CÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Operation€costs€were€estimated€at€between€20€and€30€percent€of€total€sales,€leaving€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€with€betweenÐ ° Ð$310,000€and€$350,000€monthly€profit..ô\  `‹2Times New Roman Greek ËÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAt€the€injunction€hearing,€Wrightððs€counsel,€Steve€Vescovo,€stated:€ð ðDo€they€want€to€know€how€we€foundÐ ° Ðout?€€I€know,€but€he€canððt€ask€me.€€Thatððs€my€business.€€Okay?€€But€the€fact€of€the€matter€is€weððre€right€on€the€date.€Ð tÄ ÐOkay?€€How€we€found€out€about€it€is€my€business.ðð€€(нCEKQW]cioAutoList1A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.@A.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Bi)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(š½CEKQW]cioAutoList2A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.EA.(ª½CEKQW]cioAutoList3A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.GA.(º½CEKQW]cioAutoList4A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.IA.(ʽCEKQW]cioAutoList5A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.KA.(Ú½CEKQW]cioAutoList6A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.MA.(ê½CEKQW]cioAutoList7A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.OA. ÚÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Wright€was€able€to€develop€an€Osteoset€prototype€within€a€few€weeks€of€opening€the€package€of€EthiconÐ ° Ðpellets€and€Grisoni€argues€that€this€mitigates€against€Wrightððs€assertion€that€the€development€of€an€Osteoset€deviceÐ tÄ Ðoccurred€over€a€long€period€of€trial„and„error€experimentation€and€at€great€expense.€€However,€Wright€did€not€start€fromÐ 8ˆ Ðscratch€upon€opening€the€Ethicon€packet.€€Rather,€Wright€was€able€to€use€much€of€what€it€had€learned€during€the€previousÐ üL Ðyearððs€research€into€other€calcium€sulfate€products.€€(|G2\b$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€d»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôøò»»Ô-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman ÒÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔGrisoni€alleges€that€he€did€not€agree€to€these€additional€terms€in€the€modified€TRO. Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔGrisoni€asserts€that€he€did€not€agree€to€this€language€and€did€not€even€see€the€temporary€injunction€order€untilÐ ° Ðsometime€in€June.€€ d ëÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDuring€the€interim,€Chancellor€Smallððs€bid€for€re„election€was€defeated€and€Chancellor€Evans€was€elected.€(|3…ë$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€d»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó ‘Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOn€July€15,€1999,€Grisoni€filed€a€motion€with€the€trial€court€to€amend€and€supplement€his€Answer€to€includeÐ ° Ðan€allegation€of€damages€suffered€as€a€result€of€the€wrongfully€issued€injunction,€as€well€as€a€request€for€punitiveÐ tÄ Ðdamages.€^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3…ë$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€d»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK áÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€judge€questioned€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€attorney€about€the€relevance€of€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€testimony.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€attorney,Ð ° ÐSteve€Ô_ÔMarkovitzÔ_Ô,€responded€that€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€testimony€was€relevant€to€whether€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€law€firm€should€be€permitted€toÐ tÄ Ðcontinue€representing€Wright€at€the€trial.€€Wrightððs€attorney,€Steve€Ô_ÔVescovoÔ_Ô,€indicated€that€Wright€did€not€object€toÐ 8ˆ ÐÔ_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€testimony€because€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€attorney€had€called€into€question€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€ethics€and€Wright€wished€to€respond.€Ð üL ÐÔ_ÔHaltomÔ_Ôððs€testimony€later€became€relevant€to€the€issue€of€malicious€prosecution€for€which€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€sought€damages€at€theÐ À Ðsubsequent€damages€hearing. »Ý ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAs€noted€in€the€discussion€of€the€proceedings€in€this€case,€at€the€time€of€the€hearing€to€dissolve€the€injunction,Ð ° Ðthe€injunction€bond€was€raised€to€$250,000.€€When€the€order€dissolving€the€injunction€was€appealed,€the€appellate€courtÐ tÄ Ðstayed€the€order€and€raised€the€bond€to€$500,000.€€Thereafter,€while€an€order€was€in€effect€staying€the€trial€courtÐ 8ˆ Ðproceedings,€the€trial€court€raised€the€bond€to€$2.4€million.€€However,€because€there€was€a€stay€in€effect,€this€order€wasÐ üL Ðvacated.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€appealed€this€order€on€the€bond€to€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court;€his€petition€was€denied.€€The€bondÐ À Ðremained€unchanged€until€the€hearing€on€damages€was€concluded,€after€which€the€injunction€was€dissolved.€ ÞÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTenn.€Code.€Ann.€Ô‡>ô> ò òô>ÔððÔ#†ô> ò ò>ô>#ÔÔ‡Xo.X òô>Ô€Ô#†ô> òXXo.Ö#Ô29„23„104(a)€(2000)€provides:€Ð ° ÐÌà8  àIn€cases€where€the€court€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€party€enjoined€has€suffered€a€substantial€injury,€butÐ `° Ðthat€damages€are€speculative€or€incapable€of€ascertainment€under€legal€rules,€it€may,€on€dissolution,Ð $t Ðin€its€sound€discretion,€assess€and€decree€against€the€party€suing€out€the€writ€a€penalty€in€favor€of€theÐ è8 Ðparty€enjoined. ÁÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€additional€$250,000€bond€was€posted€by€Wright,€not€Travelers.€&c$"ð"ðà0 à IÝ ƒR\b$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô> ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€knowledge€allowed€him€to€avoid€much€of€the€trial„and„error€experimentation€that€would€plagueÐ ° Ðother€new€entrants€into€the€market.€€This€fact€is€significant€but€not€necessarily€determinative.€€ò òòòÔ_ÔKoehringÔ_Ô€Co.€v.€E.D.Ð tÄ ÐÔ_ÔEthyreÔ_Ô€&€Co.ó óóó,€254€Ô_ÔF.SuppÔ_Ô.€334,€339€(N.D.€Ill.€1966).€Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ »»d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼>»»»ÔÑ8€cœXXdê»»d 8ÑÑ  ÑÑ€9³/Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î/Ó>ÂÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼>»îî/Ó#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓSEPTEMBER€17,€2001€SessionÐ üL Ðò òWRIGHT€MEDICAL€TECHNOLOGY,€INC.òòóó€Ð ^ Ðv.€Ð " r ÐBERNARD€Ô_ÔGRISONIÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔBIOGENERATIONÔ_Ô,€INC.òòóóÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔó óÐ 6 † ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ 6 † Ðà@@øøìàNo.€98„0285„1€€€€€€Walter€L.€Evans,€ChancellorÐ " r ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<ù` AßÐ úJ  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2000„01302„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R7„CV€€„€€Filed€December€18,€2001Ð õE  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<Ì` AßÐ Í  Ðó óÓ  ÓThis€case€involves€the€alleged€use€of€confidential€information€by€an€ex„employee.€€The€defendantÐ Ü,  Ðemployee€worked€for€the€plaintiff€employer€developing€a€medical€product.€€The€employee€signedÐ È Ðan€agreement€prohibiting€the€use€of€confidential€information€after€his€employment€ended,€but€didÐ ´ Ðnot€sign€a€non„competition€agreement.€€The€employee€was€terminated€and€thereafter€beganÐ  ð Ðmanufacturing€a€competing€medical€product.€€The€plaintiff€employer€sued€and€obtained€a€temporaryÐ ŒÜ Ðinjunction€prohibiting€the€ex„employee€from€manufacturing€the€product.€€The€trial€court€laterÐ xÈ Ðdissolved€the€injunction.€€Subsequently,€it€found€the€defendant€employer€liable€for€maliciousÐ d´ Ðprosecution€and€punitive€damages,€awarding€damages€of€over€$9€million.€€The€employer€appeals.Ð P  Ðò òó óWe€affirm€in€part,€reverse€in€part€and€modify.€€We€reverse€the€finding€of€malicious€prosecution,Ð <Œ Ðholding€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€establish€malice€or€lack€of€probable€cause.€€We€alsoÐ (x Ðreverse€the€award€of€punitive€damages.€€We€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€dissolution€of€the€injunctionÐ d Ðagainst€the€former€employee,€and€find€that€the€compensatory€damages€are€limited€by€the€amount€ofÐ P Ðthe€injunction€bond.€€Consequently,€the€award€of€compensatory€damages€is€modified€to€this€amount.Ô#†¼>»XXo.É#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔò òó óÐ ì< ÐÌÓñÓò òTenn€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed€in€Part,Ð Ä ÐReversed€in€Part€and€Modified.ó óÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓHolly€Kirby€Lillard,€Ô#†¼>»àXo.ó #ÔÔ‡Xo.X.¼>ÂÔ€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòAlan€E.€Highers,€J.óóÔ#†¼>»XXo.* #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€andÐ ˆ!Ø  ÐòòDavid€Farmer,€J.óóÔ#†¼>»XXo.º #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ,€joined.Ð t"Ä! ÐÌLeo€Bearman,€Jr.,€George€T.€Lewis,€III,€and€Marianne€B.€Matthews,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ L$œ# Ðplaintiff/appellant,€Wright€Medical€Technology,€Inc.ò òó óÐ 8%ˆ $ ÐÌRonald€D.€Krelstein,€Germantown,€Tennessee,€and€Steven€M.€Markowitz,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€forÐ '`"& Ðthe€defendant/appellees,€Bernard€F.€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô,€and€Ô_ÔBiogenerationÔ_Ô,€Inc.Ð ü'L#' ÐÌMichael€I.€Less€and€Ted€M.€Hayden,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Travelers€Casualty€andÐ Ô)$%) ÐSurety€Company€of€America.Ð À*&* ÐÌLucian€T.€Ô_ÔPeraÔ_Ô€and€W.€Bryan€Smith,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€submitting€Amicus€Curiae€Brief€forÐ ˜,è', ÐWilliam€H.€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ô,€Jr.Ð „-Ô(-ý ÐÓæ Óò òÓ ÓOPINIONó óÔ#†¼>»XXo.+ #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ ° ÐÓ  Óà  àThis€case€involves€the€alleged€use€of€confidential€information€by€an€ex„employee.€Ð ˆØ ÐPlaintiff/Appellant€Wright€Medical€Technology,€Inc.€(Wright),€is€a€Memphis€corporation€whichÐ tÄ Ðdevelops€and€markets€medical€products.€€Defendant/Appellee€Bernard€Grisoni€(ð ðGrisoniðð)€is€aÐ `° Ðformer€employee€of€Wright,€and€Defendant/Appellee€Biogeneration,€Inc.€(ð ðBiogenerationðð)€is€theÐ L œ Ðcompany€Grisoni€started€after€his€employment€with€Wright€was€terminated.€Ð 8 ˆ Ðà@¿¿ ìàò òFACTS€AND€PROCEEDINGSó óˆÐ  ` Ðà  àGrisoni€was€hired€by€Wright€in€February€1994€as€manager€of€silicone€materials€and€processÐ è 8  Ðresearch.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo. #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€holds€a€bachelorððs€degree€in€material€science,€masterððs€degrees€in€polymerÐ Ô$  Ðtechnology€and€business€administration,€and€a€Ph.D.€in€manufacturing€engineering.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€beganÐ À  Ðworking€in€the€field€of€manufacturing€medical€devices€in€1985.€€Before€coming€to€Wright,€GrisoniÐ ¬ü  Ðworked€with€silicone€materials€at€Dow€Corning.€€Immediately€before€joining€Wright,€Grisoni€wasÐ ˜è  Ðthe€project€manager€for€the€development€of€interocular€lenses€at€Allergan€Medical€Optics.€€€Ð „Ô  ÐÔ#†¼>»XXo.g#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔà  àWhen€Grisoni€became€employed€at€Wright,€he€was€required€to€sign€a€confidentialityÐ \¬ Ðagreement.€€The€agreement€read,€in€pertinent€part:Ð H˜ ÐÒ°ÒÒ°ÒOther€than€as€required€in€my€duties€as€an€employee€of€Wright€Medical€Technology,Ð  p ÐI€will€not€disclose€to€anyone€or€use€either€during€or€after€my€employment;€exceptÐ  \ Ðwith€the€prior€written€consent€of€Wright€Medical€Technology,€any€trade€secret,Ð øH Ðconfidential€know„how€or€confidential€business€or€technical€information€of€WrightÐ ä4 ÐMedical€Technology.€€The€foregoing€obligation€shall€also€apply€to€any€trade€secretsÐ Ð  Ðor€other€confidential€information€of€any€third€party€learned€by€me€as€a€WrightÐ ¼  ÐMedical€Technology€employee€and€which€Wright€Medical€Technology€has€anÐ ¨ø Ðobligation€to€maintain€in€secrecy.€€The€obligations€of€secrecy€and€non„use€of€thisÐ ”ä Ðparagraph€shall€not€apply€to€any€information€which€has€become€publicly€availableÐ €Ð Ðthrough€no€fault€of€my€own.Ð l¼ ÐÒ° ÒÒ°üÒThus,€the€confidentiality€agreement€prohibited€Grisoni€from€using€or€disclosing€any€confidentialÐ D!” Ðinformation€of€Wright€that€had€not€become€publicly€available.€€However,€it€did€not€include€a€non„Ð 0"€  Ðcompetition€clause€prohibiting€Grisoni€from€developing€a€competing€product€after€leaving€hisÐ #l! Ðemployment€with€Wright.€Ð $X" Ðà  àIn€1994,€Wright€began€developing€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€fillers,€and€soon€thereafter€itÐ à%0!$ Ðbecame€one€of€Wrightððs€major€priorities.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.$#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔBone€void€filler€is€a€material€used€by€an€orthopedicÐ Ì&"% Ðsurgeon€to€fill€a€cavity€appearing€in€a€patientððs€bone,€resulting€from€either€traumatic€injury€or€theÐ ¸'#& Ðsurgical€removal€of€diseased€or€infected€bone€matter.€€The€bone€void€filler€material€is€grafted€overÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€area€of€missing€bone€or€void€until€the€area€is€replenished€by€the€bodyððs€own€natural€boneÐ )à$( Ðformation.€€Use€of€a€bone€void€filler€decreases€the€risk€of€infection€and€harmful€scar€tissue€while€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðnatural€bone€regenerates.€€Traditionally,€surgeons€have€transplanted€bone€matter€from€other€parts€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€patientððs€body,€such€as€the€patientððs€ribs,€or€implanted€pieces€of€bone€from€a€bone€bank.€Ð ° ÐSynthetic€materials€have€also€been€used€with€varying€degrees€of€success.€€Calcium€sulfate€has€beenÐ œì Ðused€as€an€artificial€bone€void€filler€for€at€least€a€century.€€The€advantage€of€calcium€sulfate€is€thatÐ ˆØ Ðit€is€absorbed€into€the€body,€that€is,€it€dissolves,€at€roughly€the€same€rate€as€the€new€bone€growth.€Ð tÄ ÐThis€allows€for€the€cavity€to€remain€filled€while€the€new€bone€forms€directly€behind€the€calciumÐ `° Ðsulfate€filler€material.Ô#†¼>»XXo.F#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂԀРL œ ЀÔ#†¼>»XXo.¦##ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔà  àWright€experimented€with€several€methods€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€graft€production.€Ð $ t ÐCalcium€sulfate€dihydrate,€also€known€as€gypsum,€is€a€natural€occurring€compound€which€is€minedÐ  ` Ðand€processed.€€The€resulting€powder€can€be€used€in€both€food€and€pharmaceutical€production.