Insulting letter isn't grounds for lawsuit if the "gist...is substantially accurate"
Carl Nicolet was fired by Brinks, Inc., after the ATMs he serviced experienced a number of unexplained cash "shortages/overages." Nicolet's termination letter cited these shortages, explained Brinks' decision and his supervisor's loss of confidence in Nicolet's ability or willingness to perform his duties. Nicolet filed suit alleging several theories, including intentional infliction of emotional distress, tortious interference with a business relationship, and that he was defamed by implication of theft. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Nicolet's suit, confirming that "if the gist of the article or the sting of the charge is 'substantially accurate,' a defendant cannot be liable."