SMILEDIRECTCLUB, INC., ET AL. v. NBCUNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC, ET AL. - Articles

All Content

SMILEDIRECTCLUB, INC., ET AL. v. NBCUNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC, ET AL.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Sep 19, 2024

Court: TN Court of Appeals

Attorneys 1: J. Erik Connolly and Nicole E. Wrigley, pro hac vice, Chicago, Illinois, and John R. Jacobsen and Katharine R. Klein, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Cluster Holdco, LLC.

Attorneys 2: William J. Harbison, II; Ronald George Harris; and James F. Sanders, Nashville, Tennessee, and Jonathan D. Hacker, pro hac vice, Washington, DC, and Daniel M. Petrocelli, pro hac vice, Los Angeles, California, for the appellees, NBCUniversal Media, LLC, and Vicky Nguyen.

Attorneys 3: Herbert H. Slatery, III, Attorney General and Reporter; Andrée S. Blumstein, Solicitor General; and Janet M. Kleinfelter, Deputy Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge(s): CLEMENT

This is an action for defamation and violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act (“the TCPA”). The plaintiffs operated a teledentistry platform dedicated to providing remote treatment for mild-to-moderate malocclusion of the teeth. The defendants published an online article and broadcast an “investigative report” that alleged, inter alia, that the plaintiffs’ customers were experiencing “painful problems” such as nerve damage, joint damage, and loss of teeth. In their complaint, the plaintiffs argued these and other statements—as well as the implications derived from those statements—injured the plaintiffs’ reputation and disparaged the plaintiffs’ products, services, and business. The trial court dismissed the action under the Tennessee Public Participation Act (“the TPPA”), holding that the TCPA did not apply and that the plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie case for their defamation claims. This appeal followed. Considering the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs and disregarding all countervailing evidence, we have determined that the plaintiffs presented prima facie evidence of falsity to support some of their claims but failed to produce clear and convincing evidence of actual malice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. Defendants ask for an award of their appellate attorney’s fees under Tennessee Code Annotated § 20-17-107, which requires an award of costs and fees “[i]f the court dismisses a legal action pursuant to a petition filed under [the TPPA].” Because we have affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims under the TPPA, Defendants are entitled to an award to be determined by the trial court on remand.

Attachments: