This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. We conclude that there was more than a scintilla of evidence showing more than a mere failure to conduct a reasonable investigation. at 60. Am. They state that several paragraphs separate the column's description of Paul's suicide from its discussion of mental illness. See DuncanHubert v. Mitchell, 310 S.W.3d 92, 103 (Tex.App.Dallas 2010, pet. ); see also Civ. Id. Unlike the current trend of local news being acquired by private equity firms and national chains, we have been a family-controlled company for over 135 years. 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. See id. The Tatum filed suit alleging libel and libel per se against Petitioners alleging that the column at issue defamed them. Landfill, Inc., 434 S.W.3d 142, 15657 (Tex.2014) (citing Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 349 (1974)). Crediting the Tatums' evidence as we must, we conclude that a reasonable factfinder could find that the column's gist was false. 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. Issue Two: Did the trial court err by dismissing the Tatums' DTPA claims? Defamation has two forms: slander and libel. We next consider appellees' summary judgment ground that the column contains only nonactionable opinions. These cases are distinguishable because the case before us does not turn on the verifiability of the column's statement about the cause of Paul's suicide. Prac. For the reasons discussed below, we accept the former and reject the latter. Awareness, frank discussion, timely intervention, treatmentthose are the things that save lives. The trial court granted summary judgment for Petitioners. Listen, the last thing I want to do is put guilt on the family of suicide victims. 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. Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 591 (footnotes omitted). (describing general-purpose public figures as those who have achieved such pervasive fame or notoriety as to be public figures for all purposes). 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. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that their cases are distinguishable or otherwise unpersuasive. We thus conclude that the Tatums pled claims for both libel per quod and libel per se. Thus, the column does not qualify for the official proceeding privilege. dallas morning news v tatum oyezcash cars for sale memphis. In part, we don't talk about suicide because we don't talk about the illness that often underlies itmental illness. Prac. Juvenile Law There was a car crash, all right, but death came from a self-inflicted gunshot wound [page break] in a time of remorse afterward. We agree that the column's gist associates the obituary with deception, which denotes an intention to deceive, often for personal advantage. The next seven paragraphs describe two recent occurrences meant to illustrate Blow's pointthe events surrounding the deaths of Ted Pillsbury and Paul Tatum. Moved Permanently. 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. If a defamatory statement is true or substantially true, it is not actionable. We agree with the Tatums. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that they did. Please try again. 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). See id. 73.001. The truth of the column's gist hinges on whether the Tatums intended to deceive when they wrote the obituary, not necessarily on the strength of the scientific evidence supporting their belief about the cause of Paul's suicide. That decision, which backed the Tatums defamation claims, said readers could construe the column to suggest that Paul suffered from mental illness.. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW, PETITIONERS, v. JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM, RESPONDENTS No. Civ. 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. But in late 2015, the 5th District Court of Appeals ruled that the lawsuit could go forward. 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. %%EOF 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. Id. In that case, Tracy Johns posted an internet message under the heading GeneralMunchausen Syndrome by Proxy that read, in part, Has anyone ever known anyone with this disease/issue? endstream endobj startxref (the undisclosed information must be about the goods or services being rendered). A defamation plaintiff must prove that the allegedly defamatory statement referred to him or her. Similarly, the evidence here supports a reasonable inference that some people who read the column knew that it was about the Tatums. Appellees also argue that the column cannot reasonably be read to suggest that Paul had a mental illness. 186 0 obj <> endobj We are not persuaded. Id. Health Care Law 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. When one of my colleagues began to inquire, thinking the death deserved news coverage, it turned out to have been a suicide. ", "We are sorry for the Tatum family's tragic loss of their son," said Mike Wilson, editor of The News. The court did not state the basis for any of its rulings. West sued for defamation, he lost the case on summary judgment, and the case came before the Utah Supreme Court. Intellectual Property We also conclude that the evidence raises a genuine fact issue as to actual malice. 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. denied) (mem.op.) 0 In D Magazine Partners we said that the supreme court's 2000 Turner opinion suggests that lack of privilege might be an element of a defamation plaintiff's case, while its 2013 Neely opinion indicates that privilege is a defense. Sch. Employment Law (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).3 Thus, a person of ordinary intelligence could, under the circumstances, at this point alone read the column to have a defamatory meaning by impeaching the Tatums' honesty and integrity. A Dallas County trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit against The News. The next question is whether the false gist of the column is nevertheless substantially true. 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. See Civ. Had he investigated further and learned facts suggesting that the Tatums had no intent to deceive, this would have undercut the whole thrust of the column, which began with a reference to deception and ended with a call for honesty. 