The following section from Day on Torts Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law​​​ is out of date and should not be used. It remains a part of this site for historical purposes only. An updated version of the book is available by subscription at www.birddoglaw.com. (Additional information below.)

§24.5 Defamatory Statement

The Case: McWhorter v. Barre , 132 S.W.3d 354 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003).

The Basic Facts: The plaintiff, a pilot, sued the defendant, another pilot, for defamation based on a letter written by the defendant to the Federal Aviation Administration, which alleged that the plaintiff was medically unfit to be a pilot.

The Bottom Line:

  • “We next consider whether the Letter was defamatory. The question of whether the Letter was understood by its readers as defamatory is a question for the jury, but the preliminary determination of whether the Letter is ‘capable of being so understood is a question of law to be determined by the court.’ Memphis Publ’g Co. v. Nichols, 569 S.W.2d 412, 419 (Tenn. 1978) (emphasis in original). A trial court’s conclusions of law are subject to a de novo review with no presumption of correctness. S. Constructors, Inc. v. Loudon County Bd. of Educ., 58 S.W.3d 706, 710 (Tenn. 2001).” 132 S.W.3d at 364.
  • “In making the determination of whether a communication is capable of being understood as defamatory, ‘[t]he courts of this state have consistently followed the prevailing common-law practice of construing the allegedly libelous words in their ‘plain and natural’ import.’ Nichols, 569 S.W.2d at 419 n.7. In Stones River Motors, Inc. v. Mid-South Publ’g Co., Inc., this Court explained that:

    [f]or a communication to be libelous, it must constitute a serious threat to the plaintiff’s reputation. A libel does not occur simply because the subject of a publication finds the publication annoying, offensive or embarrassing. The words must reasonably be construable as holding the plaintiff up to public hatred, contempt or ridicule. They must carry with them an element ‘of disgrace.’ [W. Prosser, Law of Torts, § 111, p. 739 (4th ed. 1971)]. See also Memphis Telephone Company v. Cumberland Telephone and Telegraph Company, [145 F. 904 (6th Cir. 1906)] (holding that it was not libelous to state that the plaintiff was charging twice as much for its stock as the stock was worth, since it had a right to do so); and Sweeney v. Newspaper Printing Corporation, [147 S.W.2d 406 (Tenn. 1941)] (holding that it was not libelous to state that the plaintiff had opposed a job application because the applicant was a foreign-born Jew).

    Stones River Motors, Inc. v. Mid-South Publ’g Co., Inc. , 651 S.W.2d 713, 719 (Tenn Ct. App. 1983).” Id.
  • “In this case, the Letter was capable, without doubt, of being understood as defamatory. It constituted a serious threat to Plaintiff’s reputation as a pilot, the only career Plaintiff has ever known. The allegations in the Letter accused Plaintiff of violating federal law and behaving in an unprofessional manner. If the allegations in the Letter were true, Plaintiff’s career as a pilot was over. If false, Plaintiff’s reputation as a pilot was tarnished needlessly. The Letter carried an element of disgrace because Plaintiff’s reputation as a pilot will forever have a ‘black mark’ as a result of the Letter. The words of the Letter, taken at their “plain and natural’ import’ held Plaintiff up to disgrace and ridicule as a pilot and were capable of being understood as defamatory. Nichols, 569 S.W.2d at 419 n.7. The Trial Court did not err in making the determination that the Letter was capable of being understood as defamatory. We affirm on this issue.” Id. at 364-65.

Other Sources of Note: Revis v. McClean, 31 S.W.3d 250 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000) (holding a statement of opinion is actionable only if it implies the existence of undisclosed defamatory facts as the basis for the opinion); Pate v. Service Merchandise Co., Inc., 959 S.W.2d 569 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1996) (holding that extrinsic facts may still be used to show the defamatory meaning of words that are not defamatory on their face).

