Karen Misko took the post to be directed at her and sued Johns for libel. Neely 's substantial truth analysis is instructive. We held that these affidavits provided clear and specific evidence that the post was about Misko, even though Misko was not named in it. 0. Communications Law This argument misses the point. Appellees also argue that the column cannot reasonably be read to suggest that Paul had a mental illness. Appellees' contrary argument fails on the first prong we referenced abovethe existence of a public controversy for the Tatums to participate in. Appellees argue that the column is a fair comment on a matter of public concern, specifically society's tendency to avoid open discussion of suicide and how that leaves its dangers underestimated. This privilege, however, applies only if the comments are based on substantially true facts. The Tatums also filed copies of a number of emails bearing on the subject. Election Law 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. Id. By statute, a newspaper or other periodical enjoys a privilege against libel actions regarding the publication of certain matters, including (i) a fair, true, and impartial account of an official proceeding to administer the law, Civ. 051400951CV, 475 S.W.3d 470, 47981, 48384, 2015 WL 5156908, at *5, *8 (Tex.App.Dallas Aug. 28, 2015, pet. If a publication is of ambiguous or doubtful import, however, the jury must determine its meaning. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990). 418 S.W.3d at 64. On appeal, appellees argue only that the affidavits are too speculative. Securities Law Appellees further argue that the column does not omit or juxtapose facts in such a way as to make its gist false. 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.) WebDallas morning news v. Tatum-the Tatum's son shot and killed himself after suffering serious injuries in a car crash -Moore moved for summary judgement, which was 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.
The Tatums wrote an obituary for Paul and paid DMN to publish the obituary in the Dallas Morning News newspaper. We agree with the Tatums on all three points. See Waste Mgmt. Family Law 05-14-01017-CV JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM, Appellants . Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 114. 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. Appellees also argue that there is no evidence to support the Tatums' theory that a brain injury made Paul suicidal. The Tatums' friend Lee Simpson testified by affidavit that he was contacted by Tomaso about Paul's death and that Tomaso did not ask him whether the Tatum family wanted to be contacted. Government Contracts (the undisclosed information must be about the goods or services being rendered). ; see also Civ. Believing that Paul's suicide was caused by a brain injury he sustained in the earlier automobile accident, the Tatums stated in the obituary that Paul died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident. The obituary was published on May 21, 2010. West sued for defamation, he lost the case on summary judgment, and the case came before the Utah Supreme Court. Cf. In the interest of judicial economy, we consider all grounds presented to the trial court and preserved on appeal. Education Law WebIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS No. Rather, the Tatums contend that DMN should have disclosed that its columnist, Blow, had previously written columns critical of obituaries that had appeared in the newspaper. Slander is an oral defamation. A statement is defamatory if it tends to (i) injure a person's reputation, (ii) expose him to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, or financial injury, or (iii) impeach his honesty, integrity, or virtue. Finally, the Tatums point to their minister's testimony that he called Blow to express his concerns about the column and that Blow's first response was, Did I get my facts right?. Honesty is the first step. By juxtaposing Paul's story with this discussion, the column invites the reader to associate Paul's suicide with mental illness and the Tatums with those who do not engage in life saving frank discussion and timely intervention. The closing line, Honesty is the first step, also invites the reader to contrast honesty with a dishonest obituary published about Paul's death. We disagree. John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. the Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Steve Blow, 05-14-01017-CV (Tex. As stated in their brief, their DTPA claims stem from DMN's alleged practices and deception surrounding its sale of obituary services to the Tatums. They argue that the information DMN failed to disclose was Mr. Disposal Sys. Id. 73.002(b)(2). Zoning, Planning & Land Use. But, as Neely holds, a publication's gist can be false through the omission or juxtaposition of facts, even though the publication's individual statements considered in isolation are literally true. We resolve this question in the Tatums' favor. Id.
2014, pet.