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. But a topic is not a public controversy merely because some people are talking about it: A general concern or interest will not suffice. 12, 2007, pet. 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. The Tatums' first appellate issue argues that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on their libel claims. The trial court granted summary judgment for Petitioners. Grief Support. Austin v. Inet Techs., Inc., 118 S.W.3d 491, 496 (Tex.App.Dallas 2003, no pet.). 418 S.W.3d at 64. Did the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column was neither true nor substantially true? 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. Waste Mgmt. It has received nine Pulitzer Prizes since 1986, as well. See Gilbert Tex. No. Speech deals with matters of public concern when it can be fairly considered as relating to any matter of political, social, or other concern to the community or when it is a subject of legitimate news interest; that is, a subject of general interest and of value and concern to the public Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443, 453 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Insurance Law See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 61. 73.002(b)(2). A publication's gist is its main point, material part, or essence, as perceived by a reasonable person. 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. On appeal, appellees argue only that the affidavits are too speculative. Their traditional grounds were: The column was not of and concerning the Tatums. Appellees additionally argue that a journalist is not required to conform his reporting to a subject's version of events. Yet we're nearly blind to the greater threat of self-inflicted violence. Contracts 3 On June 20, 2010Father's Day, and about one month after Paul's suicidethe paper published a column by Blow entitled "Shrouding Suicide Leaves its Danger Unaddressed." 4 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. Dallas Morning News Leading daily newspaper serving the Dallas-Fort Worth area. (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.). We therefore decline to follow West. 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. 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. WFAATV, Inc.,978 S.W.2d at 572. 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. A publication is substantially true if, in the average reader's mind, the allegedly defamatory statement is not more damaging to the plaintiff's reputation than a truthful statement would have been. We construe an allegedly defamatory publication as a whole in light of the surrounding circumstances and based on how a person of ordinary intelligence would perceive it. Education Law 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). 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. The Dallas Morning News is an independent paper positioned for growth. Heritage Capital, LP v. Gonzalez, 436 S.W.3d 865, 875 (Tex.App.Dallas 2014, no pet. The column's headline was Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed. (Emphasis added). 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. 051400566CV, 2015 WL 1138258 (Tex.App.Dallas Mar. Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875. The Dallas Morning News Access ePaper Optimized for your device. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 72. See Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 62; Bentley, 94 S.W.3d at 57985. Turner, 38 S.W.3d at 114. Steve Blow is a columnist for The Dallas Morning News. This opinion should not be construed to hold that the column necessarily defamed the Tatums. See Zerangue v. TSP Newspapers, Inc., 814 F.2d 1066, 107071 (5th Cir.1987) (courts have upheld actual malice findings when the supposed source of the story disclaimed giving the information); see also Celle v. Filipino Reporter Enter., Inc., 209 F.3d 163, 190 (2d Cir.2000) (defendant's self-contradictory testimony about the source of his information supported actual malice finding). West successfully ran for mayor of a Utah town. The summary judgment evidence included a copy of the printed version of the newspaper column that prompted this suit. & Com.Code Ann. 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. I'm troubled that we, as a society, allow suicide to remain cloaked in such secrecy, if not outright deception. The Tatums purchased a space in the Dallas Morning News to publish an obituary for their son. As the Court notes, the obituary stated that their son died "as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident." Their son had shot himself after he had been involved in a car accident. Medical Malpractice Slander is an oral defamation. Star-Telegram (Fort Worth) The Newspaper distributed in Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex counties of Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant, and Wise. Because the evidence in Neely raised a genuine fact issue as to whether a news broadcast was substantially true, the court held that the defendants were not entitled to summary judgment based on the fair comment privilege. We are not persuaded by appellees' characterization of the column as nonactionable rhetorical hyperbole. 7. And the gist includes an implication that the Tatums' motive for deceiving readers was to conceal that Paul had suffered from a mental illness that the Tatums failed to confront. Entertainment & Sports Law But the court went on to hold that "to the extent that the column states that the Tatums acted deceptively, it is true." Fifth District of Texas at Dallas . Is there evidence that the column's gist was false? Cf. Justice Brown delivered the unanimous . at 1019. A no-evidence summary judgment should be reversed if the evidence is sufficient for reasonable and fair-minded jurors to differ in their conclusions. We affirm the judgment to the extent it orders the Tatums to take nothing on their DTPA claims. See Civ. %PDF-1.5 % We agree with the Tatums. denied). As the Tatums urge, the service they bought was Paul's obituary. Labor & Employment Law We are unpersuaded. 16-0098 Supreme Court of Texas May 11, 2018. 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. 203 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<5137B43803F1ED67129ECA0B47F79974>]/Index[186 34]/Info 185 0 R/Length 86/Prev 175724/Root 187 0 R/Size 220/Type/XRef/W[1 2 1]>>stream Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 63. 