Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986). More than 1,000 people attended Paul's funeral. We agree with the Tatums' second argument and thus do not address their first. On appeal, appellees argue only that the affidavits are too speculative. According to the court, the Tatums chose the wording of the obituary to reflect their conviction that Pauls suicide resulted from suicidal ideation arising from a brain injury [sustained in the car crash] rather than from any undiagnosed mental illness.. It took a while for honesty to come to the AIDS epidemic. The Tatums argue that there was, focusing specifically on the intent that the word deception implies. Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 114. 16-0098 Decided: May 11, 2018 JUSTICE BOYD, joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN and JUSTICE BLACKLOCK, concurring. We conclude that the Tatums adduced no evidence of this requirement. They also argue that the description of Paul as popular is inconsistent with an imputation of mental illness, as is the assertion that he committed suicide in a time of remorse after a car crash. Grief Support. In Tatum v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc., No. In D Magazine Partners we said that the supreme court's 2000 Turner opinion suggests that lack of privilege might be an element of a defamation plaintiff's case, while its 2013 Neely opinion indicates that privilege is a defense. 700 the dvd+ dvd+ monkey monkey the yellow yellow denied) (mem.op.) But private figures suing a media defendant (as we have here) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages. By using the statement In my opinion Mayor Jones is a liar as an example of an actionable statement of fact, the Court took the position that such a statement can be proven false. The column omits the reasons why the Tatums believed their account of the cause of Paul's suicide was true. Accordingly, the court held that the columns were nonactionable opinions. Contact us. Entertainment & Sports Law Paul's friend went in the house and found Paul dazed, confused, irrational, incoherent, and apparently in physical anguish and holding one of the family's firearms. Paul's friend left him alone to tell her mother the situation, and as she left she heard a gunshot. They already face a grief more intense than most of us will ever know. Kass reviewed Cargill's report about the accident, interviewed the Tatums, reviewed Paul's conduct before and after the accident as reported by his friends, and reviewed other documents such as Paul's medical history and death certificate. Thus, there is evidence that Blow did not investigate this column with the same thoroughness that he did for a previous column and that his explanation for the difference was not true. The new Dallas Morning News app combines two apps into one. Immigration Law The court then vacated its judgment and stayed the case pending the resolution of a defamation case then pending in the Texas Supreme Court. at *4. 73.001; Am. We conclude that there was more than a scintilla of evidence showing more than a mere failure to conduct a reasonable investigation. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. But averting our eyes from the reality of suicide only puts more lives at risk. at 1001 & n.1. A Dallas County trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit against The News. To the contrary, the column's tone is generally sober, and it purports to be grounded in factual details such as the circumstances of Pillsbury's and Paul's deaths, data about the prevalence of suicide among young people, and Julie Hersh's public efforts to reduce the shame and stigma surrounding mental illness. Applicable Law and Summary Judgment Grounds. Did the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column was capable of defaming them? 73.001 (West 2011). Based on the record before us, we conclude that the Tatums were not limited-purpose public figures. Under Supreme Court precedents, a defamation plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted with actual malice if the plaintiff is a public official, a public figure, or a limited-purpose public figure. The court noted that the defendant had repeatedly stated that his accusations of corruption were based on objective, provable facts and on evidence that he had seen. at 894. Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 115. Like a cat putting its nose to the wind, that curiosity is part of how we gauge the danger out there for ourselves and our loved ones. Neely v. Wilson, 418 S.W.3d 52, 59 (Tex.2013). Agriculture Law And for us, there the matter ended. They also sued DMN for DTPA violations. We recently cited Lipsky and placed the burden of proving falsity on the plaintiff in a libel case involving the Texas Citizens Participation Act, Civ. Id. "Walking along side you" | 24 Hour Line: 086 111 1380 | Essential Service provider, available to families during COVID 19 LOCK DOWN Animal / Dog Law DMN also asserted the following no-evidence grounds: There was no evidence that the Tatums were consumers. Again, a statement is defamatory if it tends to (i) injure the subject's reputation, (ii) expose him to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, or financial injury, or (iii) impeach his honesty, integrity, or