on that date. Bradley and ASG may have suspected or even believed on December 24 that McGowan had violated his contract. But even a reasonable suspicion or belief does not necessarily create a “valid close question of law or fact.” Rice, 456 S.E.2d at 383. At the outset, we note that McGowan’s admission that he redesigned the SSR website and created the Linkedln page cannot form the basis of a bona fide dispute given that ASG knew McGowan had done so before it promised payment of his final wages and severance. ASG’s argument that the court should consider hearsay or other inadmissible evidence for the purpose of this determination also fails. To the extent the authority ASG cites is to the contrary, we disagree. See Moore v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 683 F.2d 1321, 1322-23 (11th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>). Without admissible evidence to support its
holding otherwise inadmissible evidence supporting employers good faith in a wrongful discharge claim was not hearsay holding that a court may rely on otherwise inadmissible evidence including hearsay evidence at the preliminary injunction stage recognizing tort of wrongful discharge holding that hearsay within a police report was inadmissible recognizing cause of action for wrongful discharge