Recent Cases:

Miller v. State , No. M2008-01241-COA-R3-CV, 2009 WL 837888 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2009) (affirming commissioner’s ruling finding no defamation where defendant made no comment about plaintiff at all in news reports).


After an accident, many injury victims and their families want more information on the accident and their legal rights. Consequently, many of them have found their way to these pages. While we are happy you are here, please understand Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law was written to be a quick, invaluable reference for Tennessee tort lawyers. While the book provides the leading case for more than 300 tort law subjects and thousands of related case citations, it is not a substitute for personalized legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Rather than researching these legal issues alone, we urge you to contact one of our award-winning lawyers who can sit down with you, review your case, answer your questions and clearly explain your rights and your options in a no-cost, no-obligation consultation. Our experienced attorneys handle all personal injury and wrongful death cases on a contingency basis, so we only get paid if we win. If for any reason you are unable to come to our office, we will gladly come to you.

To schedule an appointment, contact us online or call us at 615-742-4880 or toll-free at 866.812.8787.


The foregoing is an excerpt from Day on Torts: Leading Cases in Tennessee Tort Law, published by John A. Day, Civil Trial Specialist, Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers, recipient of Best Lawyers in America recognition, Martindale-Hubbell AV® Preeminent™ rated attorney, and Top 100 Tennessee Mid-South Super Lawyers designee. Read John’s full bio here.

The book is now available electronically by subscription at www.birddoglaw.com. The new format allows us to keep the book current as new opinions are released. BirdDog Law also has John's Tennessee Law of Civil Trial and Compendium of Tennessee Tort Reform Statutes available by subscription, as well as multiple free resources to help Tennessee lawyers serve their clients

Client Reviews

So let us start out with this - the few firms we contacted prior to John Days Office were not even willing to listen to the situation and circumstances surrounding the...

David H.

The Law Offices of John Day have been exceptional to work with on my case. I have worked primarily with Thomas Mihalezo and his para-legal, Natalie Primm, for the bulk of...

Deb D.

A year ago, I was involved in a car accident that was not my fault. The Law Office of John Day was referred to me by another attorney. Rachael Booker and Vada Newman were...

Jeffery B.

Other attorneys said my case was too difficult under Tennessee law. John Day's office had confidence and took the case. I received a significant settlement in ~ 6 months...

Jonny

From my initial call with Penny to my numerous communications with Rachel, the professionalism, efficiency, and compassionate way in which my case was handled was the...

Lisa C.

I love the law office of John Day. They treat you with respect, you feel like a family to them. They take time not only to listen to your case also they make you feel...

Reginald P.

I would give John Day Law ten stars if I could. They started working with me the very day they agreed to take my case and whether I was working with an attorney or one of...

Sandra C.

I definitely recommend the staff at The Law Offices of John Day! Not once did we have to call to inquire if they were working on our case. Alexandria and Natalie were...

Tracey J.

Everything was great. You guys are a great representative. I was satisfied with everything. Truly appreciate John Day and his hard-working staff.

Jamar Gibson

We thought that you did an excellent job in representing us in our lawsuit. We would recommend you to anyone.

Mitch Deese

The Law Offices of John Day, P.C. is, without a doubt, the best in Nashville! They treated me with the utmost respect and tended to my every need. No question went...

Anthony Santiago

I would definitely recommend to anyone to hire John Day's law firm because everyone was helpful, made everything clear and got the job done. I am satisfied with how my...

June Keomahavong

It's been a long battle but this firm has been very efficient and has done a remarkable job for me! I highly recommend them to anyone needing legal assistance. Everyone...

Linda Bush

I had a great experience with the Law Offices of John Day. The staff was very accommodating, and my phone calls/emails were always responded to in a timely manner. They...

Casey Hutchinson

The office stuffs of John Day law firm made my injury case with State Farm stress free. They were very professional and respectful. My attorney was accessible anytime I...

Margaret

Contact Us

Fill out the contact form or call us at 615-742-4880 or 615-867-9900 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message