€Ð ü L  ÐUnder€the€ð ðpressedðð€method€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ÿ##ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔof€bone€void€filler€production,€a€small€amount€of€stearic€acid€is€addedÐ è 8  Ðas€a€binding€agent€to€the€calcium€sulfate€Ô_ÔdihydrateÔ_Ô€powder.€€The€mixture€is€then€compressed€intoÐ Ô$  Ðsmall€tablets€or€pellets€to€be€surgically€grafted€into€the€bone€cavity.€€A€second€method€of€bone€voidÐ À  Ðfiller€production€involves€the€removal€of€water€from€the€calcium€sulfate€dihydrate,€thereby€creatingÐ ¬ü  Ðcalcium€sulfate€Ô_ÔhemihydrateÔ_Ô.€€This€can€be€done€by€simply€heating€the€compound€in€order€to€removeÐ ˜è  Ðthe€water,€forming€beta„type€hemihydrate,€or€by€a€combination€of€heat€and€pressure€to€crystalize€theÐ „Ô  Ðhemihydrate,€forming€Ô_ÔalfaÔ_Ô„type€Ô_ÔhemihydrateÔ_Ô.€€Regardless€of€which€type€of€hemihydrate€is€produced,Ð pÀ Ðthe€calcium€sulfate€is€then€combined€with€a€fixed€amount€of€water.€€This€results€in€a€dihydrate€inÐ \¬ Ðpaste€form.€€This€€paste€can€then€be€directly€implanted€into€the€bone€cavity€to€solidify,€or€the€pasteÐ H˜ Ðcan€be€first€molded€into€small€pellets,€dried,€and€then€surgically€implanted€at€a€later€time.€€€€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.¼%#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ 4„ ÐÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àWright€and€other€companies€had€tried€to€develop€a€number€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€voidÐ  \ Ðfillers,€but€neither€Wright€nor€any€of€Wrightððs€competitors€had€gained€the€necessary€FDA€approvalÐ øH Ðfor€the€products.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ú*#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔFDA€approval€was€essential€to€developing€a€commercially€viable€product.€€In€1976,Ð ä4 ÐCongress€amended€the€Federal€Food,€Drug€and€Cosmetic€Act,€21€Ô_ÔU.S.C.S.Ô_Ô€Ô#†¼>»XXo.k,#ÔÔ‡8¼>»»¼>ÂÔÔ‡8ô> ò»8¼>ÂÔððððÔ#†8¼>» ò8ô>˜-#ÔÔ#†¼>»»8¼>Ây-#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€301€et€seq.€(1984)Ð Ð  Ð(ð ðthe€Act.ðð).€€The€amendments€to€the€Act€require€FDA€clearance€before€a€medical€device€can€beÐ ¼  Ðmarketed€in€the€United€States.€€The€amendments€did€not€cover€products€which€existed€in€interstateÐ ¨ø Ðcommerce€prior€to€May€23,€1976.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo..#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔNew€medical€devices€developed€after€that€date€were€required€toÐ ”ä Ðmeet€certain€performance€standards€established€by€the€FDA.€€To€demonstrate€that€a€product€isÐ €Ð Ðeffective€and€safe€for€use€for€humans,€and€thus€obtain€FDA€approval,€extensive€animal€and€humanÐ l¼ Ðclinical€studies€are€often€required.€Ð X ¨ Ðà  àThe€Act€allows€for€clearance€of€a€medical€product€through€an€application€process€wherebyÐ 0"€  Ðthe€submitting€company€demonstrates€to€the€FDA€that€the€non„approved€device€is€ð ðsubstantiallyÐ #l! Ðequivalentðð€to€a€predicate€device,€either€a€pre„1976€product€or€a€product€which€has€already€beenÐ $X" Ðgiven€FDA€clearance.€€This€ð ðpiggybackingðð€approval€process€permits€the€submitting€company€toÐ ô$D # Ðobtain€FDA€clearance€for€a€medical€product€without€having€to€engage€in€the€lengthy€animal€andÐ à%0!$ Ðhuman€clinical€studies€that€would€otherwise€be€necessary.€€The€FDA€exercises€a€great€deal€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðdiscretion€in€determining€whether€a€product€will€be€approved€as€ð ðsubstantially€equivalentðð€to€aÐ ¸'#& Ðpredicate€product.€€If€the€application,€known€as€a€510(k),€fails€to€meet€FDA€approval,€the€FDA€willÐ ¤(ô#' Ðusually€provide€feedback€informing€the€company€of€the€factors€it€considered€in€concluding€that€theÐ )à$( Ðtwo€compared€products€were€not€ð ðsubstantially€equivalent.ðð€€The€submitting€company€then€hasÐ |*Ì%) Ðseveral€options€to€obtain€clearance.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.~/#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€company€can€modify€its€product€to€more€closely€mimic€theÐ h+¸&* Ðpredicate€device,€or€find€a€predicate€device€more€similar€to€its€product€and€resubmit€the€510(k)Ð ° Ðapplication.€€If€the€companyððs€product€is€not€modified€or€a€new€predicate€product€is€not€found,€theÐ œì Ðcompany€could€use€an€alternate€method€of€demonstrating€ð ðsubstantial€equivalency,ðð€such€as€by€usingÐ ˆØ Ðmore€extensive€forms€of€testing€or€comparing€different€variables.€€If€FDA€approval€is€not€obtainedÐ tÄ Ðby€one€of€these€means,€the€company€would€likely€be€forced€to€engage€in€extensive€animal€and€humanÐ `° Ðclinical€studies€to€obtain€approval.€€€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.÷5#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ L œ Ðà  àOnce€FDA€clearance€is€given,€the€FDA€provides€the€public€limited€access€to€the€submittingÐ $ t Ðcompanyððs€510(k)€application€by€placing€a€summary€of€it€on€the€FDAððs€website.€€Information€notÐ  ` Ðincluded€in€the€FDA€summary€is€normally€kept€confidential.€Ð ü L  Ðà  àWithin€a€few€months€of€beginning€his€employment€with€Wright,€Grisoni€was€givenÐ Ô$  Ðresponsibility€over€Wrightððs€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler€project.€€He€worked€on€this€project€forÐ À  Ðthe€duration€of€his€employment€at€Wright.€€Prior€to€joining€Wright,€Grisoni€had€no€experience€in€theÐ ¬ü  Ðarea€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler€products€and€had€reviewed€no€literature€on€such€products.€Ð ˜è  ÐOnce€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€was€given€the€responsibility€for€developing€these€products,€he€researched€a€variety€ofÐ „Ô  Ðpublicly€available€sources€on€uses€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€grafts.Ô#†¼>»XXo. 9#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ pÀ Ðà  àIn€working€on€the€calcium€sulfate€bone€filler€project,€Grisoni€worked€closely€with€Dr.€WarrenÐ H˜ ÐHaggard€(ð ðHaggardðð),€also€employed€by€Wright.€€€Haggard€holds€a€Ph.D.€ò òó óin€biomedical€engineeringÐ 4„ Ðand€is€an€expert€in€Ô_ÔbiomaterialsÔ_Ô.€€Haggard€had€worked€for€Wright€since€August€1993.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€alsoÐ  p Ðworked€with€Robert€Churinetz€(ð ðChurinetzðð),€who€was€the€Wright€official€responsible€for€qualityÐ  \ Ðassurance€and€regulatory€approval.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.]=#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€worked€with€Churinetz€on€obtaining€FDA€approval€forÐ øH ÐWrightððs€bone€void€filler.€€Obtaining€FDA€approval€for€Wrightððs€bone€void€filler€proved€to€be€aÐ ä4 Ðlengthy€and€difficult€process.€Ð Ð  Ðà  àTo€get€the€raw€materials€for€the€bone€void€filler,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.@#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWright€entered€into€a€licensing€agreementÐ ¨ø Ðwith€U.S.€Gypsum€(ð ðÔ_ÔUSGÔ_Ôðð).€€The€agreement€with€USG€also€enabled€Wright€to€gain€access€to€USGððsÐ ”ä Ðexpertise€in€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€fillers.€€Ô_ÔUSGÔ_Ô€was€one€of€the€largest€producers€of€calciumÐ €Ð Ðsulfate€and€had€been€engaged€with€other€companies€in€extensive€research€into€the€use€of€calciumÐ l¼ Ðsulfate€as€a€bone€void€filler.Ô#†¼>»XXo.¥A#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.çC#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ X ¨ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.,D#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWhile€overseeing€this€project€for€Wright,€Grisoni€met€with€several€individuals€who€wereÐ 0"€  Ðinstrumental€in€the€development€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€fillers.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.D#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOn€one€occasion€in€April€1995,Ð #l! ÐGrisoni€met€with€Max€Sherman,Ô#†¼>»XXo.„E#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€a€former€employee€of€Ô_ÔZimmerÔ_Ô,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.F#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔanother€company€that€manufacturedÐ $X" Ðorthopedic€devices.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.–F#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWhile€at€Zimmer,€Sherman€had€been€in€charge€of€regulatory€affairs.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.#G#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔShermanÐ ô$D # Ðprovided€Wright€a€bibliography€developed€at€Zimmer€containing€several€articles€on€the€productionÐ à%0!$ Ðand€use€of€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€fillers,€which€Ô#†¼>»XXo.©G#Ôò òó óÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€used€to€do€background€research.€Ð Ì&"% ÐÔ#†¼>»XXo.¶H#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔAccording€to€Sherman,€ZimmerÔ#†¼>»XXo.UI#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€had€tried€to€develop€a€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler€but€wasÐ ¸'#& Ðunsuccessful€in€getting€its€510(k)€application€approved€by€the€FDA,€primarily€Ô#†¼>»XXo.³I#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔbecause€Ô_ÔZimmerÔ_Ô€hadÐ ¤(ô#' Ðused€actual€bone€as€the€predicate€device€for€its€bone€void€filler€in€the€510(k)€application.€€ShermanÐ )à$( Ðfelt€that€a€better€predicate€device€for€FDA€approval€would€be€Ethicon,€a€calcium€sulfate€bone€fillerÐ |*Ì%) Ðdevice€in€pellet€form€which€had€been€marketed€unsuccessfully€in€the€1950s€and€1960s.€AfterÐ h+¸&* Ðproduction€of€Ethicon€was€ceased,€the€remaining€supply€of€Ethicon€pellets€were€given€to€Dr.€LeonardÐ ° ÐPeltier,€ò òó ówho€supported€the€development€of€Ethicon.Ô#†¼>»XXo.˜J#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€€Ð œì Ðà  àIn€light€of€Shermanððs€comments,€Wright€made€a€decision€to€use€Ethicon€as€the€predicateÐ tÄ Ðdevice€in€the€510(k)€application€for€FDA€approval€of€its€bone€void€filler.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.3M#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWrightððs€initial€bone€voidÐ `° Ðfiller€was€an€antibiotic€loaded€calcium€sulfate€product€in€pellet€form.€€However,€by€mid„1995,Ð L œ ÐWrightððs€major€effort€was€a€kit,€called€Osteoset,€which€contained€calcium€sulfate€hemihydrateÐ 8 ˆ Ðpowder,€a€vial€of€liquid,€a€mixing€bowl€and€a€mixing€tool.€€The€surgeon€would€mix€the€contents€ofÐ $ t Ðthe€kitÔ#†¼>»XXo.RN#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€into€a€calcium€sulfate€paste€and€then€graft€the€paste€into€the€bone€cavity,€where€it€would€thenÐ  ` ÐsolidifyÔ#†¼>»XXo.+P#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.êP#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔIn€September€1995,€Wrightððs€510(k)€application€on€the€Osteoset€kit€was€submitted€to€theÐ ü L  ÐFDA.€€The€FDA€denied€approval€of€the€510(k)€application,€citing€the€technological€differencesÐ è 8  Ðbetween€implanted€pellets€such€as€Ethicon€and€the€direct€application€of€a€calcium€sulfate€paste.׃:×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð Ô$  ÐIn€denying€approval€for€the€510(k)€application,€the€FDA€also€noted€that€Wright€had€not€demonstratedÐ À  Ðthat€Ethicon€was€sold€in€interstate€commerce€prior€to€March€1976.€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àAfter€this€initial€failure,€Wright€determined€that€its€bone€void€filler€needed€to€be€in€the€formÐ „Ô  Ðof€€calcium€sulfate€pellets,€similar€to€Ethicon,€in€order€to€obtain€FDA€approval.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo./Q#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔIn€order€to€developÐ pÀ Ðsuch€a€product,€Wright€obtained€a€single€package€of€Ethicon€pellets€from€Dr.€Ô_ÔPeltierÔ_Ô.€€Wright€thenÐ \¬ Ðbegan€consulting€with€Dr.€Peltier€on€the€development€of€Wrightððs€own€calcium€sulfate€pellets.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.¿T#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ H˜ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo."V#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOnce€Wright€had€access€to€Ethicon€pellets,€Wright€employees€began€to€ð ðreverse€engineerððÐ  p Ðcalcium€sulfate€pelletsò òó ó€which€closely€proximated€Ethicon€pellets.€€In€January€1996,€Wright€openedÐ  \ Ðthe€single€package€of€Ethicon€pellets€and€sent€the€contents€to€USG€for€chemical€analysis.€€WithinÐ øH Ða€few€weeks€after€acquiring€the€Ethicon€pellets€from€Dr.€Peltier,€Wright€had€created€the€prototypeÐ ä4 Ðof€its€Osteoset€pressed€pellets,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.…V#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔcontaining€98%€calcium€sulfate€dihydrate€and€2%€stearic€acid.€€€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ÃX#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ Ð  Ðà  àIn€order€to€gain€FDA€approval,€Wright€needed€to€demonstrate€that€the€Osteoset€pellets€wouldÐ ¨ø Ðperform€similarly€to€Ethicon€pellets€when€implanted€into€the€human€body.€€Since€EthiconððsÐ ”ä Ðdissolution€inside€the€human€body€had€previously€proven€successful,€Churinetz€proposed€to€conductÐ €Ð Ðdissolution€tests€of€the€two€products€inside€the€laboratory.€€Ô_ÔChurinetzÔ_Ô€and€Grisoni€conducted€theÐ l¼ Ðcomparison€by€using€water€and€phosphate€buffered€saline€solution€as€the€dissolution€mediums.€€ByÐ X ¨ Ðestablishing€that€the€two€products,€Osteoset€and€Ethicon,€€had€similar€dissolution€rates€in€water,Ð D!” Ðwhich€has€less€density€than€body€fluids,€and€phosphate€buffered€saline€solution,€which€has€a€densityÐ 0"€  Ðgreater€than€body€fluids,€Churinetz€hoped€to€demonstrate€to€the€FDA€that€the€dissolution€rates€forÐ #l! Ðboth€Osteoset€and€Ô_ÔEthiconÔ_Ô€would€correlate€with€the€rate€of€new€bone€growth€when€implanted€in€theÐ $X" Ðhuman€body.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.FY#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔIn€February1996,Wright€conducted€the€dissolution€tests€and€verified€that€Osteoset€hadÐ ô$D # Ðâ âsimilar€dissolution€rates€to€Ô_ÔEthiconÔ_Ô.Ô#†¼>»XXo.^#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àThese€dissolution€tests€were€then€incorporated€into€Wrightððs€510(k)€application€in€order€toÐ ° Ðâ âshow€that€the€two€products€had€ð ðsubstantially€equivalentðð€dissolution€rates.€€Affidavits€from€formerÐ œì ÐEthicon€employees€and€Dr.€Peltier€were€submitted€to€show€that€Ethicon€had€been€marketed€inÐ ˆØ Ðinterstate€commerce€prior€to€May€1976.€€In€June€1996,€Wrightððs€510(k)€application€for€Osteoset€wasÐ tÄ Ðapproved€by€the€FDA.€€Two€months€later,€Wright€began€marketing€Osteoset€to€the€public.€€InÐ `° ÐJuly1996,€òòóóò òó óthe€summary€of€Wrightððs€510(k)€application€was€made€available€on€the€FDAððs€website.€Ð L œ Ðà  àAfter€Wright€obtained€FDA€clearance€for€Osteoset,€it€switched€to€a€casting€process€forÐ $ t Ðproducing€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô€pellets.€€The€process€required€that€Wright€first€convert€the€dihydrate€powderÐ  ` Ðsupplied€by€USG€into€hemihydrate€powder.