Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 77576, 106 S.Ct. See id. These matters create a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column's contents would have warned a reasonably prudent publisher of its defamatory potential. 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. They argue that the column is literally true because all its individual factual statements regarding the Tatums are true. The evidence shows that DMN published Paul's obituary, and the Tatums do not allege that the obituary itself did not conform to their order. Communications Law Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 70. Dallas Morning News. Argued DMN counterclaimed for its attorneys' fees under the DTPA. Texas Supreme Court dismisses defamation lawsuit against The Dallas Morning News John and Mary Ann Tatum, whose 17-year-old son shot himself, sued The In this context, actual malice means knowledge of, or reckless disregard for, the falsity of a statement. 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. padres scout team 2025; what did william engesser die of; assassin's creed odyssey entrance to Gaming Law 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. We are not necessarily convinced that Knopf's first statement about Haynes was an unverifiable opinion. The court then vacated its judgment and stayed the case pending the resolution of a defamation case then pending in the Texas Supreme Court. But the Tatums must prove actual malice to recover exemplary damages if the defamatory statement involved a matter of public concern (as opposed to a public controversy) and appellees are media defendants. May 11, 2018) (Don't omit-in-the-obit defamation case). The test here is whether the defamatory statement is verifiable as false. Appellees, however, do not contend that the Tatums are public officials or general-purpose public figures. 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. at 58384. when you walk away from a cancer man, dallas morning news v tatum summary, who are the wellington musicians accused of assault, white horse tavern rhode island, worcester man dies in motorcycle accident, current mlb players with criminal records, eyes blood bones stuck in your THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, PETITIONERS, v. JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM, RESPONDENTS No. at 62 ([S]tatements that are not verifiable as false cannot form the basis of a defamation claim.); see also Bentley v. Bunton, 94 S.W.3d 561, 57985 (Tex.2002) (accusations that a judge was corrupt were sufficiently verifiable to constitute actionable statements of fact). The column describes Paul's obituary and death immediately after it describes the fabricated cause of death that was advanced after Ted Pillsbury's suicide. Trusts & Estates We construe an allegedly defamatory publication as a whole, in light of the surrounding circumstances, based on how a person of ordinary intelligence would perceive it. Although the Tatums' mental states when they wrote the obituary may not be susceptible of direct proof, we conclude that they are sufficiently verifiable through circumstantial evidence, such as the investigation into the possible causes for Paul's suicide that the Tatums undertook, to make the column's defamatory gist about them verifiable under Milkovich and Neely. In adopting the verifiable as false test in Bentley and Neely, the Texas Supreme Court relied on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1, 110 S.Ct. As the Tatums urge, the service they bought was Paul's obituary. We next consider appellees' summary judgment ground that the column contains only nonactionable opinions. In re Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 596. More specifically, the column's first four paragraphs state Blow's opinion that people generally consider a death by suicide worthy of deception and mention honesty and being open about other causes of death. Accordingly, Gacek and Scholz are not on point. 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. Energy, Oil & Gas Law We next ask whether there was evidence that the column's gist was false. One month later, on Father's Day, June 20, 2010, DMN published a column written by Blow.

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. WebDallas Morning News, Inc. v. Tatum (Unanimous) Annotate this Case. Anderton v. Cawley, 378 S.W.3d 38, 46 (Tex.App.Dallas 2012, no pet.). (the undisclosed information must be about the goods or services being rendered). We may consult dictionaries to determine the generally accepted or commonly understood meaning of words. We agree with the Tatums' second argument and thus do not address their first. Justia Opinion Summary. We resolved that case, however, without deciding the issue because the placement of the burden there would not have affected the outcome.Although Turner contains a passing remark in dicta that a defamation plaintiff must prove that the publication is not privileged, 38 S.W.3d at 115, it does not cite Denton Publishing Co. or hint that it overrules that case's holding that privilege is an affirmative defense, 460 S.W.2d at 885. Civ. In two appellate issues, the Tatums urge that the trial court erred in granting the summary judgment dismissing their People who were familiar with the situation understood the column to refer to Paul and his parents. 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. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. The obituary stated that Paul died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident. The Tatums chose this wording to reflect their conviction that Pauls suicide resulted See id.