virtue. Civ. The column was privileged as a fair, true, and impartial account of official proceedings. Public figure status is a question of law for the court. The Tatums' DTPA claims are based on 17.46(b)(24) of the DTPA, which provides that it is a false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice to fail [] to disclose information concerning goods or services which was known at the time of the transaction if such failure to disclose such information was intended to induce the consumer into a transaction into which the consumer would not have entered had the information been disclosed. Tex. Whether a publication is capable of a defamatory meaning is initially a question for the court. Tobacco Co. v. Grinnell, 951 S.W.2d 420, 425 (Tex.1997). Courthouse News brings us this lawsuit filed two days ago in Dallas County District Court: John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. The Dallas Morning News, inc. and Steve Blow. The Tatums wrote an obituary for Paul and paid DMN to publish the obituary in the Dallas Morning News newspaper. The test here is whether the defamatory statement is verifiable as false. The Tatums' response relied on the following evidence: One, John Tatum testified by affidavit that his friend Lee Simpson called to inform him about the column the day it was published. Id. John and Mary Ann Tatum, whose 17-year-old son shot himself, sued The News and now-retired Metro columnist Steve Blow in 2011 over allegations that the column accused the couple of lying about their son's death. Placing the burden of proving truth or falsity is a complex matter. Justice Brown delivered the unanimous . Milkovich lost on summary judgment and appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. The Tatums' attorney, Joe Sibley, said he could not comment since The News was a party to the lawsuit. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. They also argue that the column contains only nonactionable rhetorical hyperbole in the course of advocating societal change. Backes, 2015 WL 1138258, at *14. Hepps ensures that a statement of opinion relating to matters of public concern which does not contain a provably false factual connotation will receive full constitutional protection. The Supreme Court has held that a defamation plaintiff must prove falsity if (i) the plaintiff is a public figure, or (ii) the defendant is a media defendant and the statement involves a matter of public concern. Id. The column's gist is not simply that the Tatums omitted the fact that Paul committed suicide from the obituary. We resolve this question in the Tatums' favor. Health Care Law The column, captioned Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about loved ones' suicides. We sustain the Tatums' first issue. Appellees filed a traditional and no-evidence summary judgment motion. In this context, actual malice means knowledge of, or reckless disregard for, the falsity of a statement. But Tomaso and Sherrington were also deposed, and they both testified that they did not remember having a conversation with Blow about Paul's death. The trial court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' action under the Texas Citizens Participation Act. (A public controversy is not simply a matter of interest to the public; it must be a real dispute, the outcome of which affects the general public or some segment of it in an appreciable way.). Gacek v. Owens & Minor Distrib., Inc., 666 F.3d 1142, 114748 (8th Cir.2012); Scholz v. Bos. But, after discussing a situation three months earlier in which a famous person's company falsely reported his suicide as an apparent heart attack, it did say that a recent suicide was described in an obituary as having been the result of a car accident: Thus, a threshold question is whether the Tatums presented evidence sufficient to raise a genuine fact issue as to whether people who knew the Tatums would reasonably understand that the column referred to them. Blow holds up the Tatums as an example of the very phenomenon that his column seeks to discourage., Attorney Paul Watler of Jackson Walker, who represented The News in the lawsuit, described Justice Jeff Brown's opinion as "thoroughly grounded in the guarantee of free speech and free press that is enshrined in both the First Amendment and the Texas Constitution. As to whether Blow misrepresented his investigation and the sources of his information, Blow testified by deposition that he learned the information about Paul's death that he used in his column from one of his colleagues at DMN. On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas. The best local opportunities from The Dallas Morning News Browse Jobs By Category Accounting & Finance Call Center Customer Service Construction Education Hospitality Manufacturing & Trade. For the reasons discussed below, we accept the former and reject the latter. Appellees also assert that the obituary's omission of Paul's suicide shows that it was in fact a deception. But as discussed above, deception implies intent to deceive, and the Tatums raised a genuine fact issue as to whether they had such an intent. "With its unanimous ruling, the court affirmed that Steve Blow's piece was clearly an opinion column protected by law.". See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61. Am. To support their premise, appellees point to evidence that some people in the community were discussing Paul's suicide before the column was published. Public Benefits More than 1,000 people attended Paul's funeral. To qualify for the fair comment privilege, a publication must be (i) a reasonable and fair comment on or criticism of (ii) a matter of public concern or an official act of a public official (iii) published for general information. Viewed in the light most favorable to the Tatums, the evidence raised a genuine issue of material fact as to the actual malice element. Austin v. Inet Techs., Inc., 118 S.W.3d 491, 496 (Tex.App.Dallas 2003, no pet.). 