€€Water€could€then€be€added€to€form€a€dihydrate€paste.€Ð ü L  ÐÔ#†¼>»XXo._#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWright€had€previously€learned€from€USG€that€either€the€alpha„type€hemihydrate€or€beta„typeÐ è 8  Ðhemihydrate€could€be€used€to€produce€calcium€sulfate€paste.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Ëc#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔWright€opted€to€use€alpha„typeÐ Ô$  Ðhemihydrate€in€its€molding€process.€Ð À  Ðà  àWright€produced€alpha„type€hemihydrate€Ô#†¼>»XXo. e#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔcrystals€using€a€calcination€process€involving€heatÐ ˜è  Ðand€pressure.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.íe#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÔ_ÔUSGÔ_Ô€had€previously€developed€temperature€and€pressure€ranges€for€the€calcinationÐ „Ô  Ðprocess,€and€Wright€acquired€this€information€as€part€of€its€agreement€with€Ô_ÔUSGÔ_Ô.€After€theÐ pÀ Ðcalcination€process€was€completed,€the€hemihydrate€powder€was€mixed€with€stearic€acid€and€waterÐ \¬ Ðto€create€a€calcium€sulfate€dihydrate€paste.€This€paste€could€then€be€mass€molded€and€dried€intoÐ H˜ Ðpellets€similar€in€size€and€composition€to€the€pressed€pellets.€€However,€Wright€discovered€that€theÐ 4„ Ðdissolution€rate€of€the€cast€pellets€was€different€than€the€dissolution€rate€of€the€pressed€pellets.€€ByÐ  p Ðdecreasing€the€amount€of€stearic€acid€in€the€mixture€of€the€cast€pelletsÔ#†¼>»XXo.†f#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ,€Wright€achieved€a€dissolutionÐ  \ Ðrate€equivalent€to€that€of€the€pressed€pellets.€Ð øH Ðà  àMetal€molds€were€originally€used€to€mold€the€Osteoset€pellets.€€However,€to€allow€the€pelletsÐ Ð  Ðto€expand€during€drying,€Grisoni€designed€a€flexible€silicon€mold.€€The€pellets€were€bottled€and€thenÐ ¼  Ðunderwent€a€sterilization€process€using€gamma€radiation.€€Once€the€sterilization€was€completed,€theÐ ¨ø Ðpellets€were€packaged€and€stored€for€distribution.€€Ð ”ä Ðà  àIn€August€1997,€Wright€implemented€a€company„wide€reduction€in€force€in€whichÐ l¼ Ðapproximately€75€employees€were€terminated.€€As€part€of€the€reduction€in€force,€on€August€19,€1997,Ð X ¨ ÐGrisoniððs€employment€with€Wright€was€terminated.€€Within€a€few€days€of€his€termination,€GrisoniÐ D!” Ðdecided€to€start€his€own€business€dealing€in€tissue€repair,€which€he€called€Ô_ÔBiogenerationÔ_Ô,€Inc.€Ð 0"€  Ðò òó óÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€experience€at€Wright,€as€well€as€several€articles€appearing€in€Memphis€newspapers,€madeÐ #l! Ðhim€aware€of€the€growing€market€in€calcium€sulfate€bone€substitutes.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€chose€to€manufactureÐ $X" Ðcalcium€sulfate€bone€filler€because€such€filler€can€be€manufactured€without€a€large€amount€of€start„Ð ô$D # Ðup€capital.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€later€testified€that€he€went€to€area€libraries€to€review€books€and€articles€onÐ à%0!$ Ðcalcium€sulfate.€Many€of€these€articles€were€listed€in€the€bibliography€of€Wrightððs€technicalÐ Ì&"% Ðâ âmonograph€for€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô,€published€and€distributed€as€part€of€Osteosetððs€marketing€campaign.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€later€testified€that€he€accessed€the€FDA€web€page€to€review€Wrightððs€510(k)€summaries€toÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô€products.€€Ð œì Ðâ âà  àAfter€Grisoniððs€initial€research,€he€began€working€on€a€competing€bone€void€filler€using€beta„Ð tÄ Ðtype€calcium€sulfate€Ô_ÔhemihydrateÔ_Ô.€€By€September€8,€1997,€less€than€three€weeks€after€his€termination,Ð `° ÐGrisoni€had€designed€a€prototype€of€his€competing€bone€filler,€which€contained€98%€calcium€sulfateÐ L œ Ðdihydrate€and€2%€stearic€acid€and€was€in€pellet€form,€similar€to€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€On€September€26,€1997,Ð 8 ˆ Ða€little€over€a€month€after€his€termination,€Grisoni€submitted€to€the€FDA€a€510(k)€application€on€hisÐ $ t Ðproduct,€called€ProFusion,€using€Osteoset€as€his€predicate€device.€€In€his€application,€GrisoniÐ  ` Ðdescribed€ProFusion€as€being€ð ðidenticalðð€to€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€€Also€included€in€the€510(k)€application€forÐ ü L  ÐProFusion€were€the€results€of€dissolution€studies€comparing€the€dissolution€rates€of€ProFusion€withÐ è 8  Ðthose€of€Osteoset.€€The€studies€were€conducted€using€the€same€test€fluids,€water€and€phosphateÐ Ô$  Ðbuffered€saline€solution,€as€Grisoni€had€used€previously€for€Wrightððs€dissolution€studies€in€its€510(k)Ð À  Ðapplication€for€Osteoset.€€Grisoni€ran€his€test€for€the€same€number€of€days,€eight,€and€used€the€sameÐ ¬ü  Ðamount€of€water,€100€millileters,€as€was€used€in€conducting€the€Wright€dissolution€studies.€€In€thisÐ ˜è  Ðmanner,€Grisoni€was€able€to€demonstrate€to€the€FDA€that€the€dissolution€rates€of€ProFusion€andÐ „Ô  ÐOsteoset€were€ð ðsubstantially€equivalent.ðð€€In€April€1998,€the€FDA€approved€Grisoniððs€510(k)Ð pÀ Ðapplication€for€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô.€Ð \¬ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.j#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔMeanwhile,€after€Grisoni€was€terminated,€Wright€began€having€technical€problems€with€itsÐ 4„ Ðantibiotic€loaded€bone€void€filler€process.€€Consequently,€not€long€after€Grisoni€was€terminated,Ð  p ÐWright€asked€Grisoni€to€return€to€Wright€as€a€consultant€for€a€limited€period€of€time,€fromÐ  \ ÐSeptember€29€to€October€31,€1997.€€On€September€29,€1997,€Grisoniððs€first€day€back€as€a€consultant,Ð øH ÐGrisoni€Ô#†¼>»XXo.z#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔtold€Haggard€that€he€was€involved€in€developing€a€bone€graft€substitute.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.|#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€next€day,Ð ä4 ÐGrisoni€met€with€the€vice€president€and€general€counsel€of€Wright,€Tom€Patton€(ð ðPattonðð),€andÐ Ð  Ðdiscussed€his€involvement€in€producing€a€competing€bone€filler€product.€€Patton€reminded€GrisoniÐ ¼  Ðof€his€obligations€under€the€confidentiality€agreement.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€assured€Patton€that€he€was€honoringÐ ¨ø Ðthe€agreement.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.«|#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ ”ä Ðà  àGrisoni€later€testified€that,€while€working€as€a€consultant€at€Wright,€Grisoni€would€take€hisÐ l¼ ÐProFusionÔ#†¼>»XXo.¤~#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€lab€notebook€with€him,€keeping€it€in€his€briefcase.€€He€said€that€he€took€the€notebook€withÐ X ¨ Ðhim€to€Wright€so€that€he€could€write€down€ideas.€€ò òó óÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€Ô#†¼>»XXo.‚#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔbriefcase€did€not€have€a€lock.€€On€severalÐ D!” Ðoccasions,€Grisoni€left€his€briefcase€unattended€at€his€desk€while€working€in€the€lab€or€attendingÐ 0"€  Ðmeetings.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€desk€was€located€close€to€Haggardððs€office.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.š€#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔHaggard€did€not€attend€the€majorityÐ #l! Ðof€the€meetings€Grisoni€attended€during€this€time.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ú#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ $X" Ðà  àAfter€Grisoniððs€meeting€with€Patton€regarding€Grisoniððs€obligations€under€the€confidentialityÐ à%0!$ Ðagreement,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.¨‚#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔPatton€remained€concerned€with€the€possible€conflict€of€having€Grisoni€consult€withÐ Ì&"% ÐWright€while€Grisoni€continued€to€develop€a€competing€bone€filler€device.€€As€a€consequence,€onÐ ¸'#& ÐOctober€8,€1997,Wright€terminated€Grisoniððs€services€as€a€consultant.€€At€that€time,€Wright€hadÐ ¤(ô#' ÐGrisoni€sign€a€consulting€agreement€which,€similar€to€the€earlier€confidentiality€agreement,Ð )à$( Ðâ âprohibited€Grisoni€from€using€or€disclosing€any€confidential€information€he€received€from€WrightÐ |*Ì%) Ðpursuant€to€the€consulting€agreement.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Thereafter,€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€received€a€letter€from€Patton€datedÐ ° Ðâ âOctober€6€1997,€informing€him€what€Patton€ò òó óÔ#†¼>»XXo.Žƒ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔbelieved€to€be€included€within€the€confidentialityÐ œì Ðagreement,€including€the€production€process€and€regulatory€strategy€for€Osteoset.׃d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_ÔððsÐ ˆØ Ðattorney,€Fred€Ô_ÔAcuffÔ_Ô,€ò òó ósent€a€letter€to€Patton€denying€that€Grisoni€had€used€any€confidentialÐ tÄ Ðinformation€and€offered€to€meet€with€Patton€to€discuss€any€alleged€violations€of€the€confidentialityÐ `° Ðagreement.€€Instead€of€meeting€with€Acuff,€Patton€sent€a€letter€to€Acuff€stating€that€ð ðwhether€thisÐ L œ Ðmatter€is€put€to€rest€or€not€is€up€to€your€client.ððÐ 8 ˆ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.3‡#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔIn€early€March€1998,€Grisoni€attended€the€annual€meeting€of€the€American€Academy€ofÐ  ` ÐOrthopedic€Surgeons€in€New€Orleans.€€During€the€meeting,€Grisoni€exhibited€ProFusion€and€offeredÐ ü L  Ðbrochures€and€other€information€to€those€in€attendance.€€Wright€also€had€a€booth€at€the€annualÐ è 8  Ðmeeting€and€saw€that€Grisoni€was€producing€his€own€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler.€€When€Patton,Ð Ô$  Ðwho€by€then€was€Wrightððs€president,€learned€that€Grisoni€was€marketing€a€competing€product,€heÐ À  Ðinstructed€Wrightððs€general€counsel,€Michael€McLaren,€to€investigate€the€matter.€€Ô_ÔMcLarenÔ_Ô€was€anÐ ¬ü  Ðexperienced€attorney€and€a€partner€in€the€Memphis€law€firm€of€Thomason,€Hendrix,€Harvey,€JohnsonÐ ˜è  Ðand€MitchellÔ#†¼>»XXo.…Š#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€(ð ðThomason€Hendrixðð),€as€well€as€Wrightððs€general€counsel.€€Ô_ÔMcLarenÔ_Ô€reviewedÐ „Ô  ÐGrisoniððs€confidentiality€agreement€and€talked€to€several€Wright€officials,€including€Haggard€andÐ pÀ ÐÔ_ÔChurinetzÔ_Ô.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Ž#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔAfter€the€investigation,€McLaren€advised€Wright€to€retain€the€Thomason€Hendrix€lawÐ \¬ Ðfirm€to€seek€injunctive€relief€against€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔAttorneys€William€Haltom€and€Robert€Moore€of€theÐ H˜ ÐÔ_ÔThomasonÔ_Ô€Hendrix€firm€were€assigned€to€represent€Wright€in€the€matter.€€Ð 4„ Ðà  àOn€March€23,€1998,€Grisoni€sent€a€letter€to€Patton€offering€to€meet€with€Wright€officials€toÐ  \ Ðdiscuss€any€alleged€violations€of€the€confidentiality€agreement.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€and€Acuff€ò òó ólater€met€withÐ øH ÐWrightððs€attorneys€to€discuss€possible€resolution€of€the€matter.€€The€meeting€was€verbally€combativeÐ ä4 Ðand€resulted€in€no€resolution.Ô#†¼>»XXo.‰#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ Ð  Ðà  àOn€March€31,€1998,€Wright€filed€an€action€in€Shelby€County€Chancery€Court,€seekingÐ ¨ø Ðinjunctive€relief€against€Grisoni€and€his€company,€Ô_ÔBioGenerationÔ_Ô.€€The€lawsuit€asserted€that€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_ÔÐ ”ä Ðhad€violated€his€confidentiality€agreement€by€using€Wrightððs€confidential€information€to€developÐ €Ð ÐÔ_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.A“#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔIn€the€complaint,€Wright€sought€injunctive€relief€prohibiting€the€use€or€disclosure€of€anyÐ l¼ Ðconfidential€information€or€trade€secrets€and€asked€the€trial€court€to€enjoin€Grisoni€fromÐ X ¨ Ðmanufacturing€and€marketing€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô.€€The€trial€judge,€Chancellor€Neal€Small,€immediatelyÐ ° Ðissued€a€temporary€restraining€order€(TRO)€prohibiting€any€further€violations€of€the€confidentialityÐ œì Ðagreement.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.h•#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€Ô_ÔTROÔ_Ô€prohibited€the€use€of€confidential€information€and€trade€secrets€but€did€notÐ ˆØ Ðenjoin€Grisoni€from€manufacturing€and€marketing€ProFusion,€so€long€as€€no€confidential€informationÐ tÄ Ðor€trade€secrets€were€utilized.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.—#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔA€temporary€injunction€hearing€was€set€for€April€13,€1998,€and€WrightÐ `° Ðwas€ordered€to€post€a€$500€bond.€€On€April€6,€1998,€attorney€Stephen€Biller€entered€a€Notice€ofÐ L œ ÐAppearance€on€behalf€of€Grisoni.€€€€€€Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àOn€the€date€of€the€scheduled€hearing,€both€parties€were€conducting€extensive€discovery.€Ð  ` ÐConsequently,€the€parties€consented€to€an€order€modifying€and€extending€the€TRO€until€April€27,€Ð ü L  Ð1998.€Unlike€the€original€TRO,€the€modified€TRO€prohibited€Grisoni€from€manufacturing€orÐ è 8  Ðmarketing€ProFusion€or€from€transferring€his€interest€in€ProFusion€or€his€approved€510(k)Ð Ô$  Ðapplication.׃T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð À  Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.™#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOn€April€23,€1998,€Grisoni€filed€his€answer,€including€a€jury€demand.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.–œ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔAt€a€meeting€on€theÐ ˜è  Ðmorning€of€the€scheduled€hearing€on€April€27ò òó ó,€Biller€told€Grisoni€that€he€felt€that€Grisoni€should€notÐ „Ô  Ðoppose€Wrightððs€request€for€a€temporary€injunction€order€pending€a€hearing€on€the€merits.€Ð pÀ ÐThereafter,€Ô_ÔBillerÔ_Ô€contacted€the€attorney€for€Wright€and€told€him€that€Grisoni€would€not€oppose€theÐ \¬ Ðtemporary€injunction€order.€€The€attorneys€for€both€parties€made€alternate€proposals€regarding€theÐ H˜ Ðwording€of€the€order.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€temporary€injunction€order€that€was€finally€entered€contained€the€sameÐ 4„ Ðlanguage€as€the€modified€TRO,€prohibiting€the€manufacture€and€marketing€of€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_ÔÔ#†¼>»XXo.¢Ÿ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ.׃UT×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ  p Ðtemporary€injunction€order€also€increased€the€injunction€bond€to€$7500.€€Travelers€Casualty€andÐ  \ ÐSurety€Company€(Travelers)€was€the€surety€under€the€bond.€€While€Ô_ÔBillerÔ_Ô,€on€behalf€of€Grisoni,Ð øH Ðconsented€to€the€temporary€injunction,€Biller€and€Grisoni€maintained€that€Grisoni€had€used€noÐ ä4 Ðconfidential€information.€€Thereafter,€the€parties€continued€discovery,€including€Grisoniððs€deposition.