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. 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). In response to Johns's dismissal motion under the Texas Citizens Participation Act, Misko filed affidavits by five people who testified that they knew Misko and believed that the post was directed at her. 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.. b. Neely, 418 S.W.3d at 70. Search by Name. We therefore do not address whether those categories apply here. Milkovich lost on summary judgment and appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Placing the burden of proving truth or falsity is a complex matter. See Tex.R. 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. 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. Government Contracts New Times, Inc. v. Isaacks, 146 S.W.3d 144, 157 (Tex.2004). 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. Prac. 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.) at 6667. That is, as Neely illustrates, enough to raise a genuine fact issue on the fair comment privilege. Julie recently wrote a blog item titled Don't omit from the obit, urging more openness about suicide as a cause of death. This case involves libel, which is a defamation expressed in written or other graphic form. 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. Moreover, a public figure must prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence. Similarly, although there is evidence that the Tatums disagreed with the manner of death finding of suicide on Paul's death certificate and tried to persuade the medical examiner to change it, there is no evidence that the outcome of this alleged controversy affected anyone except the Tatums. 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. 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. Appellees argue that a public controversy existed over the official cause of Paul's death. court opinions. Read Tatum v. Dall. 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. Heritage Capital, 436 S.W.3d at 875. 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. Become a business insider with the latest news. Generally speaking, the column's italicized words quoted above reflect a theme of alleged dishonesty by people, including those who wrote Paul's obituary, who refuse to acknowledge that someone committed suicide. 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. It took a while for honesty to come to the AIDS epidemic. at 6364. Did the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue regarding whether the column was about them? That question remains to be decided by the factfinder. Gacek v. Owens & Minor Distrib., Inc., 666 F.3d 1142, 114748 (8th Cir.2012); Scholz v. Bos. Civil Procedure 497 U.S. at 1921. Appellees, however, do not contend that the Tatums are public officials or general-purpose public figures. We disagree and affirm the judgment as to those claims. THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, INC. AND STEVE BLOW v. JOHN TATUM AND MARY ANN TATUM Oral argument was held on January 10, 2018. c.Did the Tatums raise a genuine fact issue as to negligence and actual malice? To the extent a negligence standard applies, there was no evidence of negligence. In this libel-by-implication case, a column written by Steve Blow and published by The Dallas Morning News (collectively, Petitioners) was reasonably capable of meaning that John and Mary Ann Tatum ac. [1] The Dallas woman first went public with her story of depression and suicide attempts in my column three years ago. 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. Commercial Record Daily Business newspaper published in Dallas, Texas. See Deceive, The New Oxford American Dictionary (cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, typically in order to gain some personal advantage). THE 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 646, 12-30-15) a. Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986). This argument misses the point. "With its unanimous ruling, the court affirmed that Steve Blow's piece was clearly an opinion column protected by law.". Plaintiffs sued Defendant for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), claiming that Defendant exploited the tragedy of their son's death by encouraging the criticism of their son's obituary. Posted By : / thalassery to wayanad ksrtc bus timings /; Under :international norms examplesinternational norms examples Our decision in Backes v. Misko, No. Paul died from a gunshot wound to the head. Id. Id. Did appellees conclusively prove the fair comment privilege? My column told them nothing they didn't already know. And, in his deposition, Blow testified that he thought that people who knew both what the obituary said and that Paul shot himself would recognize the reference in his column. The 2010 column, Shrouding suicide leaves its danger unaddressed, urged the public to talk more openly about suicide. May 11, 2018. Gaming Law 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. at 122627. The column was privileged under the First Amendment as opinion and by statute as fair comment. Communications Law This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. Dec 19, 2022 "Sooner or later someone is going to have to give this area credit for good coaching, good kids and good programs." Injury Law 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. We do not address this question here, however, because we conclude that the Tatums raised a genuine fact issue regarding falsity even if they bore the burden. at 64. But private figures suing a media defendant (as we have here) must prove only negligence to recover defamation damages. 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, however, counter that no ordinary reader would think the column defames the Tatums. Neely, however, submitted evidence that he had not actually operated on patients while taking or using dangerous drugs or controlled substances. Ironically, the first person I knew to die of AIDS was said to have cancer. at 10. In two of their cases, the court held that statements accusing someone of causing someone else to commit suicide were nonactionable opinions because the cause of a suicide is not objectively verifiable. 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.