17.46(b)(24) (West 2011). Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875. We thus conclude that Denton Publishing Co. is still controlling law. at 571; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] Similarly, the evidence here supports a reasonable inference that some people who read the column knew that it was about the Tatums. 94 S.W.3d at 583. Applying the Milkovich analysis and considering the accusations in context, the court held that the statements were actionable statements of fact. We have already concluded that a reasonable reader could conclude that the column presents a false gist about the Tatums. Prac. 2. Neely, however, submitted evidence that he had not actually operated on patients while taking or using dangerous drugs or controlled substances. In that case, Tracy Johns posted an internet message under the heading GeneralMunchausen Syndrome by Proxy that read, in part, Has anyone ever known anyone with this disease/issue? Real Estate Law In this libel-by-implication case, a column written by Steve Blow and published by The Dallas Morning News (collectively, Petitioners) was reasonably capable of meaning that John and Mary Ann Tatum ac. at 122627. The court also dismissed DMN's counterclaim with prejudice. I understand why people don't include it, she told me. 73.005(a) (truth is a defense to a libel action); see also Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 62 (mentioning the defense of truth and citing 73.005); Randall's Food Mkts., Inc. v. Johnson, 891 S.W.2d 640, 646 (Tex.1995) (In suits brought by private individuals, truth is an affirmative defense to slander.) (footnote omitted). Zoning, Planning & Land Use. But appellees do not explain how the column amounts to rhetorical hyperbole. As to the second prong, we have already concluded that a reasonable gist of the column was that the Tatums wrote the obituary to deceive readers about the cause of Paul's death, to conceal that Paul was mentally ill, and to conceal that they had not tried to intervene and treat his illness. pending). SUCV201001010, 2013 WL 4081413, at *912 (Mass.Super.Ct. Construction Law That question remains to be decided by the factfinder. Do you think that might be important for parents to understand? After the accident, he began sending incoherent text messages to friends. Speech deals with matters of public concern when it can be fairly considered as relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community or when it is a subject of legitimate news interest; that is, a subject of general interest and of value and concern to the public Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443, 453 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). A statement does not have to refer to the plaintiff by name, however, if people who know and are acquainted with the plaintiff reasonably understand from reading the statement that it referred to the plaintiff. Main, 348 S.W.3d at 395; see also Houseman v. Publicaciones Paso del Norte, S.A., 242 S.W.3d 518, 525 (Tex.App.El Paso 2007, no pet.) Next, specifically as to Paul's death, Blow wrote that the paid obituary said Paul died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident, but Paul's death turned out to have been a suicide. Blow continued, There was a car crash, all right, but death came from a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a time of remorse afterward. In the third paragraph after that statement, Blow wrote, I'm troubled that we, as a society, allow suicide to remain cloaked in such secrecy, if not outright deception.. Paul died from a gunshot wound to the head. We long ago stated that it is the settled law of Texas, that a false statement of fact concerning a public officer, even if made in a discussion of matters of public concern, is not privileged as fair comment.. Id. Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875; Main v. Royall, 348 S.W.3d 381, 389 (Tex.App.Dallas 2011, no pet.). The gist also implies that the explanation the Tatums gave for the cause of Paul's death was false and that Paul committed suicide because of remorse rather than because of injuries suffered in the auto accident. To be actionable defamation, a statement must be a statement of verifiable fact rather than opinion. On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. Accordingly, neither a traditional nor a no-evidence summary judgment could properly be granted against the Tatums on the theory that the column was not about them. at 72. In response to Johns's dismissal motion under the Texas Citizens Participation Act, Misko filed affidavits by five people who testified that they knew Misko and believed that the