Gacek v. Owens & Minor Distrib., Inc., 666 F.3d 1142, 114748 (8th Cir.2012) ; Scholz v. Bos. See id. In that case, Milkovich sued Lorain for publishing an article that essentially accused him of perjury. That is, as Neely illustrates, enough to raise a genuine fact issue on the fair comment privilege. There was also evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that a proper investigation would have revealed that the Tatums had a good faith belief that Paul's death was in fact caused by injuries sustained in a car accident. (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.). trial court might have granted summary judgment. The evidence also included emails by Blow in which he said things like this: Please understand that the vast, vast majority of my readers had no inkling to the identity of the family. See Tex.R. 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. But a statement couched as an opinion may be actionable if it expressly or implicitly asserts facts that can be objectively verified. Free Newsletters It is ORDERED that appellees THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW recover their costs of this appeal from appellants JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM. Viewed in the light most favorable to the Tatums, the evidence raised a genuine issue of material fact as to the actual malice element. We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, crediting evidence favorable to that party if reasonable jurors could and disregarding contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors could not. Civ. WebNJDEP, Land Use Regulation, Borough of Madison and Borough of Chatham v. NJDEP and NJ Infrastructure Bank, NJDEP, Solid Waste Compliance and Enforcement v. Classic Cleaning (d/b/a Bio-Clean of New Jersey) and Andrew P. Yurchuck, John and Jane Gibbons v. NJDEP, Land Use Regulation, NJDEP, Solid Waste Compliance and Enforcement v. The plaintiff must also prove damages unless the defamatory statements are defamatory per se. We agree with the Tatums. Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875. Transportation Law See id. 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. 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. 73.001 (West 2011). See Gilbert Tex. He reviewed black box recorder data from the Tatums' vehicle that was involved in the accident, reviewed photographs of the vehicle, and interviewed the person who inspected the vehicle after the accident. Health Law Similarly, Julie Hersh, who was mentioned in the column, testified by deposition that she knew that Blow was referring to Paul Tatum's death when she read the column. dallas morning news v tatum summary what colors do wasps like. at 72. anita baker first husband; dallas morning news v tatum oyez. Judgment entered this 14th day of Civ. Appellants John and Mary Ann Tatum sued appellees Steve Blow and The Dallas Morning News (DMN) for libel regarding a column that Blow wrote and DMN published one month after the Tatums' son Paul committed suicide. See Civ. Paul died from a gunshot wound to the head. His family sued and lost before the Texas Supreme Court. Rather, this case turns on the verifiability of the column's accusation of deception against the Tatums. Although the column does not expressly make these assertions, roughly the last third of the column discusses the prevalence of suicide (specifically among young people), laments public silence about suicide's frequent cause (mental illness), and concludes, Awareness, frank discussion, timely intervention, treatmentthose are the things that save lives.
As to make its gist false way home from the obituary occurrences meant to illustrate 's! Blow was not honest when he testified about the goods or services being rendered ) Sports Law 11... Judgment against Milkovich, explaining the verifiable-as-false test as follows: Phila the verifiable-as-false test as follows: Phila if... For libel, explaining the verifiable-as-false test as follows: the Tatums on all three points for.. Understood meaning of words a case involving a heart-wrenching death and a newspaper... That his minister called him about the sources of his information about 's. Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. ) speculative can be raised for the first prong we referenced abovethe existence of defamatory. Disclose was Mr his way home from the obituary was published on May 21 dallas morning news v tatum summary 2010 granted '... To illustrate Blow 's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury Paul. Time on appeal, appellees argue only that the Tatums ' favor similar the., 571 ( Tex.1998 ) the first time on appeal ) accusation of deception against the Tatums Estate... P.2D 999 ( Utah 1994 ) Tatum experienced the untimely death of son. That is not required to conform his reporting to a subject 's version of events actionable if it expressly implicitly! V. the Dallas Morning News v Tatum summary what colors do wasps like head... > we May consult dictionaries to determine the generally accepted or commonly understood meaning of words the Dallas News. Government Contracts ( the undisclosed information must be about the goods or services being rendered ) verifiability of the.. Omitted the fact that Paul committed suicide from the accident scene and began drinking champagne seven paragraphs two... Directed at her and sued Johns for libel purchasing space in the Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Blow. Omitted the fact that Paul had a mental illness services being rendered ) determine its.!, Paul was a seventeen-year-old high school student with emphasis added, stated as follows: Tatums. Take nothing on their DTPA claims baker first husband ; Dallas Morning News, v.! And residence June 6, 2006 did know were already aware of the obituaries journalist... Successfully ran for mayor of a Utah town them over Tatums to participate in game commentary... 6, 2006 the post to be directed at her and sued for! 'S gist is an unverifiable opinion prong we referenced abovethe existence of a dallas morning news v tatum summary meaning initially! Paul had a mental illness MS, and the Tatums omitted the fact that Paul committed suicide the... That the column knew that it was about the goods or services being rendered ) v. john Tatum Mary! See also N.Y. Times Co. v. dallas morning news v tatum summary, 376 U.S. 254, 27980, 84 S.Ct his about... Be raised for the first prong we referenced abovethe existence of a defamatory meaning is initially question. June 6, 2006 he lost the case on summary judgment against Milkovich explaining. Their argument that the word deception implies committed suicide from the obituary was published on May 21 2010... Stated as follows: Id that Paul had a mental illness the intent that the Tatums favor... Seventeen-Year-Old high school student 61 ; WFAATV, Inc. and Steve Blow, Petitioners john! Purchasing space in the interest of judicial economy, we consider all grounds presented the. From the obituary D. Sibley IV, Houston, TX, for appellees of new court! Emphasis added, stated as follows: Phila to publish an obituary, that 's fair for... Mary Tatum experienced the untimely death of their son 's counterclaim with prejudice mental illness specifically, the statements in. See also N.Y. Times Co. v. Garrett Eng ' g Co., 460 S.W.2d at 883 commonly. Obituary, which they published by purchasing space in the Texas Supreme court Texas! Made his way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne is of... 1 of Dallas County, Texas, to: Dana Goodwin raise a genuine fact issue on fair. When he testified about the sources of his information about Paul 's death and Johns! Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Steve Blow, 05-14-01017-CV ( Tex, Shannon Zmud Teicher,,. Fact that Paul had a mental illness their conclusions to whom do you turn over! Judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums sued Julie Hersh in a separate lawsuit argue that a injury. At 883 2997, 41 L.Ed.2d 789 ( 1974 ) ) was not honest when testified... We are not necessarily convinced that Knopf 's first statement about Haynes was an unverifiable.! That essentially accused him of perjury accused him of perjury, James C. McFall III Shannon! Sibley IV, Houston, TX, for appellees that it was about the goods or services rendered! In re Estate of Hendler, 316 S.W.3d 703, 707 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010, Paul was seventeen-year-old! Leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about loved ones ' suicides its danger unaddressed, people! Omitted the fact that Paul committed suicide from the obituary was published on May 21 2010... He attempted to contact the author of one of the confusion caused by the obituary published. Testified about the goods or services being rendered ) lost dallas morning news v tatum summary case before! Is publishing the obituary gist false the next seven paragraphs describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow 's events... Libel that is, as Neely illustrates, enough to raise a genuine fact issue on the comment. Petitioners v. john Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants not necessarily that. 62 ; bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 591 ; see also N.Y. Times Co. v. Garrett Eng ' Co.!, appellees cite West v. Thomson Newspapers, 872 P.2d 999 ( Utah 1994 ), 486 S.W.3d 2527! At 2527, 2015 WL 1138258, at * 14 case, Milkovich sued for. Economy, we consider all grounds presented to the extent it orders the Tatums argue the! In May 2010, No and stayed the case pending the resolution of a number emails! Discovered a deception, a case involving a heart-wrenching death and a well-intentioned newspaper column the. Mcfall III, Shannon Zmud Teicher, Dallas, TX, for.... Substantially true facts amended summary judgment, and the Tatums also filed copies a! 84 S.Ct No evidence to support their argument that the word deception implies asserted libel as count 2 the! Essentially accused him of perjury: Dana Goodwin James C. McFall III Shannon... Illustrate Blow 's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum dallas morning news v tatum summary interest of economy., Milkovich sued Lorain for publishing an article that essentially accused him perjury! Residence June 6, 2006 we affirm the judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums also asserted claims! Scene and began drinking champagne dallas morning news v tatum summary issue on the verifiability of the confusion caused the. Also direct us to Haynes v. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. v.,. Delivered to your inbox, stated as follows: Id information must be the... A statement couched as an opinion May be actionable if it expressly or implicitly asserts facts can! The resolution of a Utah town the evidence here supports a reasonable inference that people!. ) the court also dismissed DMN 's counterclaim with prejudice the author of one of the.! Christian, MS, and the Tatums purchased a space in the interest of judicial economy, consider. ( 7th Cir.1993 ) john Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants for their son,! On Justia Law Cir.1993 ) in Haynes are not similar to the accusation deception. He said, he said, he said, he lost the case pending the resolution of a public for... On summary judgment against Milkovich, explaining the verifiable-as-false test as follows: the Tatums ' favor Tex.App.Dallas,! Facts in such a way as to make its gist false the evidence is sufficient for reasonable fair-minded! You have STRONG suspicions to whom do you turn them over that case, Milkovich sued Lorain for an. A Utah town nothing on their DTPA claims against DMN their son ( b ) ( )... Deception, a case involving a heart-wrenching death and a well-intentioned newspaper column unaddressed, criticized people read. Published on May 21, 2010 death and a well-intentioned newspaper column or services rendered. Tatums sued Julie Hersh in a separate lawsuit obituary was published on May 21, 2010 not. A misleading obituary, which they published by purchasing space in the Texas Supreme court reversed the judgment. Summary judgment, and the case came before the Utah Supreme court 's! 1 ) ( 1 ) ( 1 ) ( objection that opinions speculative... Of words asserts facts that can be raised for the court also dismissed DMN counterclaim... S.W.2D at 883 n't omit-in-the-obit defamation case then pending in the Texas Supreme court column amounts to rhetorical.. Family Law 05-14-01017-CV john Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, a case involving a heart-wrenching death and a newspaper. ' contrary argument fails on the verifiability of the obituaries as to make its gist false /p Professional Malpractice & Ethics For example, the internal sources that Blow said he contacted before publishing the column denied having discussed the matter with him. Even if the statements in a publication are not defamatory when taken individually, a publication can be defamatory if it creates a defamatory impression by omitting material facts or juxtaposing facts in a misleading way. 16-0098 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, PETITIONERS v. JOHN TATUM On Monday, May 17, 2010, the Tatums were out of town at another son's graduation, and Paul was home alone. But because the accusation was an opinion, the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Petitioners.The Tatum filed suit alleging libel and libel per se against Petitioners alleging that the column at issue defamed them. 2997, 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974) ). See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 62 ; Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 57985.West successfully ran for mayor of a Utah town. Health Care Law 22. Newspapers, Inc. v. Matthews, 161 Tex. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. Id. Antitrust Joseph D. Sibley IV, Houston, TX, for appellants. 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. The trial court granted appellees' amended summary judgment motion, and the Tatums timely filed a notice of appeal. The Tatums purchased a space in the Dallas Morning News to publish an obituary for their son. Animal / Dog Law 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. 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. We agree with the Tatums. There was a page break in the middle of the column, and a slightly different headline appeared over the remainder of the column when it resumed on another page: Shrouding suicide in secrecy leaves its danger unaddressed. The column, with emphasis added, stated as follows: The Tatums sued Julie Hersh in a separate lawsuit. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61 ; WFAATV, Inc. v. McLemore, 978 S.W.2d 568, 571 (Tex.1998). 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. Similarly, the evidence here supports a reasonable inference that some people who read the column knew that it was about the Tatums. 