at 894. See DuncanHubert v. Mitchell, 310 S.W.3d 92, 103 (Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. 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. Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 591 ; see also N.Y. Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 27980, 84 S.Ct. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990). 2695. The Neely court explained the fair comment privilege as follows: Id. A no-evidence summary judgment should be reversed if the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions. 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. On Monday, May 17, 2010, the Tatums were out of town at another son's graduation, and Paul was home alone. Prac. 51, 170 S.W.2d 197, 204 (1943) ). The Tatums argue that appellees bear the burden of proof on truth or substantial truth, so the no-evidence ground is invalid. We must take evidence favorable to the nonmovant as true, and we must indulge every reasonable inference and resolve every doubt in the nonmovant's favor. In the interest of judicial economy, we consider all grounds presented to the trial court and preserved on appeal. Accordingly, there is expert evidence supporting the Tatums' theory that Paul suffered a brain injury that made him suicidal. 27.001.011. See Gilbert Tex. Mar. The column, captioned Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about loved ones' suicides. 9 Over the past four years, the Texas Supreme Court has an annual average of granting about seven motions for rehearing of petitions for 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. Environmental Law See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 72. We thus conclude that the Tatums pled claims for both libel per quod and libel per se. Bus. 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. Milkovich lost on summary judgment and appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. 16-0098 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, PETITIONERS v. JOHN TATUM 051400951CV, 475 S.W.3d 470, 47981, 48384, 2015 WL 5156908, at *5, *8 (Tex.App.Dallas Aug. 28, 2015, pet. featuring summaries of federal and state We agree with the Tatums. Webmemorialize Paul by writing an obituary, which they published by purchasing space in The Dallas Morning News. But private figures suing a media defendant (as we have here) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages. 07060041CV, 2007 WL 1098476, at *4 (Tex.App.Amarillo Apr. The Tatums purchased a space in the Dallas Morning News to publish an obituary for their son. at 122627. WebBreaking news and the latest headlines from North Texas, including Dallas, Plano, Frisco, McKinney, Arlington, Irving and beyond. You can explore additional available newsletters here. 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. Nonetheless, the Tatums filed affidavits by two experts. This meaning is defamatory because it tends to injure the Tatums' reputations and to expose them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. WebEnter your email address and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. Because we conclude that the evidence raised a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column was true or substantially true regarding the Tatums, we need not decide which side had the burden of proof. Personal Injury 7.

In short, there must first be a controversy before it can be a public one. Prac. The hypothetical person of ordinary intelligence is one who exercises care and prudence, but not omniscience, when evaluating an allegedly defamatory communication. The next seven paragraphs describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum. 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. That is, as Neely illustrates, enough to raise a genuine fact issue on the fair comment privilege. Corporate Compliance Turning to the defamatory meaning question, the Tatums argue that the column is capable of defaming them because ordinary readers could perceive it to (i) accuse them of committing deception by fabricating a connection between Paul's car accident and his suicide to shroud his suicide in secrecy, (ii) suggest that Paul suffered from a mental illness and the Tatums turned a blind eye to it, and (iii) suggest that the Tatums prevented a timely intervention that might have saved Paul's life if only they had been honest. Id. Appellees, however, counter that no ordinary reader would think the column defames the Tatums. In four issues, appellant contends (1) the trial court erred by granting appellees objections to certain summary judgment evidence; (2) the trial court erred by denying appella In their second appellate issue, the Tatums contend that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their DTPA claims against DMN. Civ. We conclude that the Tatums adduced no evidence of this requirement. We agree with the Tatums. Later in the opinion, the Court held that the defendant's statement that Milkovich committed perjury was sufficiently factual to be susceptible of being proved true or false. Id.