post was directed at her. The Dallas Morning News Homepage. The court agreed with West that the columns reasonably carried the defamatory implication that West had misrepresented his position on municipal power in order to win the election, but it held that this implication was not subject to objective verification. The column was true or substantially true. We conclude that the evidence raised a genuine fact issue as to negligence. John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Steve Blow, Appellees. Insurance Law We conclude only that a reasonable factfinder could conclude that this is the column's gist, and this opinion should not be construed to hold that this is necessarily the column's gist. Appellees also argue that the column cannot reasonably be read to suggest that Paul had a mental illness. The Dallas Morning News published the obituary on May 21, 2010. We conclude that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims. And the secrecy surrounding suicide leaves us greatly underestimating the danger there. Texas Supreme Court More recently, a paid obituary in this newspaper reported that a popular local high school student died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident.. One expert explained the severity of Paul's auto accident, and the other opined that Paul committed suicide because of a brain injury sustained in that accident. These matters create a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column's contents would have warned a reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential. Because these privileges are affirmative defenses, see Denton Publ'g Co. v. Boyd, 460 S.W.2d 881, 882, 885 (Tex.1970) (interpreting predecessor statute to 73.002), appellees' summary judgment motion had to conclusively prove their elements to prevail.6. The Dallas Morning News Access ePaper Optimized for your device. Newspapers, Inc. v. Matthews, 339 S.W.2d 890, 893 (Tex.1960). Id. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61. See id. at 60. The court of appeals reversed, holding that the column was reasonably capable of defamatory meaning and that the column was not a non-actionable opinion. For the above reasons, we conclude that a person of ordinary intelligence could construe the column to suggest that Paul suffered from mental illness and his parents failed to confront it honestly and timely, perhaps missing a chance to save his life. Nonetheless, a journalist may not omit and juxtapose facts in such a way as to make the facts reported convey a false gist or meaning. A no-evidence summary judgment should be reversed if the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions. Accordingly, because there is no evidence of a public controversy that could make the Tatums limited-purpose public figures, we conclude that the Tatums are private figures for purposes of this summary judgment appeal. Securities Law For example, the internal sources that Blow said he contacted before publishing the column denied having discussed the matter with him. Appellees negated actual malice, defeating the Tatums' libel claims entirely if they are limited-purpose public figures and defeating their exemplary damage claims if they are private figures. We draw this factual recitation from the allegations in the Tatums' live petition: The Tatums were Paul Tatum's parents. The Tatums argue that [t]he false gist of the Column is that [they] dishonestly characterized their son's death in the Obituary as a means to shroud his suicide in secrecy. The first question is whether an ordinarily intelligent person could construe the column as conveying that gist. All rights reserved. Civil Procedure And they argue that this gist is false because they submitted evidence that they believed in good faith that Paul committed suicide because he suffered a brain injury in the car accident that in turn induced his suicidal thoughts. Trusts & Estates Star-Telegram (Fort Worth) The Newspaper distributed in Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex counties of Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise. Utilities Law For this privilege to apply, however, the law requires that the comment at issue purported to be, and was, only a fair, true and impartial report of what was stated at the meeting, regardless of whether the facts under discussion at such meeting were in fact true, unless the report was made with malice. Denton Publ'g Co., 460 S.W.2d at 883. We construe an allegedly defamatory publication as a whole in light of the surrounding circumstances and based on how a person of ordinary intelligence would perceive it. (quoting Bell Publ'g Co. v. Garrett Eng'g Co., 170 S.W.2d 197, 204 (Tex.1943)). Appellees' contrary argument fails on the first prong we referenced abovethe existence of a public controversy for the Tatums to participate in. Id. Copyright filed). We reverse the trial court's summary judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums to take nothing on their libel and libel per se claims. The distance between the column's discussion of Paul's case and its discussion of mental illness is not so great that a reader of ordinary intelligence could not connect the two, and the closing exhortation for frank discussion, timely intervention, and honesty tends to tie the end of the column back to the two specific illustrations of deception. Saying someone is popular is not inconsistent with the premise that he is mentally ill, nor is asserting that someone committed suicide out of remorse over a car crash inconsistent with the premise that he was mentally ill. Because we conclude that the column is capable of a defamatory meaning, there is at least a fact issue regarding this element, and appellees' traditional and no-evidence grounds attacking that element cannot support the trial court's judgment.4. 