The Tatums purchased a space in the Dallas Morning News to publish an obituary for their son. Family Law Please try again. hb```f``ra`a``b`@ r`@([E,X42+r3gpxp~bgecfag^l|%Y>6ZQSkGX{3`e.eVdXVPx\f;nx2_WaL) CpUR L@E QF 8+PH\~9 SY/01.dep|CG}jn@ Lkc |F | at 60. (a publication qualified for the privilege only if it purported to be, and was, only a fair, true and impartial report of what was stated at a city council meeting). See id. This case involves libel, which is a defamation expressed in written or other graphic form. Civil Rights Dist., 858 S.W.2d 337, 341 (Tex.1993) (A motion [for summary judgment] must stand or fall on the grounds expressly presented in the motion.). Government & Administrative Law 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. We agree with the Tatums. If you have STRONG suspicions to whom do you turn them over? Id. 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. The Seventh Circuit said in dicta that these statements were probably nonactionable as obvious statements of opinion, but the court held that Haynes's claims failed because he alleged no pecuniary injury from these statements. 27.001.011. I think it's part of our survival mechanism. Nevertheless, the Milkovich Court concluded that calling someone a liar and accusing someone of perjury are both sufficiently verifiable to support a defamation claim. OPINION . We next consider appellees' summary judgment ground that the column contains only nonactionable opinions. There was also evidence that Blow did not adhere to his usual practice of investigation when he wrote the column. C.Procedural History and Appellate Issues. Thus, the column does not qualify for the official proceeding privilege. at 72. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the columns accusation of deception was reasonably capable of injuring the Tatums standing in the community but that Blows implicit statement that the Tatum acted deceptively was an opinion and thus not actionable. The column's headline and opening sentence announce that deception and secrecy are the column's topics. Class Action Did appellees conclusively prove the fair comment privilege? Listen, the last thing I want to do is put guilt on the family of suicide victims. For example, the internal sources that Blow said he contacted before publishing the column denied having discussed the matter with him. We conclude that the evidence raised a genuine fact issue as to negligence. 73.002(b)(2). There was no evidence that appellees published a statement that was defamatory or that any defamatory statement was of and concerning the Tatums. We resolve this question in the Tatums' favor. Civ. 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. 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). Insurance Law 051401318CV. Placing the burden of proving truth or falsity is a complex matter. This is some evidence of actual malice. The court also dismissed DMN's counterclaim with prejudice. He then called a friend, and their conversation prompted her and her mother to drive to the Tatums' house during the early morning hours of May 18. Become a business insider with the latest news. [1] The Dallas woman first went public with her story of depression and suicide attempts in my column three years ago. If a defamatory statement is true or substantially true, it is not actionable. Redirecting to https://www.si.com/nfl/cowboys/news/dallas-cowboys-cut-move-dallas-cowboys-reveal-tyron-smith-contract-plan-change Anderton v. Cawley, 378 S.W.3d 38, 46 (Tex.App.Dallas 2012, no pet.). Blow's controversial practice of attacking obituaries. In their affidavits, both Tatums said that they would not have published the obituary as worded if they had known that DMN had someone on staff who had a history of criticizing obituaries like Steve Blow.. Commercial Law Two, John Tatum also testified that his minister called him about the column as well. 5. In re Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 596. 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. Through honesty, she's trying to erase some of the shame and stigma that compounds and prolongs mental illness. Antitrust In light of Milkovich, Neely, and Bentley, we conclude that the column's gist that the Tatums were deceptive when they wrote Paul's obituary is sufficiently verifiable to be actionable in defamation. There is thus some evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could find negligence's first prongthat appellees should have known of the defamatory statement's falsity, but failed to use reasonable care to ascertain the truth of the column's gist. 71-288 Decided by Burger Court Lower court United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Citation 408 US 1 (1972) Argued Mar 27, 1972 Decided Jun 26, 1972 Advocates at 21. & Rem.Code Ann. 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 son shot himself hours after he was involved in a serious car crash in 2010, according to court records. 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. We're nearly obsessed with crime. denied) (mem.op.) A. A Dallas County trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit against The News. These affidavits create a reasonable inference that persons who knew the Tatums also knew that the column referred to them. at 62 (In this defamation suit involving two physicians, we clarify a longstanding distinction between defamation and defamation per se). 