€Ð Ð  ÐIn€his€deposition,€Grisoni€asserted€that€ProFusion€was€substantially€different€from€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.· #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ ¼  Ðà  àOn€June€3,€1998,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Þ£#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔGrisoni€and€Biller€attended€a€settlement€conference€at€the€law€offices€ofÐ ”ä ÐÔ_ÔThomasonÔ_Ô€Hendrix.€€Attorney€William€Haltom€represented€Wright€at€the€settlement€conference.€Ð €Ð ÐUnbeknownst€to€the€attorneys,€Grisoni€secretly€tape€recorded€the€settlement€conference.€€During€theÐ l¼ Ðmeeting,€Haltom€asserted€that€Grisoniððs€testimony€in€his€deposition,€that€ProFusion€was€altogetherÐ X ¨ Ðdifferent€than€Osteoset,€was€inconsistent€with€the€prior€claim€made€in€his€510(k)€application€that€theÐ D!” Ðtwo€products€were€ð ðidentical.ðð׃;¤×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ô_ÔHaltomÔ_Ô€said€that,€unless€Grisoni€agreed€to€surrender€his€510(k)€onÐ 0"€  ÐProFusion,€Wright€intended€to€go€to€both€the€chancery€court€and€the€FDA€and€inform€them€ofÐ #l! ÐGrisoniððs€contradictory€statements.€Ð $X" Ðà  àBy€September€1998,€the€relationship€between€Biller€and€Grisoni€had€deteriorated€and€aÐ ° Ðconsent€order€was€entered€substituting€Steven€Markowitz€as€the€attorney€for€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô.€€On€NovemberÐ œì Ð23,€1998,€Grisoni€filed€a€motion€to€dissolve€or€modify€the€temporary€injunction,€asserting€that€(1)Ð ˆØ Ðhe€had€never€consented€to€the€language€in€the€temporary€injunction€order€dealing€specifically€withÐ tÄ ÐProFusion€and€(2)€he€had€not€violated€the€confidentiality€agreement.€€€€Ð `° Ðà  àThe€hearing€on€Grisoniððs€motion€to€dissolve€the€injunction€was€held€on€January€26,€1999.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐAt€the€outset,€Wrightððs€attorney€assumed€that€the€only€issue€the€trial€court€planned€to€consider€wasÐ $ t Ðwhether€Grisoni€had€consented€to€the€temporary€injunction;€consequently,€he€assumed€that€GrisoniÐ  ` Ðwould€have€the€burden€of€showing€lack€of€consent€to€the€injunction.€€However,€the€trial€judge,Ð ü L  ÐChancellor€Walter€Evans,׃W×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€decided€that,€since€no€evidence€had€ever€been€presented€on€whether€Ð è 8  ÐWright€was€entitled€to€a€temporary€injunction,€the€hearing€on€dissolving€the€temporary€injunctionÐ Ô$  Ðwould€be€consolidated€with€the€hearing€on€Wrightððs€request€for€a€permanent€injunction.׃<T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РÀ  Ðò òó óAccordingly,€over€Wrightððs€objection,€the€burden€of€proof€was€assigned€to€Wright.€€Grisoni€did€notÐ ¬ü  Ðobject€to€proceeding€on€Wrightððs€request€for€a€permanent€injunction,€despite€having€originallyÐ ˜è  Ðdemanded€a€jury€trial.€€Ð „Ô  Ðà  àAt€the€outset€of€the€hearing,€Grisoni€objected€to€the€amount€of€the€injunction€bond,€whichÐ \¬ Ðwas,€at€the€time,€$7,500.€€Grisoni€noted€that€the€injunction€would€cause€him€to€miss€the€AnnualÐ H˜ ÐMeeting€of€the€American€Academy€of€Orthopedic€Surgeons,€the€premier€event€for€marketing€aÐ 4„ Ðproduct€such€as€ProFusion.€€In€light€of€this,€the€trial€judge€increased€the€amount€of€the€injunctionÐ  p Ðbond€from€$7,500€to€$250,000.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.R¤#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOn€February€1,€1999,€Travelers€issued€a€rider€to€the€originalÐ  \ Ðinjunction€bond€increasing€the€penal€sum€to€$250,000.€€€€€Ð øH Ðà  àTestimony€was€heard€over€a€six€week€period.€€Wright€first€presented€testimony€from€attorneyÐ Ð  ÐBiller€that€Grisoni€had€in€fact€consented€to€the€temporary€injunction.€€After€Billerððs€testimony,€theÐ ¼  Ðtrial€court€decided€that€the€hearing€should€be€on€Wrightððs€request€for€a€permanent€injunction.€€WrightÐ ¨ø Ðwas€then€obliged€to€present€evidence€showing€that€Grisoni€had,€in€fact,€violated€his€confidentialityÐ ”ä Ðagreement€with€Wright€during€the€course€of€Grisoniððs€€development€of€a€competing€bone€void€filler.€Ð €Ð ÐThe€evidence€presented€by€Wright€included€evidence€of€the€following:(1)€Grisoni€had€no€experienceÐ l¼ Ðwith€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€fillers€before€coming€to€Wright;€(2)€while€with€Wright,€Grisoni€wasÐ X ¨ Ðplaced€in€charge€of€Wrightððs€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler€project;€(3)€while€overseeing€theÐ D!” Ðproject,€Grisoni€was€given€access€to€a€variety€of€technical€sources€of€information€that€WrightÐ 0"€  Ðconsidered€confidential,€including€information€from€USG€that€either€alpha„type€or€beta„typeÐ #l! Ðhemihydrate€could€be€used€in€producing€bone€void€fillers;€(4)€by€trial€and€error,€and€at€substantialÐ $X" Ðtime€and€investment,€Wright€was€able€to€develop€Osteoset,€get€regulatory€approval,€and€bringÐ ô$D # Ðâ âOsteoset€to€the€market;€(5)€after€being€terminated€from€Wright,€Grisoni€was€able€to€develop€aÐ à%0!$ Ðcompeting€bone€void€filler€within€a€matter€of€weeks;€and€(6)€Grisoni€was€able€to€get€FDA€approvalÐ ° Ðby€showing€that€his€competing€bone€void€filler€was€ð ðsubstantially€equivalentðð€to€Osteoset.€€Ð œì Ðâ âà  àFor€each€piece€of€information€or€technical€know„how€Wright€asserted€to€be€confidential,Ð tÄ ÐGrisoni€sought€to€show€either€that€the€information€was€publicly€available,€and€therefore€outside€theÐ `° Ðscope€of€the€confidentiality€agreement,€or€that€Grisoniððs€process€was€different€from€the€processesÐ L œ Ðhe€learned€while€at€Wright.€Grisoni€testified€extensively€about€the€independent€research€he€did€afterÐ 8 ˆ Ðhis€termination€on€calcium€sulfate€and€the€FDA€approval€process.€€Grisoni€also€testified€extensivelyÐ $ t Ðon€the€differences€between€ProFusion€and€Osteoset€in€composition,€production€processes,€andÐ  ` Ðtesting.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ر#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔà ` àÐ ü L  Ðà  àGrisoni€also€questioned€the€credibility€of€Wrightððs€witnesses.€€Grisoni€noted€that€Wright€hadÐ Ô$  Ðasserted€in€its€complaint€that€Grisoni€had€developed€his€prototype€of€ProFusion€ð ðbyðð€September€8,Ð À  Ð1997,€a€matter€of€weeks€after€his€termination.€€Grisoni€asserted€that€he€had€told€no€one€this€date,€andÐ ¬ü  Ðthat€the€only€place€that€information€appeared€was€in€the€lab€notebook€he€brought€to€Wright€in€hisÐ ˜è  Ðbrief€case€while€working€as€a€consultant.€€When€questioned€about€this€in€his€testimony,€Haggard€€wasÐ „Ô  Ðunable€to€say€how€Wright€arrived€at€September€8,€1997€date€in€its€complaint.€€The€lab€notebook€wasÐ pÀ Ðnot€produced€to€Wright€until€discovery€was€commenced,€after€Wrightððs€complaint€was€filed€inÐ \¬ ÐMarch€1998.׃?×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€From€these€facts,€Grisoni€asserted€that€Haggard€or€another€employee€of€Wright€mustÐ H˜ Ðhave€gained€access€to€Grisoniððs€briefcase€and€looked€at€his€lab€notebook€while€he€was€consultingÐ 4„ Ðfor€Wright€in€October€1997.€€€€€€€€€€€Ð  p Ðò òó óÔ#†¼>»XXo.¢¼#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔà  àAt€the€hearing€to€dissolve€the€injunction,€for€reasons€that€are€not€entirely€clear€from€theÐ øH Ðrecord,׃bÜ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€attorney€for€Wright,€William€Haltom,€was€subpoenaed€to€testify.€€In€his€testimony,Ð ä4 ÐHaltom€was€questioned€at€length€about€the€settlement€conference€with€Grisoni€at€which€Haltom€toldÐ Ð  ÐGrisoni€that,€if€Grisoni€refused€to€give€up€his€510(k)€on€ProFusion,€Wright€would€go€to€the€chanceryÐ ¼  Ðcourt€and€to€the€FDA€to€tell€both€of€Grisoniððs€contradictory€statements€on€whether€ProFusion€wasÐ ¨ø Ðð ðidenticalðð€to€Osteoset.€€The€questioning€and€Haltomððs€testimony€were€often€contentious.€€Later€inÐ ”ä Ðthe€hearing,€the€tape€Grisoni€secretly€made€of€the€settlement€conference€was€disclosed€and€playedÐ €Ð Ðfor€the€trial€court,€in€an€effort€to€show€that€Haltom€had€ð ðthreatenedðð€Grisoni€but€would€not€admit€toÐ l¼ Ðâ âdoing€so€in€his€testimony.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ØÁ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ X ¨ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.`Æ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔAfter€the€hearing€was€concluded,€on€March€10,€1999,€the€trial€court€issued€from€the€benchÐ ° Ðâ âits€findings€of€facts€and€conclusions€of€law.€€The€trial€court€stated€the€issue€as€ð ðwhether€the€defendantÐ œì Ðused€confidential€information€or€trade€secrets€of€the€plaintiff€which€had€not€become€publiclyÐ ˆØ Ðavailable.ðð€€The€trial€court€noted€that€it€was€very€impressed€with€Grisoniððs€knowledge,€expertise€and€Ð tÄ Ðcredibility.€€The€trial€court€made€no€findings€at€that€time€regarding€the€credibility€of€WrightððsÐ `° Ðwitnesses€or€of€Wrightððs€attorney,€William€Haltom.€€The€trial€court€found,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€anyÐ L œ Ðinformation€on€which€Grisoni€relied€to€develop€ProFusion€was€not€confidential€but€was€publiclyÐ 8 ˆ Ðavailable.€€Based€on€its€view€of€the€evidence,€and€its€ò òó ódeterminations€of€credibility,€the€trial€courtÐ $ t Ðconcluded€that€ProFusion€was€developed€as€a€result€of€Grisoniððs€ingenuity,€hard€work€and€ability,Ð  ` Ðand€not€as€a€result€of€any€misappropriation€of€confidential€information€or€trade€secrets€of€Wright.€Ð ü L  Ѐà  àAfter€the€trial€court€issued€its€ruling€from€the€bench,€Wright€indicated€that€it€intended€to€fileÐ Ô$  Ðan€interlocutory€appeal.€€Wright€then€sought€from€the€trial€court€a€stay€of€the€trial€courtððs€order,Ð À  Ðpending€its€interlocutory€appeal.€€The€trial€judge€declined€to€rule€ò òó óon€Wrightððs€motion€for€a€stay.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ÃÆ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔByÐ ¬ü  Ðorder€dated€March€22,€1999,€the€trial€court€dissolved€the€injunction€and€set€a€hearing€for€March€29,Ð ˜è  Ð1999€to€determine€the€amount€of€any€damages€Grisoni€sustained€as€a€result€of€the€wrongfully€issuedÐ „Ô  Ðinjunction.Ô#†¼>»XXo.8Í#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ pÀ Ðà  àShortly€thereafter,€on€March€24,€1999,€Wright€filed€its€motion€for€interlocutory€appealÐ H˜ Ðpursuant€to€Rule€10€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure,€as€well€as€a€motion€under€RuleÐ 4„ Ð7€of€the€appellate€rules€for€a€stay€of€the€trial€courtððs€order.€€The€appellate€court€immediately€stayedÐ  p Ðthe€trial€courtððs€order€dissolving€the€injunction,€conditioned€upon€Wright€posting€an€additionalÐ  \ Ð$250,000€bond,׃f×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€making€a€total€bond€of€$500,000.€€On€March€31,€the€appellate€court€stayed€anyÐ øH Ðfurther€proceedings€in€the€trial€court€in€order€to€permit€the€appellate€court€to€address€Wrightððs€motionÐ ä4 Ðfor€interlocutory€appeal.€€The€earlier€order€staying€dissolution€of€the€injunction€also€remained€inÐ Ð  Ðeffect.Ð ¼  Ðà  àOn€May€11,€1999,€the€appellate€court€entered€an€order,€holding€that€the€injunction€againstÐ ”ä ÐGrisoni€should€remain€in€place€until€final€disposition€of€the€case,€and€finding€that€there€was€nothingÐ €Ð Ðfurther€for€the€appellate€court€to€consider€at€that€time.€€The€appellate€court€remanded€the€matter€toÐ l¼ Ðthe€trial€court€for€a€hearing€on€damages€and€entry€of€final€judgment,€and€noted€that€the€trial€court€hadÐ X ¨ Ðthe€authority€to€determine€the€adequacy€of€the€bond€pending€entry€of€final€judgment€as€well€asÐ D!” Ðpending€appeal.€€Ð 0"€  Ðà  àThereafter,€on€May€19,€1999,€Wright€filed€a€petition€with€the€appellate€court€for€a€rehearingÐ $X" Ðof€the€appellate€courtððs€denial€of€Wrightððs€Rule€10€motion€for€interlocutory€appeal.€€Wright€arguedÐ ô$D # Ðthat€remanding€the€cause€to€the€trial€court€for€a€hearing€on€damages€was€inappropriate€becauseÐ à%0!$ ÐGrisoni€had€never€requested€damages€in€any€pleading€filed€with€the€trial€court.€€On€May€24,€GrisoniÐ Ì&"% Ðâ âfiled€a€response€to€Wrightððs€petition€to€rehear,€but€did€not€address€the€issue€of€damages.Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àMeanwhile,€on€May€26,€1999,€Grisoni€filed€a€motion€with€the€trial€court€to€increase€theÐ ° Ðâ âinjunction€bond€to€$5€million.€€Grisoniððs€motion€before€the€trial€court€noted€that€the€appellate€courtÐ œì Ðhad€previously€required€an€additional€$250,000€bond,€which€remained€in€effect,€making€a€total€bondÐ ˆØ Ðat€that€point€of€$500,000.€€Grisoni€maintained€that€the€bond€in€effect€at€that€time€was€ð ðwhollyÐ tÄ Ðinadequate.ððÐ `° Ðà  àOn€June€8,€1999,€the€appellate€court€entered€an€order€on€Wrightððs€petition€for€rehearing€onÐ 8 ˆ Ðits€denial€of€Wrightððs€motion€for€interlocutory€appeal.€€Since€Grisoniððs€response€to€the€petition€hadÐ $ t Ðnot€addressed€the€issue€of€damages,€the€appellate€court€ordered€Grisoni€to€show€cause€on€whetherÐ  ` ÐGrisoni€had€filed€any€pleadings€with€the€trial€court€requesting€damages.€€The€June€8€order€stated€thatÐ ü L  Ðfurther€proceedings€in€the€trial€court€were€stayed€until€further€order€of€the€appellate€court.Ð è 8  Ðà  àOn€the€same€date,€June€8,€1999,€the€trial€court€held€a€hearing€on€Grisoniððs€motion€to€increaseÐ À  Ðthe€injunction€bond.€€Without€knowledge€of€the€order€of€the€appellate€court€staying€furtherÐ ¬ü  Ðproceedings,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€requiring€Wright€to€post€an€additional€$1.9€million€bond,Ð ˜è  Ðmaking€a€total€bond€of€$2.4€million.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€stated€that€the€additional€bond€had€to€ð ðbeÐ „Ô  Ðposted€on€or€before€June€18,€1999,€otherwise,€the€injunction€presently€in€effect,€whose€dissolutionÐ pÀ Ðwas€stayed€by€the€Court€of€Appeals,€is€dissolved.ðð€Ð \¬ Ðà  àIn€light€of€its€earlier€order€staying€proceedings€in€the€trial€court,€on€June€17,€1999,€theÐ 4„ Ðappellate€court€entered€an€order€vacating€the€trial€courtððs€June€8€order€increasing€the€injunction€bondÐ  p Ðto€$2.4€million,€finding€that€the€$500,000€bond€in€effect€at€that€time€was€ð ðsufficient€for€presentÐ  \ Ðpurposes.ðð€€The€appellate€court€denied€Wrightððs€petition€to€rehear.€€It€noted€that€the€parties€agreedÐ øH Ðthat€the€only€remaining€issue€was€damages,׃\×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€concluded€that€it€was€best€for€the€case€to€proceedÐ ä4 Ðto€final€judgment€rather€than€hearing€an€interlocutory€appeal.€€The€appellate€court€remanded€the€caseÐ Ð  Ðto€the€trial€court€and€ordered€that€the€injunction€against€Grisoni€should€remain€in€effect.€€Grisoni€thenÐ ¼  Ðsought€permission€from€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€for€an€interlocutory€appeal€of€the€Court€ofÐ ¨ø ÐAppealsðð€order€setting€the€injunction€bond€at€its€previous€level€of€$500,000.€€Grisoniððs€petition€withÐ ”ä Ðthe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€was€denied.€€The€injunction€bond€remained€at€$500,000€until€theÐ €Ð Ðconclusion€of€the€trial€courtððs€proceedings€on€the€issue€of€damages.