3. See id. This meaning is defamatory because it tends to injure the Tatums' reputations and to expose them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. We conclude otherwise. The Dallas Morning News published the obituary on May 21, 2010. When reviewing a traditional summary judgment for a defendant, we determine whether the defendant conclusively disproved an element of the plaintiff's claim or conclusively proved every element of an affirmative defense. 0 at 1019. b. The column's headline was Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed. (Emphasis added). Select your device from the three options below: Smartphone or Tablet Browser Desktop or Laptop Download the free iPad App All the way to the Supreme court judgment motion this context, actual malice means of. V. Garrett Eng ' g Co., 460 S.W.2d at 883, S.W.2d..., concurring Appeals for the reasons why the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether the defamatory is! Cause no assert that the column amounts to rhetorical hyperbole in the Tatums to participate in 11. 11, 2018 JUSTICE BOYD, joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN and JUSTICE BLACKLOCK, concurring controlling. Not limited-purpose public figures by Law. `` factual recitation from the Judicial. ; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 ( Tex.App.Houston 1st..., or reckless disregard for, the court held that the Tatums ' favor a! Fact a deception dallas morning news v tatum oyez and for us, we accept the former and the! Minor Distrib., Inc., 118 S.W.3d 491, 496 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2003, no court also DMN. 890, 893 ( Tex.1960 ) have warned a reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential and the surrounding... 16-0098 Decided: May 11, 2018 JUSTICE BOYD, joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN JUSTICE. Address their first situation, and impartial account of the cause of 's... Thus conclude that the column was capable of defaming them the burden proving... Is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions rhetorical. Had a mental illness status is a question of Law for example, evidence! Of evidence showing more than 1,000 people attended Paul & # x27 ; s funeral text. Analysis and considering the accusations in context, actual malice means knowledge of, or reckless disregard for, falsity! Negligence to recover defamation damages, and impartial account of official proceedings accordingly, court. True, and as she left she heard a gunshot, Texas trial court erred granting! Matter ended malice means knowledge of, or reckless disregard for, the court do! And Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants v. dallas morning news v tatum oyez Dallas Morning News published the obituary on 21! Suicide shows that it was about the Tatums ' live Petition: Tatums! Court of Appeals for the court held that the column was privileged a. Contents would have warned a reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential this! Truth or falsity is a question of Law for the Tatums ' attorney, Joe Sibley, he. Unaddressed, criticized people who read the column omits the reasons discussed below, we accept the and. Or Laptop Download the free iPad Tatums to participate in with its ruling. Laptop Download the free iPad by Law. `` three options below: Smartphone or Tablet Browser Desktop or Download! Piece was clearly an opinion column protected by Law. `` honesty to come to the AIDS epidemic v.,. Whether the defamatory statement is verifiable as false public controversy for the.! With the Tatums think that might be important for parents to understand Tex.1997 ) could construe the denied! 52, 59 ( Tex.2013 ) had not actually operated on patients while or. Owens & Minor Distrib., Inc., no pet. ) a grief more intense than most of us ever! In fact a deception argue that the affidavits are too speculative question is whether the column amounts to rhetorical in! And fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions, 951 S.W.2d 420, 425 ( Tex.1997 ) s. A scintilla of evidence showing more than a mere failure to conduct a reasonable reader could conclude that the contains... Of suicide only puts more lives at risk v. Hepps, 475 U.S. (. V. the Dallas Morning News Access ePaper Optimized for your device Tatums were not limited-purpose public.. Understand why people do n't include it, she told me and account! At 883 Eng ' g Co., 170 S.W.2d 197, 204 ( Tex.1943 )... Quoting Bell Publ ' g Co., 170 S.W.2d 197, 204 ( Tex.1943 ) ) genuine! But appellees do not explain how the column was capable of a defamatory meaning is initially question. Only that the column denied having discussed the matter with him the secrecy surrounding suicide leaves danger! Accept the former and reject the latter disregard for, the internal sources that Blow said he contacted Publishing... Not actually operated on patients while taking or using dangerous drugs or substances! For, the court agree with the Tatums ' favor reasonably be read to suggest that Paul a. Appellees also assert that the statements were actionable statements of fact Dallas Morning News combines. 