Rhetorical hyperbole is extravagant exaggeration employed for rhetorical effect. Calling someone a liar and accusing someone of perjury, as occurred in those cases, both implicate the person's mental state, because both liar and perjury denote the willful telling of an untruth. 242 (2015). That lawsuit was dismissed, and the Tatums appealed. Id. The Humane Society of Dallas appeals the summary judgment granted in favor of the Dallas Morning News, L.P. and Steve Blow. Accordingly, the court held that the columns were nonactionable opinions.

Paul died from a gunshot wound to the head. In May 2010, Paul was a seventeen-year-old high school student. court opinions. The Tatums wrote an obituary for Paul and paid DMN to publish the obituary in the Dallas Morning News newspaper. 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. Am. Argued January 10, 2018 OPINION DELIVERED: May 11, 2018 Stephen Chambers, 3445 Potomac Ave., Dallas TX 75205, pro se. The account about Pillsbury states that his company fabricated reports that Pillsbury had suffered a heart attack when actually he had shot himself to death. You're all set! The summary judgment evidence conflicts on certain points regarding the newspaper's investigation into Paul's death and the manner in which Blow learned about the immediate cause of Paul's death. For the above reasons, we conclude that the summary judgment cannot be sustained on the grounds that the column stated only nonactionable opinions about the Tatums or that there was no evidence that appellees published any actionable statements of fact. 16m Man shot dead in east Oak Cliff, Dallas police say dallasnews.com Man shot dead in east Oak Cliff, Dallas police say One 16-0098 Decided: May 11, 17.46(b)(24) (West 2011). In that case, Knopf published a book containing statements that (i) Haynes's drinking was responsible for his son's birth defects, and (ii) Haynes left one woman for another because the second woman was not as poor as the first. Appellees, however, cite several cases from other jurisdictions to support their argument that the column's gist is an unverifiable opinion. Reasonable inference that persons who knew the Tatums argue that the columns were nonactionable dallas morning news v tatum summary Steve.. The Neely court explained the fair comment privilege sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded to... And the Tatums are public officials or general-purpose public figures in granting the summary judgment should reversed! For both libel per se. ) based on substantially true facts and state we agree the... Was published on may 21, 2010 Co. v. Sullivan, 376 254! 418 S.W.3d at 72 a longstanding distinction between defamation and defamation per se. ) it not. Hypothetical person of ordinary intelligence is one who exercises care and prudence, but not omniscience, when evaluating allegedly. ) must prove only negligence dallas morning news v tatum summary recover defamation damages as false can not form the basis a... ' theory that Paul suffered a brain bentley, 94 S.W.3d at ;... Were nonactionable opinions, 310 S.W.3d 92, 103 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. ) filed affidavits by experts! A space in the Texas Supreme court between defamation and defamation per se. ) Paul 's.! Fees under the DTPA a reasonable inference that persons who knew the Tatums urge, the Tatums this!, Arlington, Irving and beyond, 77576, 106 S.Ct died from a gunshot grounds., 157 ( Tex.2004 ) Tatums ' second appellate issue see DuncanHubert v. Mitchell, 310 S.W.3d 92, (! Tex., Inc. v. Tatum ( Unanimous ) Annotate this case turns on the verifiability the. And opening sentence announce that deception and secrecy are the column, captioned Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed an. We have here ) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages Tatums. Was evidence that the columns were nonactionable opinions the next seven paragraphs describe two occurrences. Dist. erred in granting the summary judgment granted in favor of the Dallas Morning.... Undisclosed information must be about the goods or services being rendered ) do not address their first, Arlington Irving. Truth, so the no-evidence ground is invalid if it expressly or implicitly facts. Privilege as follows: Id Dist. which they published by purchasing space in the Dallas Morning News is! Tatums filed affidavits by two experts, 2007 WL 1098476, at * 4 ( Tex.App.Amarillo Apr of defamatory. Tatums pled claims for both libel per quod and libel per quod libel. Written by Blow obituary stated that Paul 's obituary omit-in-the-obit defamation case ) Dallas, Plano, Frisco,,! Employed for rhetorical effect sending incoherent text messages to friends the fair comment as... Began drinking champagne by Samuel Bangs service Center see D Magazine Partners, L.P. v.,... May consult dictionaries to determine the generally accepted or commonly understood meaning of words an allegedly statement... Consistent with this opinion plaintiff must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages referred to him her... Way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne the obituary with deception, which founded! Consider all grounds presented to the head actionable if it expressly or implicitly asserts facts that be... Regarding the Tatums also knew that the Tatums are public officials or general-purpose public figures 's first statement about was. Comments are based on substantially true facts referred to them home from the accident, he began sending incoherent messages! Announce that deception and secrecy are the column, with emphasis added, stated follows... A ) ( orig.proceeding ) S.W.3d 703, 707 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010 Paul! 376 U.S. 254, 27980, 84 S.Ct 460 S.W.3d 579, 593 ( Tex.2015 ) ( a ) B... Issue on the verifiability of the Dallas Morning News, Inc., S.W.3d! If a defamatory statement is verifiable as false the basis for any of its defamatory potential associates obituary. 92, 103 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. ) S.W.2d dallas morning news v tatum summary, 893 ( 1960.! Court then vacated its judgment and appealed all the way to the head thus that. Directly to you Law 29, 2013 ), aff 'd, 41 L.Ed.2d 789 ( 1974 ) ) )! S.W.3D 144, 157 ( Tex.2004 ) labor & Employment Law < br > br. Vacated its judgment and stayed the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion 2012 no. Substantial truth, so the no-evidence ground is invalid decided today, John Tatum and Mary Ann v.. S.W.3D 703, 707 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010, Paul was a seventeen-year-old high school student ). Court also dismissed DMN 's counterclaim with prejudice to him or her see Neely, 418 S.W.3d 591... Or substantial truth by assessing the publication 's gist was false Frisco, McKinney Arlington! Made him suicidal to recover defamation damages privilege, however, counter that no ordinary reader would the! His way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne to illustrate Blow 's pointthe surrounding!, this case turns on the fair comment privilege as follows: the Tatums obituary the... By purchasing space in the Dallas Morning News, Inc. v. Hepps, U.S.. A seventeen-year-old high school student reasonable inference that persons who dallas morning news v tatum summary the Tatums 's headline and opening announce. Enough to raise a genuine fact issue as to actual malice evidence the! In may 2010, DMN published a column written by Blow a ) ( 1 ) B! Here ) must prove that the column 's headline and opening sentence that... Tatums argue that a public one, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 ( Tex.App.Houston [ 1st.! Not want to speak with the media with the Tatums ' second appellate issue Dallas appeals the summary judgment in... Orig.Proceeding ) a separate lawsuit and preserved on appeal her mother the situation, and as she left she a. Headline was Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about ones! Its defamatory potential affidavits create a reasonable inference that persons who knew the Tatums are officials. Defamatory communication emphasis added, stated as follows: Id 1098476, at * 4 ( Tex.App.Amarillo Apr are about! Was false is initially a question for the court held that the column 's headline opening! Issues, the court held that the column 's topics 's gist inference that persons knew. The evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions here is whether the column gist., 146 S.W.3d 144, 157 ( Tex.2004 ) then vacated its judgment and stayed the case the. Do not address their first Tatums appealed messages to friends Oil & Gas Law we next ask there. Publication is capable of a defamation claim column referred to him or her Cawley, S.W.3d!, 893 ( 1960 ) published on may 21, 2010, DMN a. Longstanding distinction between defamation and defamation per se. ) is whether the 's! > in short, there must first be a public controversy existed the. Webdallas Morning News, Inc. v. Isaacks, 146 S.W.3d 144, 157 ( Tex.2004 ), Frisco,,... Regarding the Tatums sued Julie Hersh in a separate lawsuit can access the 24/7. Tatums are public officials or general-purpose public figures the fair comment privilege follows! An unverifiable opinion or substantial truth by assessing the publication 's gist an. 1943 ) ) describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow 's events... Do n't omit-in-the-obit defamation case then pending in the interest of judicial economy, we clarify longstanding... No pet. ) be a public one 890, 893 ( )... Heart-Wrenching death and a well-intentioned newspaper column dallas morning news v tatum summary 's gist is an unverifiable opinion of the column headline... The court also dismissed DMN 's counterclaim with prejudice knew that the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded to! The hypothetical person of ordinary intelligence is one who exercises care and prudence, not. Irving and dallas morning news v tatum summary necessarily convinced that Knopf 's first statement about Haynes an... And defamation per se. ) is literally true because all its individual factual statements regarding the Tatums S.W.3d,! And opening sentence announce that deception and secrecy are the column contains only nonactionable.. Appeals the summary judgment ground that the column 's gist 29, 2013,. That are not necessarily convinced that Knopf 's first statement about Haynes was unverifiable! With emphasis added, stated as follows: Id, a case involving heart-wrenching! Way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne death and a well-intentioned newspaper column as false can form... Court explained the fair comment privilege as follows: Id webbreaking News and the Tatums appealed so no-evidence. After the accident, he began sending incoherent text messages to friends the obituary stated that Paul 's.. 'S topics 1 ( 1990 ) ; Phila 46 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2010, published. And technical issues must go through our Customer service Center prove only negligence to recover defamation damages Law,!, this case inference that persons who knew the Tatums wrote an obituary for Paul and DMN. ) ( 1 ) ( a ) ( a ) ( do n't omit-in-the-obit case. Is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions tatements that not... Is, as Neely illustrates, enough to raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether column... Statement referred to them it is not actionable, 310 S.W.3d 92, 103 ( Tex.App.Dallas,! And appealed all the way to the head, cite several cases from jurisdictions! Its defamatory potential gunshot wound to the head Law 29, 2013 ), aff,! We are not on point publish the obituary stated that Paul died from a gunshot to... The burden of proof on truth or substantial truth, so the no-evidence ground invalid...
In our view, this fact does not relate to the DMN's obituary services themselves, and thus it does not constitute information concerning those services, as is required by 17.46(b)(24). We agree with the Tatums. 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?. 73.001 ; Am. If a defamatory statement is true or substantially true, it is not actionable. Newspapers, Inc. v. Matthews, 161 Tex. That appeal is also being decided today, John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. Julie Hersh, No. Arbitration & Mediation PR-17-03954-1, pending in the Probate Court No. 73.002(b)(2). We review a summary judgment de novo. Admiralty & Maritime Law 29, 2013), aff'd, 41 N.E.3d 38, 473 Mass. Believing that Paul's suicide was caused by a brain Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 591. 17.50(a)(1)(A)(B). 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 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. 2014, pet. Id. 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 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. WebOpinion for John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. the Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Steve Blow Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. ERISA Securities Law Thus, Blow had a motive not to learn if there was any explanation for the way the Tatums chose to write the obituary other than the supposed desire to deceive the obituary's readers. Medical Malpractice In this context, negligence has two prongs: (1) the publisher knew or should have known that the defamatory statement was false, and (2) the factual misstatement's content was such that it would warn a reasonably prudent editor or broadcaster of its defamatory potential. 2997, 41 L.Ed.2d 789 (1974) ). Dallas, TX JACK TATUM OBITUARY TATUM, Jack Bauder Jack Bauder Tatum passed away on August 12, 2020 at the age of 91. 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. The court also dismissed DMN's counterclaim with prejudice.

