LuAllen v. Home Mission Bd. of Southern Baptist Convention
| Decision Date | 09 February 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 46871,No. 1,46871,1 |
| Parties | Mildred LuALLEN v. HOME MISSION BOARD OF SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
1. A summary judgment granted in favor of one of several defendants is a final and appealable judgment under the provisions of Code Ann. § 81A-156(h), and it is unnecessary to obtain a certificate from the trial judge that it should be reviewed.
2. (a) There is no publication giving rise to a claim for libel when a report written by the immediate supervisor evaluating the performance of her duties by a corporate employee, being critical of the employee and her performance, is sent to the employee hereself, to the director of the division of the corporation in which the employee works, to members of the office personnel committee, whose duties include the evaluating of the performance of employees on the job for retention on the job, transfer, promotion or discharge, this being done largely through the use of personnel files maintained on the employees, and to the secretary of the committee who is in charge of the maintenance of the files.
(b) Where there has been no publication of the report, it is immaterial, as against the corporation, that the author or writer may have entertained malice against the employee and may have known that some statements in it were not true.
Mrs. Mildred LuAllen was employed by the Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention in its Atlanta offices, being assigned to the shipping and mailing department, where her duties consisted, inter alia, of typing index cards, preparing labels for shipping, removing staples, collecting and packaging materials to be shipped or mailed, and the like.
Her immediate supervisor was Miss Selma Dunagan, who worked under and was supervised by Mr. Dan C. McQueen, the Director of the division of Business Services.
There was an office personnel committee, composed of Mr. Meeler Markham, Dr. Rutledge and Dr. Moseley, Mr. Markham serving as chairman. This committee had general supervision of the employment and discharge of office personnel. It was a part of the committee's duties to review the progress, or lack of it, mady by employees, their efficienty in the performance of work, their work attitudes, punctuality in performance, records of attendance upon the job, and the like. Based upon these matters employees were retained in their positions, promoted, demoted, transferred or discharged.
For the use of the committee in doing its work personnel files were kept on each of the employees, and from time to time the immediate supervisor placed written reports and evaluations of the employee and his work, performance, etc., into each of these files.
On February 27, 1970 Miss Dunagan prepared a written report and evaluation of the performance of Mrs. LuAllen on her job and sent it to Mr. McQueen, to all members of the office personnel committee, and to the secretary of the committee, whose duty it was to maintain the personnel files.
The report indicated that Mrs. LuAllen had not performed well or efficiently in her job, that she appeared to have been unhappy with the work, regarding it as being of a 'lowly' type, that her addressing of labels, etc., had not been dependable, that she had been moved from one duty routine to another in an effort to improve the situation, but that Mrs. LuAllen had 'deliberately gotten behind' so that she would be moved. In the report Miss Dunagan stated: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Georgia Power Co. v. Busbin, s. 54764
...not allowed to go out with the jury because the court did not think it had been published. See LuAllen v. Home Mission Board of Southern Baptist Convention, 125 Ga.App. 456, 188 S.E.2d 138; Garrett v. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, 98 Ga.App. 443, 106 S.E.2d 333; George v. Georgia Power Com......
-
Luckey v. Gioia
...see it). To hold otherwise could impede legitimate inquiries by employers into employee conduct. See LuAllen v. Home Mission Board, etc., 125 Ga.App. 456, 459(2), 188 S.E.2d 138 (1972). In the absence of any evidence of publication, an essential element of an action for libel, summary judgm......
-
Sigmon v. Womack
...of the co-manager of the store who had general supervisory authority does not constitute publication. LuAllen v. Home Mission Board, 125 Ga.App. 456, 188 S.E.2d 138 (1972); Jackson v. Douglas County Elec. Membership Corp., 150 Ga.App. 523, 258 S.E.2d 152, supra. Nor does the fact that in fi......
-
Smith v. Lott
...673(3), 607 S.E.2d 265 (2004) ; Kurtz v. Williams, 188 Ga.App. 14, 16(3), 371 S.E.2d 878 (1988) ; LuAllen v. Home Mission, etc., Convention, 125 Ga.App. 456, 460(2), 188 S.E.2d 138 (1972).11 Conley, supra at 667–668(2), 572 S.E.2d 34 (footnote omitted).12 Murphy v. Bajjani, 282 Ga. 197, 203......