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ŒÎ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ l¼ Ðà  àÔ#†¼>»XXo.ä#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€hearing€on€damages€commenced€on€March€6,€2000.€€Grisoni€sought€damages€under€RuleÐ D!” Ð65€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€on€the€theory€that€the€injunction€was€wrongfullyÐ 0"€  Ðissued,€as€well€as€damages€for€malicious€prosecution,€damages€under€the€Tennessee€penalty€statuteÐ #l! Ðfor€wrongful€injunctions,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð29„23„104,€ò òó óand€damages€for€Wrightððs€allegedÐ $X" Ðmisappropriation€of€Grisoniððs€proprietary€information€to€develop€another€product€called€Allomatrix.ò òó ó€Ð ô$D # Ðâ âGrisoni€also€sought€punitive€damages€and€attorneyððs€fees.Ô#†¼>»XXo.xä#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àAt€the€hearing€on€damages,€Grisoni€testified€regarding€his€sales€projections€for€ProFusion,Ð ° Ðâ âas€well€as€his€expected€costs€and€profit€margin.€€Grisoni€also€presented€the€testimony€of€an€economicÐ œì Ðexpert,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Tç#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔRobert€Bush.€€Bush€calculated€that€potentially€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€could€have€achieved€approximatelyÐ ˆØ Ð10€percent€of€an€estimated€€$500€million€to€$750€million€total€annual€market€for€bone€filler€products.€Ð tÄ ÐFor€the€period€during€which€the€injunction€was€in€place,€taking€into€account€the€amount€of€productÐ `° ÐGrisoni€could€have€produced,€Ô#†¼>»XXo.³è#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔBush€estimated€that€Grisoni€could€have€realized€on€approximately€10Ð L œ Ðpercent€of€his€sales€potential€or,€roughly,€$5.3€million€per€year.׃=×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð 8 ˆ Ѐ€à  àGrisoni€again€testified€on€his€assertion€that€Wright€officials€accessed€the€information€in€hisÐ  ` Ðlab€notebook€during€the€time€in€which€Grisoni€worked€as€a€consultant€for€Wright.€€In€his€testimony,Ð ü L  ÐGrisoni€said€that€the€fact€that€his€prototype€for€ProFusion€was€developed€on€September€8,€1997€wasÐ è 8  Ðnoted€in€his€lab€notebook.€€Grisoni€maintained€that€the€only€place€this€date€appeared€was€in€his€labÐ Ô$  Ðnotebook.€€He€had€not€discussed€this€date€with€anyone€at€Wright.€€Nevertheless,€in€its€originalÐ À  Ðcomplaint,€Wright€alleged€that€Grisoni€developed€his€prototype€ð ðbyðð€September€8.€€€Grisoni€allegedÐ ¬ü  Ðthat,€during€the€time€he€was€consulting€for€Wright€in€October€1997,€Haggard€accessed€GrisoniððsÐ ˜è  Ðbriefcase€without€Grisoniððs€permission,€read€through€the€lab€notebook€and,€thereby,€learned€the€dateÐ „Ô  Ðthe€prototype€was€developed.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.’ê#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ pÀ Ðà  àIn€support€of€his€claim€for€malicious€prosecution,€Grisoni€proffered€the€testimony€of€LarryÐ H˜ ÐÔ_ÔHoukÔ_Ô,€Ph.€D.,€ò òó óa€chemistry€professor€for€nearly€30€years,€employed€at€the€time€of€trial€at€theÐ 4„ ÐUniversity€of€Memphis.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Âï#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€substance€of€Houkððs€testimony€was€that€anyone€with€a€chemistryÐ  p Ðbackground€would€have€been€able€to€produce€ProFusion€using€only€publicly€available€information.€Ð  \ ÐHouk€asserted€that€this€fact€would€have€been€obvious€to€Wright€at€the€time€that€Wright€allegedlyÐ øH Ðreviewed€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€Ð ä4 Ðà  àÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€sought€compensatory€damages€for€malicious€prosecution€as€well€as€punitiveÐ ¼  Ðdamages.€€€€In€response€to€the€allegation€of€malicious€prosecution,€Wright€offered€the€testimony€ofÐ ¨ø ÐWright€officials€and€attorneys€concerning€the€reasons€why€they€believed€that€seeking€an€injunctionÐ ”ä ÐÔ#†¼>»XXo.Eñ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔwas€appropriate.€ò òó óPatton€testified€that€he€first€observed€Grisoniððs€ProFusion€product€at€the€annualÐ €Ð Ðmeeting€of€the€American€Academy€of€Orthopedic€Surgeons.€€The€similarities€in€the€two€products€andÐ l¼ Ðthe€fact€that€Grisoni€was€able€to€develop€ProFusion€in€such€a€short€time€convinced€Patton€thatÐ X ¨ ÐGrisoni€had€likely€used€Wrightððs€confidential€information€to€develop€ProFusion.€€Afterward,€PattonÐ D!” Ðasked€Wrightððs€general€counsel,€Mike€McLaren,€to€investigate€the€matter.€McLaren€testified€that€heÐ 0"€  Ðinterviewed€Haggard€and€Churinetz€and€reviewed€the€work€in€which€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€was€involved€whileÐ #l! Ðemployed€at€Wright,€as€well€as€the€confidentiality€agreements€Grisoni€had€signed.€€McLaren€said€thatÐ $X" Ðhe€was€familiar€with€the€legal€requirements€to€obtain€injunctive€relief€and€felt€at€the€time€thatÐ ô$D # Ðinjunctive€relief€was€warranted.Ô#†¼>»XXo.†ô#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔò òÐ à%0!$ Ðà  àó óGrisoni€also€sought€damages€for€the€alleged€misappropriation€of€information€from€his€labÐ ¸'#& Ðnotebook.€€Grisoni€testified€that,€in€early€1998,€he€began€researching€a€calcium€sulfate€putty€whichÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcontained€substances€to€promote€bone€growth.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€recorded€his€research€on€the€calcium€sulfateÐ ° Ðputty€in€his€lab€notebook.€€The€lab€notebook€was€later€turned€over€to€Wright€in€April€1998€as€partÐ œì Ðof€discovery€into€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€development€of€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô.€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€testified€that€lab€notes€obtainedÐ ˆØ Ðduring€discovery€ò òó ófrom€Don€Peterson,€the€engineer€in€charge€of€developing€of€Wrightððs€calciumÐ tÄ Ðsulfate€based€putty,€called€Ô_ÔAllomatrixÔ_Ô,€indicated€that€Peterson€had€used€test€data€described€inÐ `° ÐGrisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€From€this,€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€argued€that€Wright€had€misappropriated€proprietaryÐ L œ Ðinformation€from€Grisoniððs€notebook€and€that€Grisoni€should€therefore€recover€any€profits€WrightÐ 8 ˆ Ðrealized€on€Allomatrix.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Äø#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔò òó óÐ $ t Ðà  àAfter€the€damages€hearing,€the€trial€judge€issued€lengthy€written€findings€of€fact€andÐ ü L  Ðconclusions€of€law.€€In€its€findings€of€facts€and€conclusions€of€law,€the€trial€court€made€specificÐ è 8  Ðcredibility€determinations,€weighing€Ô#†¼>»XXo..þ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔheavily€in€favor€of€Grisoni.€€The€trial€court€found€Grisoni€to€beÐ Ô$  Ða€ð ðvery€credible€witnessðð€and€found€support€for€his€testimony€in€other€evidence€in€the€record.€€InÐ À  Ðcontrast,€€the€trial€court€found€the€testimony€of€several€of€Wrightððs€witnesses,€particularly€Dr.Ð ¬ü  ÐHaggard€and€attorney€Haltom,€to€be€untruthful€and€unsupported€by€other€evidence.€€Specifically,€theÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€court€found€that€Wright€witnesses€testified€untruthfully€regarding€the€source€of€the€date€allegedÐ „Ô  Ðin€the€complaint€as€the€date€by€which€Grisoni€had€developed€his€ProFusion€prototype.€€The€trial€courtÐ pÀ Ðconcluded€that€Wright€must€have€learned€this€date€from€an€unauthorized€inspection€of€Grisoniððs€labÐ \¬ Ðnotebook€during€the€period€in€which€Grisoni€was€a€consultant€for€Wright,€in€October€1997.€€The€trialÐ H˜ Ðcourt€also€concluded,€relying€on€Dr.€Houkððs€testimony,€that€Wright€knew€or€should€have€known,Ð 4„ Ðafter€its€unauthorized€review€of€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook,€that€ProFusion€was€not€developed€by€the€useÐ  p Ðof€any€confidential€information.€Despite€this,€the€trial€court€noted,€Wright€consistently€soughtÐ  \ Ðinjunctive€relief€against€Grisoni€and€refused€any€offers€by€Grisoni€to€show€that€he€had€not€usedÐ øH Ðconfidential€information.€€€Ð ä4 Ðà  àThe€trial€court€also€reviewed€at€length€the€testimony€of€attorney€William€Haltom€regardingÐ ¼  Ðhis€statements€to€Grisoni€in€the€course€of€the€settlement€conference€that€Grisoni€secretly€recorded.€Ð ¨ø ÐThe€trial€judge€concluded€that€Haltom€testified€untruthfully€that€he€did€not€tell€Grisoni€or€his€attorneyÐ ”ä Ðat€that€time,€Steve€Biller,€that€he€would€ð ðgo€to€the€FDAðð€if€Grisoni€refused€to€surrender€his€510(k)Ð €Ð Ðon€ProFusion.€€The€trial€court€noted€that€Wright€refused€to€consider€Grisoniððs€overtures€toÐ l¼ Ðdemonstrate€that€he€had€not€used€confidential€information€and€instead,€through€attorney€Haltom,Ð X ¨ Ðthreatened€Grisoni€with€criminal€prosecution€for€perjury€if€he€refused€to€surrender€his€510(k)€onÐ D!” ÐProFusion.€€From€these€facts€the€trial€court€concluded€that€Wright€acted€without€probable€cause,€andÐ 0"€  Ðthat€Wrightððs€motivation€in€filing€suit€against€Grisoni€was€to€keep€Grisoni€out€of€the€calcium€sulfateÐ #l! Ðbone€void€filler€market,€rather€than€any€belief€that€Grisoni€had€developed€ProFusion€through€the€useÐ $X" Ðof€confidential€information.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.Ÿÿ#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÐ ô$D # Ðà  àThe€trial€court€concluded€that€Grisoni€had€been€wrongfully€enjoined€from€participating€in€theÐ Ì&"% Ðbone€void€filler€market€for€two€years.€€As€a€result,€the€trial€court€found,€Grisoni€had€sufferedÐ ¸'#& Ðsignificant€damages€in€the€form€of€lost€profits€from€sales€of€ProFusion€and€lost€opportunities€inÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdeveloping€new€calcium€sulfate€products.€€It€noted€that,€in€Tennessee,€damages€from€an€injunctionÐ )à$( Ðthat€has€been€wrongfully€issued€are€limited€to€the€amount€of€the€injunction€bond,€unless€there€is€aÐ |*Ì%) Ðfinding€of€malicious€prosecution.€€Based€on€its€finding€that€Wright€was€liable€for€maliciousÐ h+¸&* Ðprosecution,€the€trial€court€found€that€Grisoniððs€damages€were€not€limited€by€the€amount€of€theÐ ° Ðinjunction€bond.€€It€found€that€the€amount€of€damages€sustained€by€Grisoni,€while€notÐ œì Ðmathematically€certain,€could€reasonably€€be€assessed.€€Considering€the€proof€at€the€hearing,€the€trialÐ ˆØ ÐcourtÔ#†¼>»XXo.v #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€awarded€Grisoni€and€Biogeneration€$4.79€million€in€compensatory€damages€and€an€additionalÐ tÄ Ð$408,000€per€month€for€the€next€twelve€months€or€until€the€final€resolution€of€the€case,€whicheverÐ `° Ðoccurred€first.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.÷#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€trial€court€declined€to€award€damages€on€Grisoniððs€claim€that€Wright€developedÐ L œ ÐAllomatrix€by€utilizing€wrongfully€obtained€material€from€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€The€trial€courtÐ 8 ˆ Ðfound€that€ð ðalthough€there€is€a€strong€inference€to€support€Defendantsðð€contention€[that€WrightÐ $ t Ðmisappropriated€material€from€the€lab€notebook],€this€court€cannot€say,€by€a€preponderance€of€theÐ  ` Ðevidence,€that€Wrightððs€Allomatrix€putty€is€the€product€of€Grisoniððs€research€and€lab€bookÐ ü L  Ðinformation.ðð€€On€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€claim€for€punitive€damages,€the€trial€court€found€that€Wright€had€actedÐ è 8  Ðwith€malice€in€instituting€the€injunction€proceeding€and€awarded€Grisoni€punitive€damages€in€theÐ Ô$  Ðamount€of€$4.79€million.€Ô#†¼>»XXo.0#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€final€judgment€was€issued€on€May€10,€2000.€€On€May€26,€2000,Ð À  ÐWright€filed€its€notice€of€appeal.€€Ð ¬ü  Ðà  àOn€May€30,€2000,€Grisoni€filed€a€motion€with€the€trial€court€seeking€an€order€requiringÐ „Ô  ÐWright€and€Travelers€to€post€an€appeal€bond€in€the€amount€of€$18€million.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ç#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOn€that€same€day€the€trialÐ pÀ Ðcourt€conducted€a€hearing€to€determine€Wrightððs€application€for€a€stay€of€execution.€€The€trial€courtÐ \¬ Ðgranted€a€stay€but€ordered€that€Wright€post€a€stay€bond€for€$9.7€million.€€However,€if€Wright€agreedÐ H˜ Ðto€file€with€the€Court€of€Appeals€a€consent€order€dissolving€the€temporary€injunction,€the€bond€wouldÐ 4„ Ðbe€reduced€to€$5€million.€€On€June€21,€2000€the€$5€million€bond€was€posted€and€five€days€later€theÐ  p Ðconsent€order€was€entered€permitting€Grisoni€to€begin€producing€and€marketing€ProFusion.€€ò òó óÔ#†¼>»XXo.z#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔOn€JulyÐ  \ Ð6,€2000,€the€trial€court€conducted€a€hearing€to€determine€Travelersðð€liability€on€the€injunction€bond.€Ð øH ÐÔ#†¼>»XXo.2#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔThe€injunction€bond€provides:Ð ä4 ÐÒ°ÒÒ°ÒThat€the€undersigned,€Wright€Medical€Technology,€Inc.,€as€PRINCIPAL€andÐ ¼  ÐTRAVELERS€CASUALTY€AND€SURETY€COMPANY€OF€AMERICA,€asÐ ¨ø ÐSURETY,€are€held€and€firmly€bound€unto€Bernard€F.€Grisoni€and€Biogeneration,Ð ”ä ÐInc.,€in€the€sum€of€Seven€Thousand,€Five€Hundred€and€no/100€Dollars€($7,500.00)Ð €Ð Ð[later€amended€by€rider€to€$250,000]Ô#†¼>»XXo.#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€for€the€payment€of€which€well€and€truly€to€beÐ l¼ Ðmade,€we€bind€ourselves€firmly€by€these€presents:Ð X ¨ ÐThe€condition€of€this€bond€is€such€that,€whereas,€WRIGHT€MEDICALÐ 0"€  ÐTECHNOLOGY,€INC.,€has€sought€and€obtained€a€Temporary€Restraining€Order€inÐ #l! Ðthis€cause;€now,€if€said€Principal€or€Surety€pays€all€damages€and€costs€which€anyÐ $X" Ðperson€may€sustain€by€the€suing€out€of€such€Temporary€Restraining€Order€if€the€sameÐ ô$D # Ðis€dissolved,€this€obligation€to€be€void;€otherwise,€to€remain€in€full€force€and€effect.€Ð à%0!$ ÐÒ°`ÒÒ°nÒÔ#†¼>»XXo.-#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€argued€to€the€trial€court€that€the€terms€of€the€Travelersðð€bond€can€be€interpreted€in€twoÐ ¸'#& Ðdifferent€ways.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo. #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔGrisoni€admitted€that€the€first€paragraph€limits€Travelersðð€liability€to€the€penal€sum,Ð ¤(ô#' Ð$250,000.€€However,€Grisoni€argued€that€the€second€paragraph€subjected€Travelers€to€liability€forÐ )à$( Ðthe€entire€judgment€in€excess€of€$9€million.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.ø#ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔGrisoni€asserted€that€the€clause€ð ðif€said€Principal€orÐ |*Ì%) ÐSurety€pays€all€damages€and€costsðð€creates€an€obligation€for€Travelers€to€pay€all€damages€and€costs.€Ð h+¸&* ÐBecause€Travelers€drafted€the€instrument,€Grisoni€maintained,€the€second€interpretation€shouldÐ ° Ðprevail.€€The€trial€court€rejected€Grisoniððs€argument€and€fixed€Travelersðð€liability€at€$250,000.