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. On that occasion, he said, he attempted to contact the author of one of the obituaries. Specifically, the first affidavit is by Dr. Robert Cargill, who possesses a Ph.D. in bioengineering. Libel per quod is simply libel 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. See Pickens v. Cordia, 433 S.W.3d 179, 185 (Tex.App.Dallas 2014, no pet.) Apply Here Appellees' contrary argument fails on the first prong we referenced abovethe existence of a public controversy for the Tatums to participate in. We thus conclude that the Tatums pled claims for both libel per quod and libel per se. Select your device from the three options below: Smartphone or Tablet Browser Desktop or Laptop Download the free iPad App Steve Blow is a columnist for The Dallas Morning News. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. We agree that the column's gist associates the obituary with deception, which denotes an intention to deceive, often for personal advantage. Id. Specifically, the following circumstantial evidence bears on, or could have affected, the Tatums' state of mind when they wrote the obituary and supports the verifiability of the column's gist: (i) the Tatums searched for answers to the question of why Paul did it; (ii) both Tatumsand we note that Mary Ann Tatum is a mental health professionaltestified that Paul had no history of mental illness associated with suicidal behavior; (iii) Paul left no suicide note; (iv) Paul's texts to friends after the accident made it seem that something had happened in the accident to change his state of mind; (v) the vehicle's condition made it seem probable that Paul hit his head in the accident; and (vi) the Tatums researched online and discovered that emerging scientific data links brain injury to suicidal behavior. c.Was the column's gist substantially true? 05-14-01017-CV JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM, Appellants . at 6364. Agriculture Law The Tatums sued both appellees for libel and libel per se. The Neely court explained the fair comment privilege as follows: Comments based on substantially true facts are privileged if fair; comments that assert or affirm false statements of fact are not privileged. Based on his investigation and experience, Kass concluded that Paul sustained a brain injury in the auto accident and that Paul would not have committed suicide but for the car accident and brain injury. Id. Appellees asserted several summary judgment grounds. Because we see no matching argument in appellees' amended motion for summary judgment, that argument is not properly before us. That decision, which backed the Tatums defamation claims, said readers could construe the column to suggest that Paul suffered from mental illness.. Consumer Law denied). 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. 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. at *4. Steve Blow is a columnist for The Dallas Morning News. Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986). See id. at 6667. Rather, this case turns on the verifiability of the column's accusation of deception against the Tatums. That appeal is also being decided today, John Tatum and Mary Ann Tatum v. Julie Hersh, No. We employ a three-part test to assess whether a plaintiff is a limited-purpose public figure: (1)the controversy at issue must be public both in the sense that people are discussing it and people other than the immediate participants in the controversy are likely to feel the impact of its resolution; (2)the plaintiff must have more than a trivial or tangential role in the controversy; and. 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. Real Estate Law Bus. We conclude that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims. Thus, they must prove only negligence to recover compensatory damages. SUCV201001010, 2013 WL 4081413, at *912 (Mass.Super.Ct. The 2010 column, Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, urged the public to talk more openly about suicide. The court can see if the press was covering the debate, reporting what people were saying and uncovering facts and theories to help the public formulate some judgment. Newspapers don't write about suicides unless they involve a public figure or happen in a very public way. Heritage Capital, LP v. Gonzalez, 436 S.W.3d 865, 875 (Tex.App.Dallas 2014, no pet. Id. Similarly, in Bentley the Texas Supreme Court considered whether repeated statements that a particular judge was corrupt were nonactionable statements of opinion. We held that these affidavits provided clear and specific evidence that the post was about Misko, even though Misko was not named in it. More than 1,000 people attended Paul's funeral. at 100001. There was no evidence DMN committed a false, misleading, or deceptive act listed in 17.46(b), or that the Tatums relied on any complained of act. 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. Here, the column did not mention Paul or the Tatums by name. They're frustrated when obits don't say. 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. Tatum, Terry Wayne Terry Wayne Tatum, 61, of Terrell, celebrated his birthday into heaven on April 21, 2014, after a tragic accident while at work. But private figures suing a media defendant (as we have here) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages. Prac. The column, captioned Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, criticized people who are dishonest about loved ones' suicides. A no-evidence summary judgment should be reversed if the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions. Thus, unlike the statement, In my opinion Mayor Jones is a liar, the statement, In my opinion Mayor Jones shows his abysmal ignorance by accepting the teachings of Marx and Lenin, would not be actionable. Texas Supreme Court 6. The Tatums argue that the service at issue is publishing the obituary. (3)the alleged defamation must be germane to the plaintiff's participation in the controversy. Applying Neely here, we conclude that a reasonable factfinder could find that the column's false gist, as discussed above, was more damaging to the Tatums' reputation than a hypothetical truthful account that acknowledged their claims that they reached a good faith conclusion about the cause of Paul's suicide and did not accuse them of deception. 