Kim Brown v. Christian Brothers University, 2013 Tenn. App. LEXIS 512

Incidents occurred on February 27, 2011 and March 9, 2011 on Christian Brothers University's campus involving Kim Brown and campus security.
Brown, a former CBU student, misrepresented himself as a current student and later failed to obtain proper parking and ID decals.
On Feb. 27, Brown was questioned at the guard booth, fled, and security searched for him in the IT Building.
On Mar. 9, Brown was detained briefly by campus police after being identified and checked for warrants, then released with conditions.
Brown filed suit on March 14, 2011, later amending to assert thirteen claims including defamation, false light, false imprisonment, malicious harassment, negligence, assault, battery, and civil conspiracy.
The trial court granted a directed verdict on all remaining claims after Brown nonsuited some counts; the appellate record was limited to portions approved for appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the directed verdict proper on multiple claims?	Brown contends factual issues remained for trial.	CBU argues sufficient evidence supports dismissal on all claims.	Directed verdict affirmed; no material evidence supports Brown’s prima facie case on those claims.
Was cross-examination about Brown's prior lawsuits permissible?	Brown objects to cross-examination on other lawsuits as irrelevant.	Brown opened the door by his testimony; questioning permissible to impeach motive.	Court did not abuse discretion; admission was within trial court's control and door-opening doctrine applied.
Was the denial of dialing a phone number and admission of video evidence an abuse of discretion?	Brown sought to introduce phone and video evidence.	Record incomplete; appellate review limited by truncated transcript; decisions supported by record.	No reversible error; evidentiary ruling not shown to be an abuse of discretion.

Coffee v. State, 216 S.W.2d 702 (Tenn. 1948) (cross-examination is within trial court’s discretion)
Davis v. Wicker, 333 S.W.2d 921 (Tenn. 1960) (limits on cross-examination discretion)
Brown v. Mapco Express, 393 S.W.3d 696 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012) (defamation: whether statements are actionable and publication requirements)
West v. Media Gen. Convergence, Inc., 53 S.W.3d 640 (Tenn. 2001) (false light invasion of privacy elements)
Poulos v. Lutheran Social Services of Illinois, Inc., 728 N.E.2d 547 (Ill. Ct. App. 2000) (special relationship concept in false light publicity)
Outdoor Management LLC v. Thomas, 249 S.W.3d 368 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007) (presumption of evidentiary support in absence of complete transcript)
Richardson v. Miller, 44 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000) (standards for directed verdict)