€€Ô#†¼>»XXo.M #ÔÔ‡Xo.X»¼>ÂÔ€Ô#†¼>»XXo.6"#ÔÐ œì Ðà@<<"ìàÔ€Xo.X»¼>ÂÔò òISSUES€ON€APPEALó óˆÐ tÄ Ðà  àIn€this€appeal,€Wright,€Grisoni€and€Travelers€all€raise€issues€to€be€considered€by€this€Court.€Ð L œ ÐIn€addition,€attorney€Haltom,€while€not€a€party,€filed€an€òòamicusóó€brief€in€this€appeal.€€The€issues€raisedÐ 8 ˆ Ðby€all€parties€are€outlined€below.€€òòò òóóÐ $ t Ðó óÓ:+ÓÓ  Óà  àOn€appeal,€Wright€contends€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€rulingÐ ü L  Ðthat€Grisoni€did€not€use€confidential€information€to€develop€ProFusion€and€obtain€FDA€approvalÐ è 8  Ðand,€consequently,€erred€in€dissolving€the€injunction.€€In€the€alternative,€even€if€the€injunction€wasÐ Ô$  Ðimproperly€issued,€Wright€argues€that€Grisoni€is€Ô_ÔestoppedÔ_Ô€from€recovering€ò òó ódamages€resulting€fromÐ À  Ðthe€injunction€because€he€consented€to€it.€€Further,€Wright€asserts€that€the€evidence€shows€thatÐ ¬ü  ÐWright€had€probable€cause€to€institute€the€lawsuit€and€acted€without€malice,€and€consequently,€theÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€court€erred€in€finding€liability€for€malicious€prosecution.€€Wright€also€argues€that€the€trial€courtÐ „Ô  Ðerred€in€its€award€of€compensatory€damages€because€proof€of€the€amount€of€Grisoniððs€damages€wasÐ pÀ Ðtoo€speculative€to€support€an€award.€€Lastly,€Wright€argues€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€toÐ \¬ Ðjustify€an€award€of€punitive€damages.Ð H˜ Ðà  àIn€response,€Grisoni€argues€that€the€evidence€establishes€that€his€product,€ProFusion,€isÐ  p Ðconsiderably€different€than€Wrightððs€product,€Osteoset.€€Grisoni€contends€that€the€evidence€showsÐ  \ Ðthat€he€developed€ProFusion€and€obtained€FDA€approval€by€using€only€information€that€was€publiclyÐ øH Ðavailable.€€Grisoni€argues€that€the€appellate€court€may€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€order€to€dissolve€theÐ ä4 Ðinjunction€only€if€it€finds€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€dissolving€the€injunction.€€In€theÐ Ð  Ðalternative,€even€if€the€standard€is€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€Grisoni€maintains€that€the€trialÐ ¼  Ðcourtððs€decision€to€dissolve€the€injunction€should€be€affirmed.€€On€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€findÐ ¨ø ÐWright€liable€for€malicious€prosecution,€Grisoni€asserts€that€the€evidence€shows€that€Wright€gainedÐ ”ä Ðunauthorized€access€to€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€In€so€doing,€Grisoni€contends,€the€evidence€showsÐ €Ð Ðthat€Wright€became€aware€that€ProFusion€was€significantly€different€from€Osteoset€and€thatÐ l¼ ÐProFusion€was€developed€without€the€use€of€confidential€information.€€Despite€this,€Grisoni€argues,Ð X ¨ ÐWright€sought€and€obtained€injunctive€relief€and,€therefore,€should€be€held€liable€for€maliciousÐ D!” Ðprosecution€as€well€as€punitive€damages.€€Grisoni€asserts€that€Wrightððs€improper€review€of€his€labÐ 0"€  Ðnotebook€constitutes€ð ðunclean€handsðð€and€bars€Wright€from€seeking€equitable€relief.€€Grisoni€arguesÐ #l! Ðthat€the€award€of€compensatory€damages€was€supported€by€evidence€that€was€not€too€speculative€toÐ $X" Ðsupport€such€an€award.€€In€the€alternative,€Grisoni€argues€that€even€in€the€absence€of€maliciousÐ ô$D # Ðprosecution,€he€is€entitled€to€recover€a€statutory€penalty€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€29„23„Ð à%0!$ Ð104(a).€€Punitive€damages€were€supported,€Grisoni€argues,€by€the€evidence€of€malice€and€uncleanÐ Ì&"% Ðhands.€€Grisoni€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€declining€to€award€him€damages€for€Wrightððs€useÐ ¸'#& Ðof€material€allegedly€misappropriated€from€his€lab€notebook€to€develop€Allomatrix.€€Lastly,€GrisoniÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âasserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€limiting€Travelersðð€liability€under€the€bond€to€$250,000.€€Ð )à$( Ðà  àOn€appeal,€Travelers€asserts€that€the€trial€court€correctly€limited€its€liability€to€$250,000.€Ð ° Ðâ âUnder€the€terms€of€the€bond,€Travelers€argues,€it€is€unambiguous€that€its€liability€is€limited€to€theÐ œì Ðpenal€amount€of€the€bond.€Travelers€also€argues€that€its€liability€on€the€bond€was€discharged€whenÐ ˆØ Ðthe€trial€court€failed€to€enter€judgment€against€it€and,€alternatively,€that€the€bond€was€dischargedÐ tÄ Ðupon€Wrightððs€filing€of€an€appeal€bond.€€ò òó óÐ `° Ðà  àAttorney€Haltom€filed€an€òòamicusóó€brief€on€appeal€asking€this€Court€to€review€the€trial€courtððsÐ 8 ˆ Ðfinding€that€he€did€not€testify€truthfully€regarding€his€statements€in€the€settlement€conference€withÐ $ t ÐGrisoni.€€Haltom€argues€that€this€Court€can€review€the€credibility€determination€made€by€the€trialÐ  ` Ðcourt€since€Haltomððs€trial€testimony€can€be€compared€to€the€transcript€of€the€tape€recorded€settlementÐ ü L  Ðconference.€€€Ð è 8  Ðà0  àà ° àà@òò&ì(#(#àò òANALYSISó óˆÐ À  Ðà  àIn€considering€the€issues€raised€on€appeal,€we€analyze€first€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€liabilityÐ ˜è  Ðfor€malicious€prosecution.€In€connection€with€the€award€of€damages€for€malicious€prosecution,€theÐ „Ô  Ðaward€of€punitive€damages€will€be€reviewed.€€Next€we€review€the€trial€courtððs€order€dissolving€theÐ pÀ Ðtemporary€injunction€and€its€finding€that€Grisoni€did€not€use€confidential€information€in€developingÐ \¬ ÐProFusion.€€In€connection€with€this,€we€address€Wrightððs€contention€that€Grisoni€cannot€obtainÐ H˜ Ðcompensatory€damages€for€wrongful€issuance€of€the€injunction€because€he€consented€to€it,€as€wellÐ 4„ Ðas€the€award€of€damages€for€wrongful€issuance€of€the€injunction.€€The€remaining€issues€on€appealÐ  p Ðwill€then€be€discussed.€€ò òÐ  \ Ðà@    ìàMALICIOUS€PROSECUTION€AND€PUNITIVE€DAMAGESˆÐ ä4 Ðó óÓD$ÓÓ  Óà  àThe€elements€of€a€cause€of€action€for€malicious€prosecution€are€well€settled.€€They€are:€(1)Ð ¼  Ða€judicial€proceeding€that€has€been€instituted€by€the€defendant€and€finally€resolved€in€the€favor€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðclaimant;€(2)€the€defendant€instituted€the€proceeding€without€probable€cause;€and€(3)€the€defendantÐ ”ä Ðacted€with€malice.€€òòò òRoberts€v.€Federal€Express€Corp.ó óóó,€842€S.W.2d€246,€247„248€(Tenn.€1992).€€TheÐ €Ð Ðclaimant€bears€a€heavy€burden€of€proof€in€establishing€the€element€of€lack€of€probable€cause€and€theÐ l¼ Ðelement€of€malice.€€ò òòòKauffman€v.€A.€H.€Robins€Co.,€Inc.óóó ó,€448€S.W.2d€400,€404€(Tenn.€1969).€Ð X ¨ ÐProbable€cause€exists€where€the€original€plaintiff€possessed€a€reasonable€belief€in€both€the€existenceÐ D!” Ðof€facts€supporting€his€claim€and€that€those€facts€made€out€a€legally€valid€claim.€€òòò òBuda€v.€CasselÐ 0"€  ÐBros.,€Incóóó ó,€568€S.W.2d€628,€631„632€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1978).€€The€reasonableness€of€the€defendantððsÐ #l! Ðbelief€and€conduct€is€a€factual€determination.€€ò òòòRobertsó óóó,€842€S.W.2d€at€248„249€(overruling€earlierÐ $X" Ðcases€holding€that€whether€probable€cause€existed€at€the€time€the€proceeding€was€instituted€is€a€legalÐ ô$D # Ðdetermination).€€òòò òóóó óThe€plaintiff€may€rely€on€the€advice€of€counsel€as€to€the€validity€of€the€claim€whereÐ à%0!$ Ðthe€advice€is€sought€in€good€faith€and€is€given€after€fair€and€complete€disclosure€of€all€relevant€factsÐ Ì&"% Ðin€his€possession€and€all€facts€he€could€have€ascertained€by€reasonable€diligence.€€ò òòòKelley€v.Ð ¸'#& ÐTomlinsonóóó ó,€46€S.W.3d€742,€748€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2000)òòò òó óóó.€€As€to€malice,€the€claimant€need€not€proveÐ ¤(ô#' Ðill€will€or€personal€hatred,€so€long€as€he€demonstrates€an€improper€motive.€€ò òòòLawson€v.€Wilkinsonó óóó,Ð )à$( Ðâ â447€S.W.2d€369,€374€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1969).€€While€malice€may€be€inferred€from€a€total€absence€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðprobable€cause,€no€amount€or€kind€of€malice€is€sufficient€to€establish€lack€of€probable€cause.€Ð ° Ðòòò òNashville€Union€Stockyards,€Inc.€v.€Grissimó óóó,€13€Tenn.€App.€115,€126„127€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1930).€Ð œì Ðâ âà  àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€found€Wright€liable€for€malicious€prosecution€and€awarded€GrisoniÐ tÄ Ðcompensatory€damages€on€this€claim.€€Compensatory€damages€were€awarded€to€Grisoni€in€theÐ `° Ðamount€of€$4.79€million€for€the€period€of€April€3,€1998€through€April€2,€2000,€and€$408,000€perÐ L œ Ðmonth€thereafter€until€resolution€of€the€lawsuit.€€ò òó óÐ 8 ˆ Ðà  àThe€trial€courtððs€finding€of€malicious€prosecution€was€based€on€its€factual€finding€that€WrightÐ  ` Ðofficials€improperly€gained€access€to€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook€while€Grisoni€worked€as€a€consultantÐ ü L  Ðfor€Wright.€€From€this€finding,€the€trial€court€inferred€that€Wright€knew€the€entire€content€ofÐ è 8  ÐGrisoniððs€lab€notebook€prior€to€filing€suit.€€The€trial€court€credited€testimony€to€the€effect€that€anyoneÐ Ô$  Ðlooking€at€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook€would€know€that€ProFusion€was€developed€without€the€use€ofÐ À  Ðconfidential€information,€and€from€this€concluded€that€Wright€instituted€the€lawsuit€against€GrisoniÐ ¬ü  Ðwithout€probable€cause.€€The€trial€courtððs€finding€of€malicious€prosecution€was€also€premised€on€itsÐ ˜è  Ðconclusion€that€Wrightððs€attorneys€were€untruthful€and€threatening€to€Grisoni,€for€the€sole€purposeÐ „Ô  Ðof€preventing€Grisoni€from€introducing€into€the€market€a€product€to€compete€with€Osteoset.€€The€trialÐ pÀ Ðcourtððs€factual€findings€were€based€in€part€on€its€determination€of€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€forÐ \¬ Ðboth€parties.€€€Ô‡SXcœXXXo.ÔÐ H˜ Ðà  àWhen€the€resolution€of€the€issues€in€a€case€depends€upon€the€truthfulness€of€witnesses,€theÐ  p Ðtrial€judge€who€has€the€opportunity€to€observe€the€witnesses€in€their€manner€and€demeanor€whileÐ  Z Ðtestifying€is€in€a€far€better€position€than€this€Court€to€decide€those€issues.€€ò òòòMcCaleb€v.€Saturn€Corp.ó óóó,Ð ôD Ð910€S.W.2d€412,€415€(Tenn.€1995);Ô#†Xo.XXSXcœjK#ÔÔ‡SXcœXXXo.Ôòòò ò€Whitaker€v.€Whitakeróóó óÔ#†Xo.XXSXcœ[M#ÔÔ‡SXcœXXXo.Ô,€957€S.W.2d€834,€837€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð Þ. Ð1997).€€The€weight,€faith,€and€credit€to€be€given€to€any€witnessððs€testimony€lies€in€the€first€instanceÐ È Ðwith€the€trier€of€fact,€and€the€credibility€accorded€will€be€given€great€weight€by€the€appellate€court.€Ð ² Ðòòò òIdó óóó.;€ò òòòEstate€of€Walton€v.€Youngó óóó,€950€S.W.2d€956,€959€(Tenn.€1997).Ô#†Xo.XXSXcœ¾M#Ô€€ò òó óWhere€there€is€conflict€in€theÐ œì Ðtestimony€that€requires€a€determination€of€the€credibility€of€a€witness,€the€trial€courtððs€finding€isÐ ŠÚ Ðbinding€on€the€appellate€court€ð ðunless€from€other€real€evidence€the€appellate€court€is€compelled€toÐ vÆ Ðconclude€to€the€contrary.ðð€€ò òòòHudson€v.€Cappsó óóó,€651€S.W.2d€243,€246€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983)€(citingÐ b² Ðò òòòState€ex€rel€Balsinger€v.€Town€of€Ô_ÔMadisonvilleÔ_Ôó óóó,€435€Ô_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€2d€803,€807€(Tenn.1968)).Ð N ž Ðà  àOn€appeal,€Wright€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Wright€improperly€gainedÐ &"v  Ðaccess€to€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook€while€Grisoni€worked€at€Wright€as€a€consultant.€€The€trial€courtððsÐ #b! Ðfinding€is€based€on€Wrightððs€allegation€in€the€complaint€that€Grisoni€had€developed€his€prototypeÐ þ#N" Ðof€ProFusion€ð ðbyðð€September€8,€1997.€€ò òó óGrisoni€testified€that€he€had€told€no€one€that€he€developedÐ ê$: # Ðthe€ProFusion€prototype€on€September€8,€that€the€only€document€containing€the€date€was€GrisoniððsÐ Ö%&!$ Ðlab€notebook,€and€that€the€lab€notebook€was€not€disclosed€to€Wright€until€discovery€commenced,Ð Â&"% Ðwell€after€Wrightððs€complaint€was€filed.€€Grisoni€testified€that,€while€he€worked€as€a€consultant€forÐ ®'þ"& ÐWright,€he€often€left€his€lab€notebook€unattended€on€his€desk,€located€near€Haggardððs€office.€€WhileÐ š(ê#' ÐHaggard€denied€accessing€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook,€the€trial€judge€found€that€Haggard€was€not€aÐ †)Ö$( Ðâ âcredible€witness.€€The€trial€court€noted€the€statement€by€Wrightððs€attorney,€Steven€Vescovo,€that€heÐ r*Â%) Ðknew€where€the€September€8€date€in€the€complaint€came€from,€but€that€Grisoniððs€attorney€could€notÐ ° Ðask€him€about€it.€€Ð œì Ðâ âà  àIn€a€situation€such€as€this,€the€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€isÐ tÄ Ðnecessarily€dependent€on€the€trial€judgeððs€evaluation€of€the€witnessesðð€demeanor€and€manner€whileÐ `° Ðtestifying€under€these€circumstances;€the€trial€courtððs€determination€on€the€witnessesðð€credibilityÐ L œ Ðmust€be€accorded€great€weight€by€the€appellate€court.€€ò òòòSee€Estate€of€Waltonó óóó,€950€S.W.2d€at€959.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€credited€Grisoniððs€testimony€that€the€only€way€anyone€could€haveÐ  ` Ðknown€the€date€on€which€the€ProFusion€prototype€was€developed€was€by€looking€at€his€lab€notebook.€Ð ü L  ÐThe€trial€judge€discredited€Haggardððs€denial€that€he€improperly€accessed€the€lab€notebook.€€From€thisÐ è 8  Ðthe€trial€judge€inferred€that€Wright€officials€improperly€accessed€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook€and,Ð Ô$  Ðmoreover,€inferred€that€Wright€officials€thereby€gained€knowledge€of€everything€in€the€lab€notebook.€Ð À  ÐWhile€this€is€a€far„reaching€conclusion€to€infer,€we€find€that€it€is€a€permissible€inference.€€With€dueÐ ¬ü  Ðdeference€to€the€trial€courtððs€determination€of€credibility,€we€find€that€the€evidence€does€notÐ ˜è  Ðpreponderate€against€this€factual€finding.€€Ð „Ô  ÐÓr;ÓÓ  Óà  àò òó óNext€we€examine€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Wrightððs€attorney,€William€Haltom,€wasÐ \¬ Ðuntruthful€and€improperly€threatening€to€Grisoni.€€This€is€a€unique€credibility€determination€in€whichÐ H˜ Ðthe€issue€is€whether€Haltom€€testified€truthfully€at€trial€regarding€his€recollection€of€what€he€said€inÐ 4„ Ðsettlement€conference.€€Since€Grisoni€secretly€taped€the€settlement€conference,€this€is€not€just€aÐ  p Ðswearing€contest€between€Haltom€and€Grisoni.€€Rather,€determining€Haltomððs€credibility€involvesÐ  \ Ðcomparing€his€testimony€at€trial€to€the€transcript€of€the€settlement€conference.€Ð øH Ðà  àIn€the€settlement€conference,€Haltom€noted€that€Grisoni€swore€in€the€510(k)€application€forÐ Ð  Ðthe€FDA€that€ProFusion€is€identical€to€Osteoset,€but€in€his€deposition€Grisoni€denied€that€ProFusionÐ ¼  Ðwas€identical€to€Osteoset.€€Haltom€said€in€the€settlement€conference€that€one€or€the€other€is€not€theÐ ¨ø Ðtruth.€€Haltom€told€Grisoni€and€his€attorney€Steve€Biller€that€Wright€would€pursue€the€lawsuit€andÐ ”ä Ðwould€go€back€to€the€FDA€and€would€give€information€on€Grisoniððs€contradictory€statements€to€bothÐ €Ð Ðthe€FDA€and€the€chancery€court.Ð l¼ Ðà  àIn€the€settlement€conference,€Grisoniððs€attorney€Biller€explained€to€Grisoni€that,€based€onÐ D!” ÐGrisoniððs€contradictory€deposition€testimony,€Wright€could€go€to€the€FDA€and€contest€the€validityÐ 0"€  Ðof€his€510K€and€€Grisoni€would€€ð ðwind€up€with€zero.ðð€€Haltom€said€ð ðitððs€a€little€more€serious€thanÐ #l! Ðthatðð€and€that€ð ðthereððs€obvious€implications€for€making€false€statements€to€the€FDA.€.€.,ðð€andÐ $X" Ðpromised€to€pursue€those€remedies€unless€Grisoni€agreed€to€surrender€his€510K€and€make€theÐ ô$D # Ðinjunction€permanent.Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àIn€Haltomððs€testimony€at€trial,€Haltom€was€asked€by€Grisoniððs€attorney€what€was€discussedÐ ¸'#& Ðat€the€meeting.€Haltom€described€the€contradiction€between€Grisoniððs€sworn€statement€to€the€FDAÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€his€deposition€testimony,€said€that€he€told€Grisoni€and€Biller€that€Wright€wanted€Grisoni€toÐ )à$( Ðâ âsurrender€his€510(k),€testified€that€he€asserted€that€Wright€would€pursue€its€civil€remedy€in€court,€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðstated€that€Wright€had€ð ðan€absolute€right€to€go€back€to€the€FDA€and€point€out€his€sworn€testimonyÐ ° Ðunder€oath€which€establishes€a€direct€contradiction€to€everything€he€submitted€to€the€FDA.ððÐ œì Ðâ âà  àHaltom€was€asked€repeatedly€whether€he€told€Grisoni€that€if€he€did€not€surrender€his€510(k),Ð tÄ ÐHaltom€would€notify€the€FDA.€€Haltom€replied€ð ðnoðð€and€then€explained€that€he€told€Grisoni€that,Ð `° Ðas€a€lawyer,€he€had€an€obligation€to€pursue€a€civil€remedy,€including€ð ðgoing€back€to€the€FDA€andÐ L œ Ðsaying€you€issued€a€510(k),€and€according€to€the€man€you€issued€the€510(k)€to,€what€he€told€you€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðthis€document€he€now€says€under€sworn€testimony€isnððt€true.ððÐ $ t Ðà  àIn€heated€exchanges€between€Haltom€and€Grisoniððs€attorney€at€trial,€Steve€Markowitz,Ð ü L  ÐHaltom€was€also€asked€if€he€told€Grisoni€that€the€implications€for€making€false€statements€wereÐ è 8  Ðclear.€€Haltom€said€that€he€did€not€recall€using€those€words,€denied€threatening€Grisoni€with€criminalÐ Ô$  Ðprosecution,€denied€unethical€conduct,€said€he€had€no€idea€what€the€implications€were€for€makingÐ À  Ðfalse€statements€to€the€FDA,€and€said€that€he€never€threatened€Grisoni€with€anything€other€thanÐ ¬ü  Ðpursuing€a€lawful€civil€remedy.Ð ˜è  Ðà  àIn€its€findings€on€credibility,€the€trial€court€characterized€the€testimony€of€Wrightððs€witnesses,Ð pÀ Ðnaming€Haltom€specifically,€as€ð ðeither€untruthful,€inaccurate€or€strained€credibility.€.€.€.ðð€€InÐ \¬ Ðdiscussing€his€conclusion€that€Haltom€was€not€truthful,€the€trial€court€stated:Ð H˜ Ðà8  àò òó ó47.€€On€June€3,€1998,€a€settlement€conference€was€held€at€the€Thomas€[sic]€HendrixÐ  p Ðlaw€firm€office€with€Dr.€Grisoni,€Attorney€Biller,€and€Attorney€William€Haltom,€Jr.€Ð  \ ÐUnbeknowing€to€all€the€attorneys,€Dr.€Grisoni€secretly€recorded€the€entireÐ øH Ðconversations€at€the€meeting.€€Ðä4Ð Ð  Ðà8  à48.€€In€the€recorded€tape€of€the€meeting,€Attorney€Haltom€made€it€very€clear€thatÐ ¼  ÐWright€was€concerned€about€Dr.€Grisoni€and€Ô_ÔBiogenerationÔ_Ôððs€entry€into€the€calciumÐ ¨ø Ðsulfate€bone€void€filler€market,€by€securing€FDA€approval.€€Attorney€HaltomÐ ”ä Ðspecifically€stated€that€ð ðthis€matter€(lawsuit)€can€be€brought€to€an€end€if€Dr.€GrisoniÐ €Ð Ðwill€surrender€[to€Wright]€his€510(k)ðð€approval€from€the€FDA€and€consent€to€makingÐ l¼ Ðthe€temporary€injunction€permanent.€€ÐX ¨Ð Ð  Ðà8  à49.€€Attorney€Haltom€specifically€told€Dr.€Grisoni€that€ð ðyouððve€got€to€agree€to€aÐ 0"€  Ðpermanent€injunction,€and€part€of€that€would€be€surrendering€the€510(k),€but€thatÐ #l! Ðwould€be€the€most€crucial.ððÐ$X"Ð Ð  Ðà8  à50.€€In€a€further€effort€to€persuade€Dr.€Grisoni€to€give€in€to€Wrightððs€demands,Ð à%0!$ ÐAttorney€Haltom€made€the€following€statement:ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àa.€€ð ðWeððre€prepared,€starting€tomorrow€to€go€forward€with€a€least€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðtwo„part€war€in€this€case€„€the€court€of€FDA€and€the€Shelby€CountyÐ )à$( ÐChancery€Court.ðð€€Ð|*Ì%)` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àb.€€ð ð€.€.€.€thereððs€obvious€implications€for€making€false€statements€toÐ ° Ðthe€FDA.€.€.€.ððМì` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àc.€€ð ðDr.€Grisoni€either€didnððt€tell€the€truth€to€the€FDA€or€he€hasnððt€toldÐ tÄ Ðthe€truth€to€the€chancellor€(per€his€deposition)€.€.€.€weððre€prepared€toÐ `° Ðgive€that€information€to€both€the€FDA€and€to€the€chancellor.€.€.€.ððÐL œ` x` x Ðà8  à51.€€Attorney€William€Haltom,€Jr.€was€not€truthful€when€he€testified€under€oath€atÐ $ t Ðtrial,€on€behalf€of€Wright,€that€he€never€told€Mr.€Biller€or€Dr.€Grisoni€that€he€wouldÐ  ` Ðgo€to€the€FDA€if€Dr.€Grisoni€did€not€surrender€the€510€(k).Ðü L Ð Ð  Ðà8  à52.€€Notwithstanding€the€clarity€of€the€threat€to€Dr.€Grisoni€at€the€June€3òòrdóó€meeting,Ð Ô$  Ðas€contained€on€the€recorded€tape€and€transcript,€Attorney€Haltom€at€trial€testifiedÐ À  Ðthat€Attorney€Biller€never€indicated€to€him€that€he€felt€like€he€was€threatening€Dr.Ð ¬ü  ÐGrisoni€with€criminal€action€(for€perjury).€€He€said€that:Иè Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTo€the€contrary,€[Attorney€Biller]€and€I€have€talked€since€this,€and€heÐ pÀ Ðsaid€that€there€was€no€threat€ever€made,€[and]€that€heððs€willing€toÐ \¬ Ðsupport€me€on€this.€ÐH˜` x` x ÐFindings€of€Fact€and€Conclusions€of€Law€(References€to€trial€exhibits€deleted).Ð  p Ðà  àThis€credibility€determination€presents€a€unique€situation.€€In€contrast€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ øH Ðdetermination€of€the€witnessesðð€credibility€regarding€the€alleged€improper€access€to€Grisoniððs€labÐ ä4 Ðnotebook,€the€questions€to€Haltom€centered€on€his€recollection€of€statements€made€at€the€settlementÐ Ð  Ðconference,€and€the€truthfulness€of€his€testimony€can€be€ascertained€from€a€comparison€of€hisÐ ¼  Ðtestimony€to€the€tape€of€the€settlement€conference.€€€In€comparing€the€two,€it€is€clear€that€HaltomððsÐ ¨ø Ðtestimony€overall€is€consistent€with€what€was€said€during€the€settlement€conference.€€When€askedÐ ”ä Ðif€he€told€Grisoni€that,€if€he€did€not€surrender€his€510(k)€that€Wright€would€notify€the€FDA,€HaltomððsÐ €Ð Ðinitial€response€was€ð ðno.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Immediately€thereafter,€however,€and€indeed€repeatedly€in€his€testimony,Ð l¼ ÐHaltom€acknowledged€telling€Grisoni€that€Wright€would€go€back€to€the€FDA€to€point€out€theÐ X ¨ Ðcontradiction€between€his€deposition€testimony€and€his€statements€to€the€FDA.€€Thus,€while€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourt€made€a€factual€finding€that€Haltom€ð ðwas€not€truthful€when€he€testified€under€oath€at€trial,€onÐ 0"€  Ðbehalf€of€Wright,€that€he€never€told€Mr.€Biller€or€Dr.€Grisoni€that€he€would€go€to€the€FDA€if€Dr.Ð #l! ÐGrisoni€did€not€surrender€his€510(k),ðð€with€due€deference€to€the€trial€courtððs€role€in€assessingÐ $X" Ðcredibility,€we€must€conclude€that€this€finding€is€clearly€erroneous.€€ò òòòSee€Hudson€v.€Cappsó óóó,€651Ð ô$D # ÐS.W.2d€243,€246€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1983)(holding€that€the€trial€courtððs€determination€of€credibility€isÐ à%0!$ Ðð ðbinding€on€the€appellate€court€unless€from€other€real€evidence€the€appellate€court€is€compelled€toÐ Ì&"% Ðconclude€to€the€contraryðð).€€ò òòòSee€also€Krick€v.€City€of€Lawrenceburgó óóó,€945€S.W.2d€709,€712€(Tenn.Ð ¸'#& Ð1997)(holding€that€where€all€the€proof€is€by€deposition,€appellate€court€may€draw€its€ownÐ ¤(ô#' Ðconclusions€about€credibility).€€òòò ò€óóó óÐ )à$( Ðà  àMoreover,€in€support€of€the€finding€of€malicious€prosecution,€the€trial€court€relies€onÐ ° Ðstatements€made€during€the€settlement€conference€that,€to€settle€the€case,€Grisoni€must€surrender€hisÐ œì Ð510(k)€on€ProFusion;€if€not,€Wright€would€wage€a€ð ðtwo„part€warðð€by€pursuing€the€chancery€courtÐ ˆØ Ðlawsuit€and€contacting€the€FDA.€€Citing€Haltomððs€statements€during€the€settlement€conference€that,Ð tÄ Ðif€Grisoni€did€not€surrender€his€510(k),€Wright€would€give€the€information€on€Grisoniððs€depositionÐ `° Ðtestimony€to€the€FDA€and€that€ð ðthereððs€obvious€implications€for€making€false€statements€to€the€FDAÐ L œ Ð.€.€.€,ðð€the€trial€court€characterized€these€statements€as€ð ðthreats.ðð€€It€concluded€from€all€of€this€thatÐ 8 ˆ ÐWrightððs€ð ðprimary€motivationðð€in€filing€the€lawsuit€was€to€deny€Grisoni€ð ðentry€into€its€formerlyÐ $ t Ðexclusive€calcium€sulfate€bone€void€filler€marketðð€and,€based€on€this,€found€Wright€liable€forÐ  ` Ðmalicious€prosecution.Ð ü L  Ðà  àWe€must€ascertain€whether€these€statements,€made€during€the€course€of€a€settlement€attempt,Ð Ô$  Ðcan€be€the€basis€for€a€finding€of€malicious€prosecution.€€In€an€unfair€competition€lawsuit€such€as€this,Ð À  Ðit€is€axiomatic€that€the€actions€of€the€plaintiff,€in€filing€the€suit,€are€motivated€by€a€desire€to€preventÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€defendant€from€competing.€€Of€course,€this€cannot€be€accomplished€by€filing€a€groundlessÐ ˜è  Ðlawsuit;€however,€the€mere€fact€that€the€plaintiff€desires€to€prevent€the€defendant€from€introducingÐ „Ô  Ðinto€the€market€a€competing€product€cannot€be€the€basis€for€a€finding€of€malicious€prosecution.€€ThisÐ pÀ Ðfact€indicates€neither€malice€nor€lack€of€probable€cause.€Ð \¬ Ðà  àLikewise,€the€statements€made€during€the€settlement€conference,€that€Wright€would€pursueÐ 4„ Ðthe€lawsuit€and€go€to€the€FDA€if€Grisoni€did€not€surrender€his€510(k),€cannot€be€the€basis€for€aÐ  p Ðfinding€of€malicious€prosecution.€€The€trial€court€characterized€these€assertions€as€ð ðthreats,ðð€and€thatÐ  \ Ðis€not€inaccurate.€€However,€this€is€the€harsh€reality€of€litigation.€€Provided€the€lawsuit€was€notÐ øH Ðgroundless,€Wright€had€the€legal€right€to€pursue€the€chancery€court€litigation€and€to€use€legal€meansÐ ä4 Ðto€call€into€question€the€validity€of€Grisoniððs€510(k)€on€ProFusion.€€The€trial€court€emphasized,€andÐ Ð  ÐGrisoni€calls€unethical,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Haltomððs€statement€during€the€settlement€conference€that€ð ðthereððs€obviousÐ ¼  Ðimplications€for€making€false€statements€to€the€FDA.€.€.€.ðð€€While€a€perjury€prosecution€might€resultÐ ¨ø Ðfrom€Wright€contacting€the€FDA€regarding€Grisoniððs€contradictory€deposition€testimony,€Wright€hadÐ ”ä Ða€reasonable€legal€basis€for€questioning€the€validity€of€Grisoniððs€501(k),€regardless€of€peripheralÐ €Ð Ðconsequences€to€Grisoni.€€This€is€an€ugly€but€unavoidable€consequence€of€settlement€negotiations;Ð l¼ Ðeach€side€must€try€to€convince€the€other€that€refusing€to€relent€to€its€settlement€demand€will€resultÐ X ¨ Ðin€consequences€that€are€worse€than€giving€in€to€the€settlement€demand.€€Provided€the€lawsuit€is€notÐ D!” Ðgroundless,€statements€of€this€type€in€settlement€negotiations€cannot€form€the€basis€for€a€finding€ofÐ 0"€  Ðmalicious€prosecution.Ð #l! Ðà  àThe€finding€of€malicious€prosecution€must€now€be€evaluated€in€light€of€the€remainingÐ ô$D # Ðevidence.€€As€noted€above,€the€trial€court€found,€based€on€its€credibility€determinations,€that€WrightÐ à%0!$ Ðhad€knowledge€of€the€entire€contents€of€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook€on€ProFusion€prior€to€instituting€thisÐ Ì&"% Ðlawsuit.€€At€the€same€time,€however,€there€are€a€number€of€other€facts€of€which€Wright€was€awareÐ ¸'#& Ðat€the€time€the€lawsuit€was€instituted.€€It€is€undisputed€that€Wright€had€knowledge€that€Grisoni€hadÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdeveloped€a€prototype€of€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô€within€a€month€of€leaving€his€employment€with€Wright,€aÐ ° Ðprocess€that€had€taken€Wright€over€a€yearò òó ó€of€trial„and„error€experimentation€with€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.׃Q×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€WrightÐ œì Ðknew€that€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€had€represented€to€the€FDA€that€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô€was€ð ðidenticalðð€to€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€€AssumingÐ ˆØ Ðthat€Wright€knew€that€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô€utilized€the€beta€form€of€calcium€sulphateò òó ó,€Wright€knew€thatÐ tÄ ÐÔ_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€had€been€privy€to€Wrightððs€experimentation€with€both€the€alpha€and€beta€forms€whileÐ `° ÐÔ_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô€was€being€developed.€€Wright€knew€that€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô€was€being€marketed€in€a€pellet€form€thatÐ L œ Ðwas€nearly€identical€to€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€€Wright€knew€that€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€had€used€a€process€and€methodology€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðhis€510(k)€application€with€the€FDA€that€had€great€similarities€to€the€process€used€by€Wright€in€itsÐ $ t Ð510(k)€for€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô,€a€process€that€had€included€over€a€yearò ò€ó óof€experimentation€and€modification€byÐ  ` ÐWright,€including€an€initial€rejection€by€the€FDA.€€Wright€had€knowledge€of€all€of€these€facts€in€lightÐ  P  Ðof€this€Courtððs€decision€inòòò òHickory€Specialtiesó óóó,€in€which€the€Court€held€that,€despite€the€fact€that€theÐ ì <  Ðprocesses€in€question€were€based€on€existing€technology€and€potentially€could€have€been€developedÐ Ø(  Ðby€independent€technology,€the€defendant€former€employee€could€be€enjoined€because€he€in€fact€usedÐ Ä  Ðhis€knowledge€of€the€confidential€process€obtained€through€his€position€with€his€former€employer.€Ð °  Ðò òòòHickory€Specialties,€Inc.€v.€B€&€L€Laboratories,€Inc.,ó óóó€592€S.W.2d€583,€587€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1979).€Ð œì  Ðòòò òóóó óThus,€Wright€had€reason€for€a€good€faith€belief€that€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€had€developed€Ô_ÔProFusionÔ_Ô€and€appliedÐ ˆØ  Ðfor€the€501(k)€with€the€FDA€by€utilizing€confidential€information€that€he€obtained€during€hisÐ tÄ Ðemployment€with€Wright.€€In€light€ofò òòò€Hickory€Specialtiesó óóó,€and€the€undisputed€evidence,€we€mustÐ `° Ðconclude€that€Wright€had€a€reasonable€basis€for€believing€that€it€had€a€good€chance€of€establishingÐ Lœ Ðgrounds€for€its€civil€claim€against€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô.€€ò òòò€See€Ô_ÔBudaÔ_Ô€v.€Cassel€Bros.,€Inc.ó óóó,€568€S.W.2d€628,€631„Ð 8ˆ Ð632€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1978);€ò òòòTaylor€v.€Morrisó óóó,€No.€01A01„9804„CH„00211,€1999€WL€675138,€at€*4Ð $t Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Sept.€1,€1999).ò òó óÐ ` Ðà  àGrisoni€contends€that€Wright€should€be€held€liable€for€malicious€prosecution€for€continuingÐ è8 Ðthe€litigation€as€well.€€However,€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€the€temporary€injunction€wasÐ Ô$ Ðwrongfully€issued€hinges€in€large€part€on€its€credibility€determination€in€Grisoniððs€favor.€€GrisoniÐ À Ðtestified€essentially€that€he€developed€ProFusion€by€independent€technology€and€not€from€usingÐ ¬ü Ðinformation€he€obtained€while€employed€at€Wright.€€Under€ò òòòHickory€Specialtiesó óóó,€of€course,€even€ifÐ ˜è Ðthe€process€could€potentially€be€developed€by€independent€technology,€the€employee€could€be€heldÐ „Ô Ðliable€if€he€in€fact€used€knowledge€of€the€confidential€process€that€he€obtained€while€employed€byÐ pÀ Ðthe€plaintiff€employer.€€592€S.W.2d€at€587.€€Wright,€of€course,€is€not€required€to€know€in€advanceÐ \ ¬ Ðof€the€injunction€hearing€that€the€trial€court€would€credit€Grisoniððs€testimony€that€he€developedÐ H!˜ ÐProFusion€by€independent€technology€and€not€through€the€use€of€knowledge€he€obtained€while€atÐ 4"„  ÐWright€regarding€the€development€of€Ô_ÔOsteosetÔ_Ô.€€ò òòòSee€Ô_ÔILGÔ_Ô€Indus.,€Inc.€v.€Scottó óóó,€273€N.E.2d€393,€398Ð  #p! Ð(Ill.€1971)€(ð ðIn€many€cases€the€question€of€whether€a€specific€matter€is€a€trade€secret€is€an€extremelyÐ  $\" Ðclose€one,€often€not€readily€predictable€until€a€court€has€announced€its€ruling.ðð).€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ôððs€assertionsÐ ø$H # Ðwere€highly€disputed.€€Consequently,€in€its€continuation€of€the€litigation,€up€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ ä%4!$ Ðfinding€that€the€injunction€should€be€dissolved,€Wright€still€had€a€reasonable€basis€for€believing€thatÐ Ð& "% Ðit€had€a€good€chance€of€establishing€grounds€for€its€civil€claim€against€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô.€€After€that€point,Ð ° Ðcontinuation€of€the€injunction€was€simply€to€preserve€the€status€quo€pending€appeal.€€Under€theseÐ œì Ðcircumstances,€we€cannot€conclude€that€the€evidence€establishes€either€malice€or€lack€of€probableÐ ˆØ Ðcause€for€Wrightððs€continuation€of€the€litigation.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€WrightÐ tÄ Ðis€liable€for€malicious€prosecution€must€be€reversed.€€€€Ð `° Ðà  àIn€light€of€this€holding,€we€must€review€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€punitive€damages.€€The€trialÐ 8 ˆ Ðcourt€awarded€punitive€damages€in€the€amount€of€$4.79€million,€after€noting€that€punitive€damagesÐ $ t Ðcould€be€awarded€only€if€Wrightððs€conduct€amounted€to€ð ðfraud,€malice,€oppression,€gross€negligenceÐ  ` Ðor€outrageous€conduct,ðð€and€citing€ò òòòDavenport€v.€Chrysler€Credit€Corp.ó óóó,€818€S.W.2d€23€(Ô_ÔTenn.CtÔ_Ô.Ð ü L  ÐApp.€1991).€€The€standard€for€punitive€damages€was€refined€further€in€ò òòòHodges€v.€S.C.€Toof€&€Co.ó óóó,Ð è 8  Ð833€S.W.2d€896€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€ò òòòHodgesó óóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€cautioned€that€punitiveÐ Ô$  Ðdamages€should€be€awarded€only€in€cases€involving€ð ðthe€most€egregious€of€wrongs.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€901.€€TheÐ À  ÐCourt€emphasized€that€it€sought€to€avoid€ð ðdull[ing]€the€potentially€keen€edge€of€the€doctrine€as€anÐ ¬ü  Ðeffective€deterrent€of€ò òó ótruly€reprehensible€conduct.ðð€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€(quoting€ò òòòTuttle€v.€Raymondó óóó,€494€A.2d€1353,Ð ˜è  Ð1361€(Me.€1985)).€€It€held€that,€in€order€to€award€punitive€damages,€the€trial€court€must€findÐ „Ô  Ðð ðintentional,€fraudulent,€malicious€or€reckless€conduct€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.ðð€€ò òòòId.€ó óóóÐ pÀ Ðà  àIn€this€case,€we€have€reversed€the€finding€of€malicious€prosecution,€concluding€that€WrightÐ H˜ Ðhad€a€reasonable€belief€that€it€had€a€good€chance€of€establishing€grounds€for€its€civil€claim€againstÐ 4„ ÐGrisoni.€€Under€these€circumstances,€the€award€of€punitive€damages€is€not€warranted€and€must€beÐ  p Ðreversed.Ð  \ Ðà@!ìàò òWRONGFUL€INJUNCTIONó óˆÐ ä4 Ðà  àWright€also€argues€on€appeal€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€dissolving€the€injunction€againstÐ ¼  ÐGrisoni.€€Resolution€of€this€issue€turns€on€whether€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÐ ¨ø Ðcourtððs€finding€that€the€information€Grisoni€used€in€developing€and€obtaining€regulatory€approvalÐ ”ä Ðfor€ProFusion€was€available€through€independent€research€of€public€sources.€€Wright€argues€that€theÐ €Ð Ðevidence€shows€that€ProFusion€was€the€product€of€Grisoniððs€prior€access€to€Wrightððs€confidentialÐ l¼ Ðsources€and€its€trial„and„error€experimentation.Ð X ¨ Ðò òó óà  àAn€employee€may,€of€course,€enter€into€an€agreement€with€his€employer€barring€him€fromÐ 0"€  Ðengaging€in€any€competition€with€the€employer.€€ò òòòHeyer„Jordan€&€Assocs.,€Inc.€v.€Jordanó óóó,€801Ð #l! ÐS.W.2d€814,€821€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€€In€the€absence€of€such€an€agreement,€once€the€employmentÐ $X" Ðrelationship€ends,€the€employee€is€free€to€develop€and€market€products€which€compete€with€thoseÐ ô$D # Ðof€his€former€employer.€€ò òòòEd€Nowogroski€Ins.,€Inc.€v.€Ruckeró óóó,€971€P.2d€936,€941€(Wash.€1999).€Ð à%0!$ ÐHowever,€the€employee€is€still€bound€by€the€general€duty€not€to€disclose€confidential€informationÐ Ì&"% Ðor€trade€secrets€belonging€to€the€former€employer;€violation€of€this€duty€gives€rise€to€a€cause€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðaction€in€the€employer€to€obtain€relief€against€the€former€employee.€€ò òòòId.ó óóó€at€941„942€(citingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âRestatement€(Third)€of€Unfair€Competition€Ô‡>Xo.XXXo.ÔÔ‡>ô> òX>Xo.ÔððÔ#†ô> ò ò>ô>]º#ÔÔ#†Xo.X òô>|º#Ô€42€cmt.€b€(1995)).€€ò òó óÐ )à$( ÐÓ]ÓÓ  Óà  àIn€addition€to€any€common€law€duties,€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€also€executed€a€confidentiality€agreement.€Ð ° Ðâ âSimilar€to€the€standard€under€the€common€law,€the€agreement€prohibits€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€from€using€orÐ œì Ðdisclosing€any€of€Wrightððs€trade€secrets€or€confidential€information,€but€does€not€apply€to€ð ðanyÐ ˆØ Ðinformation€which€has€become€publicly€available€through€no€fault€ofðð€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô.€€The€agreement,€ofÐ tÄ Ðcourse,€must€be€interpreted€by€reference€to€common€law€principles.€€ò òòòDynamics€Research€Corp.€v.Ð `° ÐAnalytic€Sciences€Corp.óóó ó,€400€N.E.2d€1274,€1288€(Mass.€App.€Ct.ò ò€ó ó1980)€(finding€that€a€ð ðnon„Ð L œ Ðdisclosure€agreement€only€affirmed€the€intent€of€the€parties€to€be€bound€by€the€common€law€of€tradeÐ < Œ Ðsecretsðð).€Ð ( x ÐÓ%»ÓÓ  Óà  àThe€burden€of€proof€in€a€lawsuit€to€protect€employer€trade€secrets€was€discussed€in€òòò òHickoryÐ  P  ÐSpecialties,€Inc.€v.€B&L€Laboratories,€Inc.,€ó óóó592€S.W.2d€at€586€(citing€ò òòòSmith€v.€Ô_ÔDravoÔ_Ô€Corp.ó óóó,€203Ð ì <  ÐF.2d€369€(7òòthóó€Cir.€1953)).€€In€such€a€lawsuit,€the€employer€has€the€burden€of€proving€that€trade€secretsÐ Ø(  Ðwere€communicated€to€the€employee€in€the€course€of€a€confidential€employment€relationship€and€thatÐ Ä  Ðthe€employee€is€attempting€to€use€those€secrets€to€the€detriment€of€the€employer.€ò ò€€òòId.€€ó óóóA€trade€secretÐ °  Ðis€ð ðany€formula,€process,€pattern,€device€or€compilation€of€information€that€is€used€in€oneððs€businessÐ  ð  Ðand€which€gives€him€an€opportunity€to€obtain€an€advantage€over€competitors€who€do€not€use€it.ðð€€òòò òId.Ð ŒÜ  Ðó óóó(quoting€òòò òAllis„Ô_ÔChalmersÔ_Ô€Mfg.€Co.€v.€Continental€Aviation€&€Eng.€Corp.ó óóó,€255€Ô_ÔF.SuppÔ_Ô.€645,€653Ð xÈ Ð(E.D.€Mich.€1966)).ò òó ó€€Confidential€information€is€closely€analogous€to€a€trade€secret€and€warrantsÐ d´ Ðsimilar€protection.€€ò òòòSee€Vantage€Technology,€LLC,€v.€Crossó óóó,€17€S.W.3d€637,€645€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð P  Ð1999);€ò òòòÔ_ÔHeyerÔ_Ô„Jordanóó,€ó ó801€S.W.2d€at€821.€€ò òòòó óóóSeveral€factors€to€consider€in€determining€whether€aÐ <Œ Ðpiece€of€information€constitutes€a€trade€secret€are:Ð ,| ÐÓ¿ÓÒ°ÒÒ°Ò(1)€the€extent€to€which€the€information€is€known€outside€of€the€business;Ð T Ð(2)€the€extent€to€which€it€is€known€by€employees€and€others€involved€in€theÐ Ü, Ðbusiness;Ð È Ð(3)€the€extent€of€measures€taken€by€the€business€to€guard€the€secrecy€of€theÐ  ð Ðinformation;Ð ŒÜ Ð(4)€the€value€of€the€information€to€the€business€and€to€its€competitors;Ð d ´ Ð(5)€the€amount€of€money€or€effort€expended€by€the€business€in€developing€theÐ <"Œ  Ðinformation;Ð (#x! Ð(6)€the€ease€or€difficulty€with€which€the€information€could€be€properly€acquired€orÐ %P # Ðduplicated€by€others;Ð ì%Xo.XXXo.ÔÔ‡>ô> òX>Xo.ÔððÔ#†ô> ò ò>ô>SR#ÔÔ#†Xo.X òô>rR#Ô€29„23„104,׃d×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€sometimes€referred€to€as€the€ð ðpenalty€statute.ðð€€Grisoni€argues,€without€citingÐ ¬ü  Ðsupporting€authority,€that€such€a€penalty€is€appropriate€where€the€enjoined€party€is€unable€to€proveÐ ˜è  Ðmalicious€prosecution.€€Further,€Grisoni€argues,€the€penalty€is€not€limited€by€the€amount€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðinjunction€bond.€€Grisoniððs€argument€is€without€merit.€The€statute€is€a€mechanism€for€an€award€ofÐ pÀ Ða€penalty€in€a€situation€in€which€the€enjoined€partyððs€damages€are€too€speculative€to€support€an€awardÐ \¬ Ðof€compensatory€damages.€€Obviously,€the€trial€court€did€not€conclude€that€the€evidence€was€tooÐ H˜ Ðspeculative€to€support€an€award€of€compensatory€damages.€€The€statute,€therefore,€has€no€applicationÐ 4„ Ðto€the€facts€in€this€case.Ð  p Ðà  àAccordingly,€we€hold€that€Grisoni€is€entitled€to€recover€as€compensatory€damages€for€theÐ øH Ðwrongful€injunction€the€full€amount€of€the€injunction€bond,€$500,000.€€The€trial€courtððs€award€ofÐ ä4 Ðcompensatory€damages€is€therefore€modified€to€this€amount.€€Ð Ð  Ðà@"ìàò òSURETY€LIABILITY€ó óˆÐ ¨ø Ðà  àGrisoni€argues€on€appeal€that€Travelers€should€be€liable€for€the€full€judgment,€rather€than€theÐ €Ð Ðamount€of€its€bond,€$250,000,€based€on€alleged€ambiguity€in€the€terms€of€Travelersðð€bond.€€The€firstÐ l¼ Ðparagraph€sets€Travelersðð€liability€under€the€bond€at€$250,000.€€The€second€paragraph€then€providesÐ X ¨ Ðthat,€ð ðò òòòifóóó ó€said€Principal€or€Surety€pays€òòò òalló óóó€damages€and€costs€which€any€person€may€sustain€by€theÐ D!” Ðsuing€out€of€such€Temporary€Restraining€Order€if€the€same€is€dissolved,€this€obligation€to€be€void.ðð€Ð 0"€  Ð(emphasis€added).€€€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€argues€that€the€use€of€the€word€ð ðallðð€in€the€paragraph€creates€anÐ #l! Ðobligation€on€the€part€of€Travelers€to€pay€the€entire€judgment.€€However,€the€use€of€the€word€ð ðifðð€inÐ $X" Ðthe€second€paragraph€creates€a€condition€which,€if€met,€discharges€the€obligation€created€in€the€firstÐ ô$D # Ðparagraph.€€Travelerððs€liability€as€a€surety€is,€therefore,€limited€to€$250,000.Ð à%0!$ Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€Travelers€asserts€that€the€injunction€bond€has€been€discharged€by€the€trial€courtððs€failure€toÐ ° Ðenter€a€judgment€against€Travelers.€€Travelers€also€argues€that€the€bond€has€been€discharged€byÐ œì ÐWrightððs€filing€of€an€appeal€bond.€€Travelers€fails€to€offer€any€authority€supporting€these€assertions.€Ð ˆØ ÐWe€find€them€without€merit.€€€€€Ð tÄ Ðà@00%ìàò òÔ_ÔALLOMATRIXÔ_Ôó óˆÐ L œ Ѐò òòòóóó óà  àGrisoni€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€not€award€damages€for€Wrightððs€allegedÐ $ t Ðmisappropriation€of€material€from€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€Grisoni€produced€his€lab€notebook€toÐ  ` ÐWright€as€part€of€Wrightððs€discovery€into€Grisoniððs€alleged€use€of€confidential€information.€€AlongÐ ü L  Ðwith€information€relating€to€Grisoniððs€development€of€ProFusion,€the€notebook€also€containedÐ è 8  Ðinformation€on€Grisoniððs€research€into€a€calcium€sulfate€based€putty.€€Grisoni€testified€that,€withinÐ Ô$  Ða€few€months€of€gaining€access€to€his€lab€notebook,€Wright€was€able€to€develop€its€own€calciumÐ À  Ðsulfate€putty€product,€Allomatrix,€using€several€of€the€same€development€parameters€described€inÐ ¬ü  ÐGrisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€Grisoni€argues€that€this€evidence€preponderates€in€favor€of€finding€thatÐ ˜è  ÐWright€used€Grisoniððs€proprietary€information€in€developing€Allomatrix.€€€Despite€finding€nearly€allÐ „Ô  Ðcredibility€determinations€in€Grisoniððs€favor,€the€trial€judge€nevertheless€could€not€find€that€WrightÐ pÀ Ðhad€developed€Allomatrix€by€using€information€from€Grisoniððs€lab€notebook.€€We€hold€that€theÐ \¬ Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððs€holding.€€Ð H˜ Ðà0  àà ° àà@FF%ì(#(#àò òCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ  p Ðà  àIn€sum,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€factual€finding€that€Wright€improperly€accessed€GrisoniððsÐ øH Ðlab€notebook,€reverse€as€clearly€erroneous€the€trial€courtððs€finding€on€the€credibility€of€WrightððsÐ ä4 Ðattorney,€William€Haltom,€and€hold€that€the€evidence€is€not€sufficient€to€find€either€malice€or€lackÐ Ð  Ðof€probable€cause.€€Consequently,€the€finding€of€malicious€prosecution€is€reversed.€Because€theÐ ¼  Ðevidence€is€insufficient€to€support€a€finding€of€malice,€the€award€of€punitive€damages€is€likewiseÐ ¨ø Ðreversed.€€Deferring€to€the€trial€courtððs€determinations€on€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses,€we€holdÐ ”ä Ðthat€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€order€dissolving€the€injunction.€€TheÐ €Ð Ðaward€of€compensatory€damages€to€Grisoni€for€the€wrongful€injunction€must€be€limited€by€theÐ l¼ Ðamount€of€the€injunction€bond.€€Therefore,€the€award€of€compensatory€damages€is€modified€to€theÐ X ¨ Ðamount€of€the€bond,€$500,000.€€We€hold€that€Travelers€may€be€held€liable€for€the€amount€of€the€bondÐ D!” Ðit€executed,€$250,000.€€We€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€holding€that€Wright€is€not€liable€for€utilizingÐ 0"€  Ðinformation€allegedly€misappropriated€from€Grisoni€to€develop€Allomatrix.€€The€remaining€issuesÐ #l! Ðraised€on€appeal€are€pretermitted.Ð $X" Ðà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part€and€modified€as€set€forthÐ à%0!$ Ðabove.€€Costs€are€divided€equally€among€the€parties,€appellant,€Wright€Medical€Technology,€Inc.,Ð Ì&"% Ðand€its€surety,€and€the€appellees,€Bernard€F.€Ô_ÔGrisoniÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔBiogenerationÔ_Ô,€Inc.,€and€appellee,€TravelersÐ ¸'#& ÐCasualty€and€Surety€Company€of€America,ò òó ó€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÒû°Ò€€€€€€€€à0 S àà0« S(#S(#àÓ Óà  àà [ àà ³ àà  à___________________________________€Ð|*Ì%)« (#« (# Ðà S àà « àà  àà [ àà ³ àà  àHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGE