Manzoor Memon v. Haroon Shaikh, 401 S.W.3d 407

Shaikh filed a defamation suit in Houston against Memon based on years of published statements.
Memon disseminated nine allegedly defamatory statements about Shaikh via letters, blogs, emails, and a monthly newsletter.
The jury answered liability on all nine statements and awarded damages for mental anguish and damages to Shaikh’s reputation, plus exemplary damages, with a permanent injunction issued.
One central issue was whether a single damages question could support liability for multiple statements, and whether any error in that structure was preserved.
Memon argued the evidence was legally and factually insufficient and that the injunction was inconsistent with the verdict, while Shaikh argued damages were supported and the injunction proper.
The appellate court affirmed, holding the liability findings, damages, and injunction were supported and not inconsistent with the jury verdict.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Legal-sufficiency of liability findings	Shaikh contends multiple statements created valid liability theories.	Memon argues at least one statement lacks proof of falsity with knowledge.	No reversible error; evidence supported liability under single theory or preserved objections.
Factual-sufficiency of damages	Shaikh supports $100k past mental anguish and $250k past reputation damages as reasonable.	Memon seeks remittitur reducing actual and exemplary damages.	Damages supported; no remittitur; exemplary damages upheld.
Permanent injunction	Injunction necessary to prevent continued defamation.	Injunction inconsistent with jury verdict or overbroad.	Injunction not inconsistent with findings; court did not abuse discretion.

City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard for legal-sufficiency review of verdicts and new-trial motions)
Crown Life Ins. Co. v. Casteel, 22 S.W.3d 378 (Tex. 2000) (Casteel harm analysis for valid vs. invalid theories of liability)
Bentley v. Bunton, 94 S.W.3d 561 (Tex. 2002) (premised damages and remittitur discussion in prolonged defamation campaign)
Formosa Plastics Corp., USA v. Kajima Int’l, Inc., 216 S.W.3d 436 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 2006) (single theory of liability with multiple factual allegations)
Akin v. Santa Clara Land Co., 34 S.W.3d 334 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2000) (treatment of multiple acts as single or separate theories of liability)
Marshall Field Stores, Inc. v. Gardiner, 859 S.W.2d 391 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1993) (tort theories and damages framework in defamation)
Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 116 S.W.3d 757 (Tex. 2003) (double recovery and full compensation principle in damages)