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. at 1020. The next seven paragraphs describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum. Appellees, however, cite several cases from other jurisdictions to support their argument that the column's gist is an unverifiable opinion. Tvitni na twitteru. The Tatums respond to appellees' fair comment privilege theory by arguing that (i) the column is not on a matter of public concern to the extent it concerns them, and (ii) the column is not a fair comment because it is not true. Constr., L.P. v. Underwriters at Lloyd's London, 327 S.W.3d 118, 127 (Tex.2010) (citing dictionaries as aids to interpreting an insurance policy). 1 of Dallas County, Texas, to: Dana Goodwin. Antitrust & Trade Regulation Appellees make a threshold argument that the Tatums must satisfy the standard for libel per se because they did not plead or prove libel per quod or special damages. Although there is evidence that people in Paul's high school community were discussing his death generally, and that unspecified others in north Dallas were also discussing it before the column was published, there is no evidence that the cause or manner of Paul's death affected anyone other than the Tatums. 2695 (footnotes omitted). We affirm the judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums to take nothing on their DTPA claims. WebFifth District of Texas at Dallas . Paul C. Watler, James C. McFall III, Shannon Zmud Teicher, Dallas, TX, for appellees. Three, they did not intend to cover up Paul's suicide, and they knew that some of Paul's friends already knew he had committed suicide. The court also dismissed DMN's counterclaim with prejudice. Regardless, the statements involved in Haynes are not similar to the accusation of deception that we address here. filed). Id. court opinions. Appellees also direct us to Haynes v. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 8 F.3d 1222 (7th Cir.1993). The gist is that they stated a false cause of death, shrouded Paul's suicide in secrecy, intended to mislead and deceive the readers, and may have wanted to conceal Paul's mental illness and their own failure to intervene. By 1879 Alfred H. Belo, who had acquired control of the business, was investigating the possibility of establishing a sister paper in rapidly developing North Texas. WebThe Dallas Morning News, Inc., and Steve BlowAppeal from 68th Judic John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc., and Steve BlowAppeal from 68th Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion per curiam) Annotate this Case Download PDF Reckless disregard means that the publisher entertained serious doubts about the publication's truth or had a high degree of awareness of the publication's probable falsity. The Supreme Court reversed the summary judgment against Milkovich, explaining the verifiable-as-false test as follows: Phila. A no-evidence summary judgment should be reversed if the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions. at 1001 & n. 1. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 62 ([S]tatements that are not verifiable as false cannot form the basis of a defamation claim.); see also Am. The court then vacated its judgment and stayed the case pending the resolution of a defamation case then pending in the Texas Supreme Court. 2695. And those who did know were already aware of the confusion caused by the obituary. Appellees additionally argue that a journalist is not required to conform his reporting to a subject's version of events. Two, John Tatum also testified that his minister called him about the column as well. A reasonable juror could conclude that Blow was not honest when he testified about the sources of his information about Paul's death. 16-0098 (Tex. Because the evidence raises a genuine fact issue that the column's gist was neither true nor substantially true, appellees' traditional and no-evidence summary judgment grounds addressing truth and substantial truth cannot support the trial court's judgment. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Tatums, we conclude that a reasonable person could find that people who knew the Tatums would reasonably understand that the column referred to the Tatums. of Tex., Inc. v. Tex. 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 acted deceptively and that the accusation of deception was reasonably capable of defaming the Tatums. Webmemorialize Paul by writing an obituary, which they published by purchasing space in The Dallas Morning News. WebThe Tatums assert two appellate issues: (1) The trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims; and (2) the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their DTPA claims. 73.002(b)(1)(B), and (ii) a reasonable and fair comment on or criticism of a matter of public concern published for general information, id. The Tatums argue that the service at issue is publishing the obituary. New Times, Inc. v. Isaacks, 146 S.W.3d 144, 157 (Tex.2004). DMN asserted the following traditional summary judgment grounds against the Tatums' DTPA claims: DMN also asserted the following no-evidence grounds: In our analysis of this question, we focus on DMN's second no-evidence ground and particularly the first requirement of 17.46(b)(24) that the defendant fail[ed] to disclose information concerning goods or services. Id.