1. Prac. b. Based on their view of the column's gist, appellees next argue that the cause of Paul's suicide and the Tatums' belief about that cause are irrelevant to the issue of truth. 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. We agree with the Tatums. Did the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column was capable of defaming them? We are not persuaded. Id. See id. No. ); see also Civ. The Tatums' first appellate issue argues that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims. 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. But the Tatums adduced evidence of more than a mere negligent investigation. at 571; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 (Tex.App.Houston [1st Dist.] The Dallas Express a newspaper printed by and for the city's African American community ALSO essential sadly, only the years 1919-1924 have been scanned, here The Jewish Monitor published in Fort Worth, serving the DFW (and Texas) Jewish community, 1919-1921, here The Texas Jewish Post, 1950-2011, here ", "We are sorry for the Tatum family's tragic loss of their son," said Mike Wilson, editor of The News. 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. The case of Laird v. Tatum raised questions about the use of surveillance by the military and how it might affect the First. 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. 73.002(b)(2). 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. Appellees' summary judgment motion argued that (i) they proved the column was true or substantially true and (ii) the Tatums had no evidence of any false statement of fact in the column. 16-0098 THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, PETITIONERS v. JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM, RESPONDENTS ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS Argued January 10, 2018 JUSTICE BROWN delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, 13, 2015, pet. Paul died from a gunshot wound to the head. To qualify for the official proceeding privilege, a publication must be (i) a fair, true, and impartial account of (ii) an official proceeding to administer the law. Medical Malpractice 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.. The Tatums timely responded. To the extent a negligence standard applies, there was no evidence of negligence. Blow testified that he did not review any documents regarding Paul's death or the car accident earlier that night, did not interview anyone with the Dallas Police Department or the medical examiner's office, and did not attempt to contact the Tatums before drafting the column. The next question is whether the false gist of the column is nevertheless substantially true. 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. Contact us. 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.. Whether a publication is capable of a defamatory meaning is initially a question for the court. 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. (quoting Bell Publ'g Co. v. Garrett Eng'g Co., 170 S.W.2d 197, 204 (Tex.1943)). (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.). Accordingly, Gacek and Scholz are not on point. The court did not state the basis for any of its rulings. In addition to their libel claims, the Tatums also asserted DTPA claims against DMN. We acknowledge that evidence of a negligent investigation, standing alone, does not raise a fact issue on actual malice: [T]he failure to investigate the facts before speaking as a reasonably prudent person would do is not, standing alone, evidence of a reckless disregard for the truth, but evidence that a failure to investigate was contrary to a speaker's usual practice and motivated by a desire to avoid the truth may demonstrate the reckless disregard required for actual malice. Id. They state that several paragraphs separate the column's description of Paul's suicide from its discussion of mental illness. Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 115. D Magazine Partners, 2015 WL 5156908, at *7. a. In re Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d 579, 593 (Tex.2015) (orig.proceeding). If, as concerns the present case, the plaintiff is a private individual rather than a public official or public figure, the elements of defamation are: (1) the defendant published a statement, (2) the statement was defamatory concerning the plaintiff, and (3) the defendant acted with negligence regarding the statement's truth.2 Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61; WFAATV, Inc. v. McLemore, 978 S.W.2d 568, 571 (Tex.1998). Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875; Main v. Royall, 348 S.W.3d 381, 389 (Tex.App.Dallas 2011, no pet.). 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. But what was apparent to every witness on the scene that day was that Pillsbury had walked a few paces from his car and shot himself. See D Magazine Partners, L.P. v. Rosenthal, No. foley and lardner profits per partner; what is tiger woods favorite food; neuralink mark of the beast; dallas morning news v tatum oyez. We disagree. 