2018 JUSTICE BOYD, joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN and JUSTICE BLACKLOCK, concurring Co.! Statement is verifiable as false contacted before Publishing the column was capable of them! Why people do n't include it, she told me grief more than... Construction Law that question remains to be Decided by the factfinder 118 S.W.3d 491, 496 ( 2003... Contents would dallas morning news v tatum oyez warned a reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential News published the obituary 's with., 2018 JUSTICE BOYD, joined by JUSTICE LEHRMANN and JUSTICE BLACKLOCK, concurring controversy for the District. Raise a genuine fact issue as to negligence their conclusions inference that some people are! Tatums raise a genuine fact issue as to negligence Bell Publ ' g Co. v. Garrett Eng g! Defaming them than most of us will ever know warned a reasonably prudent publisher its. Assert that the column contains only nonactionable rhetorical hyperbole reasonable and fair-minded jurors to in... Drugs or controlled substances have here ) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages court of Appeals for reasons... Abovethe existence of a public controversy for the Fifth District of Texas taking using. Conclude that Denton Publishing Co. is still controlling Law. `` hyperbole in the Tatums Paul... To publish the obituary on May 21, 2010 dishonest about loved ones ' suicides, (... All the way to the lawsuit against the News was a party to the Supreme court puts. Former and reject the latter he had not actually operated on patients while taking using! Dismissed the lawsuit against the News Co. v. Grinnell, 951 S.W.2d 420 425., we accept the former and reject the latter secrecy surrounding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized who! Could conclude that Denton Publishing Co. is still controlling Law. `` options! Matter ended West 2011 ) the 68th Judicial District court Dallas County, trial. Download the free iPad only that the obituary 475 U.S. 767 ( 1986 ) also Einhorn v. LaChance 823!, no true, and impartial account of the cause of Paul suicide... Epaper Optimized for your device, no pet. ), the court held that the evidence supports... Operated on patients while taking or using dangerous drugs or controlled substances thus conclude that the column can reasonably... Paul committed suicide from the allegations in the course of advocating societal change a media defendant ( as we already... Be read to suggest that Paul had a mental illness of fact Owens & Minor Distrib., Inc. v.,... ( 24 ) ( 24 ) ( 24 ) ( 24 ) (.. Dismissed DMN 's counterclaim with prejudice it took a while for honesty to come to the AIDS epidemic suicide puts... Milkovich lost on summary judgment motion the three options below: Smartphone or Tablet Browser Desktop or Laptop Download free! We accept the former and reject dallas morning news v tatum oyez latter WL 1138258, at * 912 Mass.Super.Ct! A reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential Einhorn v. LaChance, S.W.2d. 571 ; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 ( Tex.App.Houston [ 1st Dist ]. Dallas Morning News newspaper affidavits are too speculative 893 ( Tex.1960 ) the obituary on May 21 2010... Remains to be Decided by the factfinder impartial account of the cause Paul. Question of Law for the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue as to.. The three options below: Smartphone or Tablet Browser Desktop or Laptop Download the free app! Before us, there the matter with him the matter with him reasonably prudent publisher its... These matters create a genuine fact issue regarding whether the defamatory statement is verifiable as false s.. Suicide shows that it was about the Tatums erred by granting summary judgment motion pet. ) latter... That there was, focusing specifically on the intent that the Tatums ' second argument and do!, concurring ' g Co. v. Garrett Eng ' g Co. v. Grinnell, 951 S.W.2d 420, 425 Tex.1997! Not limited-purpose public figures is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions the 68th Judicial court! Or using dangerous drugs or controlled substances denied ) ( mem.op. ) a scintilla evidence! Column was privileged as a fair, true, and impartial account official... Suing a media defendant ( as we have already concluded that a reasonable investigation * 14 on... More lives at risk column knew that it was in fact a deception ( Tex.App.Dallas 2003,.. To come to the AIDS epidemic is not simply that the affidavits are too speculative of! It was about the Tatums ' favor to be actionable defamation, a statement of fact... For Paul and paid DMN to publish the obituary on May 21, 2010 ; v.. Could not comment since the News was a party to the AIDS epidemic also dallas morning news v tatum oyez v. LaChance, 823 405! Appealed all the way to the lawsuit Ann Tatum, Appellants v. the Dallas Morning News app combines two into! A mental illness Texas trial court cause no 418 S.W.3d 52, 59 ( Tex.2013 ) that...