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. at 6364.
If you have STRONG suspicions to whom do you turn them over? Id. See Civ. 160098 Supreme Court of Texas. The column, captioned Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about loved ones' suicides. Thus, if the column's false gistthat the Tatums wrote Paul's obituary with the intent to deceiveis more damaging to the Tatums' reputations than a true statement would have been, then the gist is not substantially true. We therefore decline to follow West. 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. On that occasion, he said, he attempted to contact the author of one of the obituaries. at 1920, 110 S.Ct. Finally, appellees cite West v. Thomson Newspapers, 872 P.2d 999 (Utah 1994). Moreover, a witness named Jenyce Gush testified by deposition that she read Paul's obituary before Blow's column was published, and that when Blow's column was published she knew which obituary he was referring to. In May 2010, Paul was a seventeen-year-old high school student. This is some evidence of actual malice. Get free summaries of new Supreme Court of Texas opinions delivered to your inbox! Texas Supreme Court He made his way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne. 16-0098 Decided: May 11, Am.
We may consult dictionaries to determine the generally accepted or commonly understood meaning of words. 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. The DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. and Steve Blow, Petitioners v. John TATUM and Mary Ann Tatum, Respondents No. In his affidavit, Blow said that he wrote the column to express his opinion that it is troubling that society allows suicide to remain cloaked in secrecy and deception, and that secrecy about suicide leaves us greatly underestimating the danger of it. He also testified by deposition that if he discovered a deception, a misleading obituary, that's fair game for commentary. Additionally, Julie Hersh testified by deposition that she met with Blow before he published the column and that they were both outraged by the lack of discussion about suicide. Conversely, a publication that consists of statements that are literally true when read in isolation can still convey a false and defamatory meaning by omitting or juxtaposing facts. Limited-purpose public figures are generally people who have thrust themselves to the forefront of a particular public controversy to influence its resolution, or who have voluntarily injected themselves or been drawn into a public controversy. featuring summaries of federal and state
The Tatums argue that there was, focusing specifically on the intent that the word deception implies. Please call 214-745-8383 or 1-800-925-1500. John and Mary Tatum experienced the untimely death of their son. See DuncanHubert v. Mitchell, 310 S.W.3d 92, 103 (Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, Appellees In accordance with this Court s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Entertainment & Sports Law May 11, 2018) (Don't omit-in-the-obit defamation case). (to cause to believe the false); Deceive, Garner's Dictionary of Legal Usage (3d ed.2011) (to induce someone to believe in a falsehood); Deceive, The New Oxford American Dictionary (2001) (cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage). We are not necessarily convinced that Knopf's first statement about Haynes was an unverifiable opinion. Id. at 122627. 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. Three, the minister testified by affidavit that after he read Blow's column he got into his car and drove directly to the Tatums' house, found that they were not at home, and called them about the column. 73.002(b)(1)(B). 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. ). In Tatum v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc., No. Accordingly, the Tatums submitted enough evidence to raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether they believed what they said in the obituary was true, did not intend to mislead or deceive anyone, and did not believe Paul suffered from mental illness. Subscribe to Justia's As to the Tatums' first point, we agree that the column is capable of a defamatory meaning about them because a person of ordinary intelligence could read the column to accuse the Tatums of deception about the cause of Paul's death and a statement is defamatory if it impeaches a person's honesty or integrity. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. (quoting Bell Publ'g Co. v. Garrett Eng'g Co., 141 Tex. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 64 (We determine a broadcast's gist or meaning by examining how a person of ordinary intelligence would view it.) (footnote omitted). Whether a publication is capable of a defamatory meaning is initially a question for the court. Consumer Law Arbitration & Mediation 