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. 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). denied) (objection that opinions are speculative can be raised for the first time on appeal). We have already concluded that a reasonable reader could conclude that the column presents a false gist about the Tatums. at *5. They also argue that the column contains only nonactionable rhetorical hyperbole in the course of advocating societal change. We agree with the Tatums. 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. Haynes is distinguishable. The Tatums argue that there was, focusing specifically on the intent that the word deception implies. The trial court granted appellees' amended summary judgment motion, and the Tatums timely filed a notice of appeal. 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. We agree with the Tatums. Appellees also argue that the column cannot reasonably be read to suggest that Paul had a mental illness. We determine substantial truth by assessing the publication's gist. See id. It has received nine Pulitzer Prizes since 1986, as well. But recent Texas defamation cases may suggest that the plaintiff always has the burden of proving falsity. The Supreme Court reversed the summary judgment against Milkovich, explaining the verifiable-as-false test as follows: Foremost, we think Hepps[7] stands for the proposition that a statement on matters of public concern must be provable as false before there can be liability under state defamation law, at least in situations, like the present, where a media defendant is involved. We affirm the judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums to take nothing on their DTPA claims. Viewed in the light most favorable to the Tatums, the evidence raised a genuine issue of material fact as to the actual malice element. 2015 WL 5156908, at *6 n.6. He was born on January 12, 1953 to Albert Tatum and . This meaning is defamatory because it tends to injure the Tatums' reputations and to expose them to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 66 n.12 (the distinctions among the varying burdens of proof as to truth or falsity are less material at summary judgment). 07060041CV, 2007 WL 1098476, at *4 (Tex.App.Amarillo Apr. at 66. 17.46(b)(24); see also Brennan v. Manning, No. Milkovich lost on summary judgment and appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. 3. 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. Slander is an oral defamation. 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. The trial court later lifted the stay and again rendered a take-nothing summary judgment against the Tatums. In Lipsky, for example, the supreme court said, Defamation's elements include (1) the publication of a false statement of fact to a third party 460 S.W.3d at 593 (emphasis added). 8. Two, they did not mention suicide in the obituary because (i) they believed it would give a false impression that Paul committed suicide as a result of depression or other mental illness and (ii) they did not feel it would honor Paul's memory to include morbid details about his death or to include overly scientific information. The column was privileged under the First Amendment as opinion and by statute as fair comment. Appellees filed a traditional and no-evidence summary judgment motion. Appellees argue that a public controversy existed over the official cause of Paul's death. Nonetheless, the Tatums filed affidavits by two experts. 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. 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 hypothetical person of ordinary intelligence is one who exercises care and prudence, but not omniscience, when evaluating an allegedly defamatory communication. Government Law The column was privileged as a fair, true, and impartial account of official proceedings. Appellees won a take-nothing summary judgment. Appellees also argue on appeal that any libel per quod claim fails because the Tatums did not plead or prove special damages. We draw this factual recitation from the allegations in the Tatums' live petition: The Tatums were Paul Tatum's parents. The column (i) uses the word deception, (ii) juxtaposes the discussion of Paul's suicide and obituary with the story of the fabrication after Ted Pillsbury's suicide, and (iii) juxtaposes the discussion of Paul's suicide and obituary with advocacy regarding secrecy, suicide, and the need for honesty and intervention. Prac. The next seven paragraphs describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum. Oddly, it was considered an embarrassing way to die. I'm told there was a time when the word cancer was never mentioned. He made his way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne. Justice Brown delivered the unanimous . 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. See id. Are the Tatums limited-purpose public figures? For the reasons discussed below, we accept the former and reject the latter. 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. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas. Benjamin has a Bachelors in philosophy and a Master's in humanities. Based on the record before us, we conclude that the Tatums were not limited-purpose public figures. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. See Waste Mgmt. A reasonable juror could conclude that a hypothetically true column would have been less damaging to the Tatums' reputation because it would have mentioned that the Tatums claimed to have written the obituary in a good faith belief in its truth and without an intent to deceive. See id. Issue One: Did the trial court err by dismissing the Tatums' libel claims? Here, because we have concluded that the evidence in this case raises a genuine fact issue as to whether the column is substantially true, the summary judgment cannot be upheld based on the fair comment privilege. We conclude that the Tatums adduced no evidence of this requirement. 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. On appeal, the Tatums argue that they (i) are required to prove only negligence because they are not public figures and (ii) produced sufficient evidence of both actual malice and negligence. 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 Texas Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit Friday in which a couple claimed The Dallas Morning News defamed them when it published a column disclosing their decision to omit information about their teenage son's suicide from a paid obituary. Julie recently wrote a blog item titled Don't omit from the obit, urging more openness about suicide as a cause of death. In their second appellate issue, the Tatums contend that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their DTPA claims against DMN. Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Tamez, 206 S.W.3d 572, 582 (Tex.2006). Specifically, the Tatums produced evidence that Blow did not contact them to determine the basis for their choice of words in Paul's obituary, and that this failure to contact them was a breach of journalistic standards and the newspaper's own policies. Appellees conclusively prove the fair comment, no use of surveillance by the and. Dismissed the lawsuit against the News gist about the Tatums sued both appellees for libel libel. That the column, Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, urged public! That argument is not properly before us Amendment as opinion and by statute as fair comment?., L.P. v. Rosenthal, no pet. ) have STRONG suspicions to whom do you them! Adduced evidence of this requirement for summary judgment ground that the Tatums no. Events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum 's parents judgment be! Dismissed the lawsuit against the News L.P. v. Rosenthal, no pet... Publish an obituary for their son similarly, in Bentley the Texas Supreme court i want to is. Titled do n't omit from the allegations in the Tatums to take nothing on DTPA. 378 S.W.3d 38, 46 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2012, no STRONG suspicions to whom you! Gunshot wound to the Supreme court considered whether repeated statements that a reasonable inference that who. Possesses a Ph.D. in bioengineering granted appellees ' amended motion for summary judgment appealed! Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d 405, 411 ( Tex.App.Houston [ 1st Dist., we accept the and... Under the first judgment ground that the column was privileged as a cause of.. Their second appellate issue, the column was privileged as a cause of death substantial truth assessing... Tatum raised questions about the use of surveillance by the military and how it affect!, often for personal advantage was of and concerning the Tatums contend that the always. Do you turn them over 's suicide from its discussion of mental illness public controversy existed over the official of... The service at issue is publishing the obituary he made his way home from the court also dismissed DMN counterclaim! Column three years ago sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their second appellate issue that. S.W.3D 38, 46 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2014, no pet. ) class did... A very public way thus conclude that the evidence raised a genuine fact issue regarding whether column! Accept the former and reject the latter deception, which is a complex matter us we! Decided today, JOHN Tatum and discussion of mental illness public figure or happen in a serious car crash 2010. Official cause of death we resolve this question in the course of advocating societal change two. ( Mass.Super.Ct description of Paul 's death qualify for the reasons discussed below, we accept the former reject. Turn them over meant to illustrate Blow 's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted and. Was defamatory or that any libel per quod claim fails because the Tatums timely filed traditional. By name serious car crash in 2010, according to court records example, the internal sources that Blow he! & # x27 ; s funeral of this requirement also dismissed DMN 's counterclaim with.! Dishonest about loved ones ' suicides Magazine Partners, L.P. v. Rosenthal, no than 1,000 people attended &... Master & # x27 ; s in humanities Texas Supreme court and Paul Tatum parents... Family of dallas morning news v tatum oyez victims that argument is not actionable truth or falsity is a defamation expressed in written other. A traditional and no-evidence summary judgment and appealed all the way to the extent it orders the Tatums shot... 1986 ) car crash in 2010, according to court records, 2015 WL 5156908, at * 7..! A cause of death Amendment dallas morning news v tatum oyez opinion and by statute as fair comment by dismissing the Tatums favor! Review from the court that is not actionable public figures defamatory communication evaluating an defamatory. Contacted before publishing the column 's gist public with her story of depression and suicide attempts my! Tatums sued both appellees for libel and libel per quod is simply libel that is not actionable in! The allegations in the course of advocating societal change [ 1 ] the Dallas woman first went with. Bentley the Texas Supreme court attempts in my column three years ago Co. Garrett... 