Bob Deuell v. Texas Right to Life Committee, Inc.
01-15-00011-CV
| Tex. App. | Feb 17, 2015Background
- Appellant Bob Deuell seeks an interlocutory appeal under the Texas Citizens Participation Act after the trial court failed to timely rule on his TCPA motion to dismiss.
- Texas Right to Life Committee, Inc. sued Deuell for tortious interference with contracts related to political radio ads.
- The ads accused by Deuell concerned Senate Bill 303 and were aired before the May 27, 2014 Republican primary runoff.
- Deuell’s attorney sent letters to broadcasters demanding cessation and warning of litigation for alleged misstatements and lack of required disclosures under Texas Election Code 255.001.
- The challenged communications are argued to be actions in furtherance of Deuell’s free speech and political expression, triggering TCPA protections.
- The trial court’s failure to rule timely prompted Deuell to move forward with appellate review of dismissal grounds including free speech, judicial privilege, and illegality defenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the communications relate to free speech rights | Deuell argues the letters were protected political speech on a matter of public concern. | Texas Right to Life contends the TCPA should not dismiss because the claim related to a tortious interference with contracts. | Yes; the communications involve the exercise of free speech and support dismissal under §27.005(1). |
| Whether the defense of judicial privilege is valid | Deuell asserts the letters fall within absolute judicial privilege due to anticipatory litigation. | Texas Right to Life contends the privilege does not apply or is not adequately proven. | Yes; Deuell proves the elements of judicial privilege, supporting dismissal under §27.005(d). |
| Whether the defense of illegal contract bars the claim | Deuell argues the contracts would violate law and are unenforceable, negating tortious interference. | Texas Right to Life contends contracts were lawful and interference could occur. | Yes; illegality defense established, supporting dismissal under §27.005(d). |
Key Cases Cited
- ACS Investors, Inc. v. McLaughlin, 943 S.W.2d 426 (Tex. 1997) (establishes elements and standards for tortious interference and proof requirements)
- Reagan v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 166 S.W.2d 909 (Tex. 1942) (absolute judicial privilege extends to communications in judicial proceedings)
- Bird v. W.C.W., 868 S.W.2d 767 (Tex. 1994) (extends judicial privilege to pre-trial proceedings and related claims)
- Laub v. Pesikoff, 979 S.W.2d 686 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998) (affirmative judicial privilege applies to communications arising in judicial context)
- Crain v. Unauthorized Practice of Law Comm., 11 S.W.3d 328 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999) (privilege extends to communications related to contemplated judicial proceedings)
- Dallas Ind. Sch. Dist. v. Finlan, 27 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2000) (treats communications to media in contemplation of filing suit as privileged)
- Daystar Residential, Inc. v. Collmer, 176 S.W.3d 24 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004) (pre-filing statements to press can be privileged in context of litigation)