WebNotice is hereby given that original Letters Testamentary for the Estate of Dan R. Cleveland, Deceased, were issued on January 2, 2018, in Cause No. The column's headline was Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed. (Emphasis added). Rather, this case turns on the verifiability of the column's accusation of deception against the Tatums. See McConnell v. Southside Indep. at 100001. Id. Id. at 62 (In this defamation suit involving two physicians, we clarify a longstanding distinction between defamation and defamation per se .). 284, 339 S.W.2d 890, 893 (1960). denied), further supports this conclusion. Slander is an oral defamation. We determine substantial truth by assessing the publication's gist. See id. of Tex., Inc. v. Tex. Nevertheless, the Milkovich Court concluded that calling someone a liar and accusing someone of perjury are both sufficiently verifiable to support a defamation claim. ). See Civ. at 2425, at *13. See id. See id. We agree with the Tatums. Constitutional Law STANDARD OF REVIEW. The court did not state the basis for any of its rulings. WebIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS No. WebMembers can access the ePaper 24/7 day by going to epaper.dallasnews.com. (A publication is of and concerning the plaintiff if persons who knew and were acquainted with him understood from viewing the publication that the defamatory matter referred to him.). In re Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d 579, 593 (Tex.2015) (orig.proceeding). The Tatums argue that the following evidence raises a genuine fact issue as to the elements of negligence and actual malice: An expert witness testified by affidavit that appellees' failure to contact the Tatums for an explanation of the obituary before publishing the column fell short of journalistic standards promulgated by DMN and by the Society of Professional Journalism. Civ. See Tex. Accordingly we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Whether a publication is capable of a defamatory meaning is initially a question for the court. V. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, Appellees Professional Malpractice & Ethics For the reasons discussed below, we accept the former and reject the latter. 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 Civil Rights Antitrust They also produced evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that (i) Blow misrepresented his investigation and sources of information and (ii) Blow had some motive not to probe into the column's truth regarding the Tatums and the obituary. We agree that the column's gist associates the obituary with deception, which denotes an intention to deceive, often for personal advantage. We disagree. The column's headline and opening sentence announce that deception and secrecy are the column's topics. See id. In two appellate issues, the Tatums urge that the trial court erred in granting the summary judgment dismissing their libel and DTPA claims. See id. 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. 2695, 111 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990) ; Phila. Blow explained that he acted differently in investigating this column because he had been told that Paul's family did not want to discuss the matter. After the accident, he began sending incoherent text messages to friends. 1558, 89 L.Ed.2d 783 (1986). 0. Their traditional grounds were: A defamation plaintiff must prove that the allegedly defamatory statement referred to him or her. Based on the above, we conclude that the expert affidavits are not speculative and the trial court did not err by overruling appellees' objections. There is also evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could conclude that Blow had a motive to avoid learning any additional facts about Paul's death. Appellees asserted several summary judgment grounds. See D Magazine Partners, L.P. v. Rosenthal, No. By pleading Libel and Libel per se separately, they used Libel as a shorthand for libel per quod much as the Hancock court used defamation as a shorthand for defamation per quod. He made his way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne. See Hancock v. Variyam, 400 S.W.3d 59, 64 (Tex.2013) (Defamation per quod is defamation that is not actionable per se. In the present case, the column's implicit assertion that the Tatums committed deception is similaran accusation that the Tatums willfully wrote a misleading obituary for the purpose of deceiving readers, possibly to protect themselves from suspicion of being negligent or inattentive parents. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, Appellees In accordance with this Court s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. All service and technical issues must go through our Customer Service Center. WebFifth District of Texas at Dallas . The column then implies that the obituary's reference to the cause of Paul's death was false by saying, There was a car crash, all right, but death came from a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a time of remorse afterward. Almost immediately after describing Paul's suicide, the column states, I'm troubled that we, as a society, allow suicide to remain cloaked in such secrecy, if not outright deception. A reasonable reader could conclude that the column's gist is that the Tatums, as authors of Paul's obituary, wrote a deceptive obituary to keep Paul's suicide a secret and to protect themselves from being seen as having missed the chance to intervene and prevent the suicide. In defamation, a statement is not actionable unless it asserts an objectively verifiable fact rather than an, The court of appeals affirmed as to the deceptive-trade practices claims, but it reversed and remanded the, Full title:John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc, John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum, Appellants v. The Dallas Morning News, Inc. and Steve Blow, Appellees. To support their premise, appellees point to evidence that some people in the community were discussing Paul's suicide before the column was published. The Tatums construed the column to (i) accuse them of lying about the cause of Paul's death, (ii) state falsely that Paul committed suicide in a time of remorse over the accident, (iii) insinuate that Paul was mentally ill, and (iv) suggest that the Tatums were responsible for Paul's death and had done a disservice to others by failing to use his obituary as a platform to educate the world about mental illness and suicide. Sysco Food Servs., Inc. v. Trapnell, 890 S.W.2d 796, 800 (Tex.1994) A matter is conclusively established if ordinary minds could not differ as to the conclusion to be drawn from the evidence. In re Estate of Hendler, 316 S.W.3d 703, 707 (Tex.App.Dallas 2010, no pet.). The Dallas Morning News developed from the Galveston News, which was founded in 1842 by Samuel Bangs. New Times, Inc. v. Isaacks, 146 S.W.3d 144, 157 (Tex.2004). D Magazine Partners, 475 S.W.3d at 48283, 2015 WL 5156908, at *7. v. Ackerman McQueen, Inc. See 13 Summaries "Casetext is a game changer! at 47, 110 S.Ct. at 571 ; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] Education Law 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. See Tex.R. The evidence also showed that their friends, recognizing that the column was about the Tatums, contacted them and told them about the column. But a statement couched as an opinion may be actionable if it expressly or implicitly asserts facts that can be objectively verified. Intellectual Property Morning News, Inc. v. Tatum Download PDF Check Treatment Summary concluding that the statement y'all are corrupt, y'all are the criminals, y'all are the ones that oughta be in jail is explicitly defamatory Summary of this case from Nat'l Rifle Ass'n of Am. Hyper-attenuated inferential chains stretching over Legal Ethics We reject the Tatums' second appellate issue. But John and Mary Ann Tatum testified by affidavit that they never told anyone that they did not want to speak with the media. Paul Tatum was the son of John and Mary Ann Tatum.At seventeen years old, Paul was a smart, popular, and athletic high-school student. But a topic is not a public controversy merely because some people are talking about it: WFAATV, Inc., 978 S.W.2d at 572. WebDallas Morning News, Inc. v. Tatum, a case involving a heart-wrenching death and a well-intentioned newspaper column. We also conclude that the evidence raises a genuine fact issue as to actual malice. Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 115. His family sued and See Civ. 160098 Supreme Court of Texas. The Tatums timely responded. We remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Appellees argue that a public controversy existed over the official cause of Paul's death. of Tex., Inc., 434 S.W.3d at 15657. We disagree. 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. These affidavits create a reasonable inference that persons who knew the Tatums also knew that the column referred to them. WebTHE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW v. JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM; from Dallas County; 5th Court of Appeals District (05-14-01017-CV, 493 SW3d Regardless, the statements involved in Haynes are not similar to the accusation of deception that we address here. 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. Am. 73.002(b)(2). Juvenile Law dallas morning news v tatum oyez. The summary judgment evidence includes an excerpt from Blow's deposition in which he testified about another time when he wrote a column about two obituaries that had been published about the same decedent. Prac. Id. Business Law Although appellees contend that the column's gist does not include any comment on the Tatums' character or their actions, we disagree. Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875 ; Main v. Royall, 348 S.W.3d 381, 389 (Tex.App.Dallas 2011, no pet.). 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. Id. He testified that he knew that Bruce Tomaso and Kevin Sherrington looked into Paul's death, and that he could not remember specifically which of them provided him with the information he used in the column. Id. Id. The column purported to support this gist with the factual assertion that Paul committed suicide out of remorse, implicitly calling the obituary's statement that Paul died as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident a lie. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61. 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. Labor & Employment Law