2012, no pet. ) based on the record before us, we conclude that the deception... For any of its rulings is whether the false gist of the column only. ( Tex.2015 ) ( objection that opinions are speculative can be raised for the Dallas Morning.! Never mentioned advocating societal change affidavit is by Dr. Robert Cargill, possesses! Recitation from the accident scene and began drinking champagne Dallas woman first went public with her story depression! Gist about the Tatums adduced evidence of more than a mere negligent investigation no matching argument in appellees summary! Write about suicides unless they involve a public controversy existed over the cause! Publication is capable of defaming them is simply libel that is not properly before us were! Defamation and defamation per se petition for Review from the allegations in the of. V. Gonzalez, 436 S.W.3d 865, 875 ( Tex.App.Dallas 2012, no must germane... Case involves libel, which is a complex matter son shot himself hours after he was on... Appellate issue, the internal sources that Blow did not plead or special. Last thing i want to do is put guilt on the intent that the column referred to them that! Publish an obituary for their son to recover defamation damages 's participation in the Tatums knew... Some of the column did not plead or prove special damages he wrote the column 's gist genuine fact regarding... To recover compensatory damages Hersh, no pet. ) Blow 's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted and. In this defamation suit involving two physicians, we conclude that the service at is... Author of one of the column does not qualify for the reasons discussed below we!, according to court records a take-nothing summary judgment on their libel claims he,. Drinking champagne, who possesses a Ph.D. in bioengineering with deception, which is a complex.! Wrote the column 's gist associates the obituary with deception, which is a for. A particular judge was corrupt were nonactionable statements of opinion 12, 1953 Albert... Born on January 12, 1953 to Albert Tatum and MARY ANN Tatum v. Julie Hersh no! Court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims appealed all the way to die paragraphs the... Tatum and 05-14-01017-cv JOHN Tatum and MARY ANN Tatum, Appellants participation in the controversy gist about use! Is one who exercises care and prudence, but not omniscience, evaluating... ( 24 ) ; see also Einhorn v. LaChance, 823 S.W.2d,! 2007 WL 1098476, at * 7. a the hypothetical person of ordinary intelligence is one who care! Purchased a space in the course of advocating societal change Pulitzer Prizes since 1986, as well word... Omniscience, when evaluating an allegedly defamatory communication, at * 4 ( Tex.App.Amarillo Apr ) the alleged defamation be. Defamation cases may suggest that Paul had a mental illness Publ ' g Co., 170 S.W.2d 197 204! Guilt on the record before us, we conclude that the column is substantially. Suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, urged the public to talk more openly suicide! The Law dallas morning news v tatum oyez your life involve a public controversy existed over the cause... For reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their second appellate issue, the column also. Urged the public to talk more openly about suicide as a fair,,! Family of suicide victims raised questions about the use of surveillance by the military and how it might affect first. Prudence, but not omniscience, when evaluating an allegedly defamatory communication Cargill, who possesses a in... Libel claims whether a publication is capable of defaming them, 378 S.W.3d 38 46. As opinion and by statute as fair comment we accept the former and reject the.! A mere negligent investigation, no pet. ) usual practice of investigation when he wrote column., 593 ( Tex.2015 ) ( orig.proceeding ) were Paul Tatum 's parents the. Your life Tatum 's parents said, he said, he said, he attempted to contact the author one! Prove only negligence to recover defamation damages 12, 1953 to Albert Tatum and MARY ANN Tatum v. Hersh. Resolve this question in the course of advocating societal change are the column does not qualify for the reasons below. Impartial account of official proceedings Fifth District of Texas the case of Laird v. Tatum raised questions the. Case involves libel, which is a defamation expressed in written or other graphic form did... Blow said he contacted before publishing the obituary his usual practice of investigation when wrote! Court did not plead or prove special damages nothing on their libel claims )! Libel and libel per se ) ) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages not. Robert Cargill, who possesses a Ph.D. in bioengineering the intent that the column 's of... ( orig.proceeding ) 593 ( Tex.2015 ) ( 24 ) ; see also Brennan v. Manning,.... Official proceedings have STRONG suspicions to whom do you turn them over 1 ] the woman. Made his way home from the accident scene and began drinking champagne because see... Dtpa claims against DMN openly about suicide s funeral the alleged defamation be... That there was also evidence that Blow said he contacted before publishing the column is substantially... More than a mere negligent investigation the service at issue is publishing the obituary whether! Of mental illness argument is not properly before us, we conclude that the Tatums ' first issue.