Service Employees International Union Local 5, Dan Schlademan and Susan Strubbe v. Professional Janitorial Service of Houston, Inc., 415 S.W.3d 387

PJS sues SEIU Local 5 and officers for defamation following the union’s Justice for Janitors campaign; statements targeted PJS’s wage/labor conduct to poach business; publications appeared on union websites, flyers, letters, reports, emails, and speeches.
Union moved for summary judgment arguing lack of actual malice and nonactionable opinions; trial court denied the motion; interlocutory appeal followed.
PJS contends §51.014(a)(6) jurisdiction applies because a media defendant’s First Amendment defense is implicated; union claims it is a media defendant due to its online presence.
Court applies a Kaufman-type multi-factor test to determine if an Internet actor is a “member of the electronic media,” requiring primary business as news reporting; record shows union is not primarily a news publisher and its publications are campaign materials.
The court also examines whether the union’s communications qualify as “a person whose communication appeared in or was published by the electronic or print media,” concluding the self-published statements were not published by media and thus jurisdiction fails. The appeal is dismissed for lack of interlocutory jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether union is a member of the electronic media under §51.014(a)(6)	PJS argues union is media due to websites and online presence	Union argues it is a media defendant	Unqualified; union not a member of the electronic media
Whether union’s communications qualify as appeared in or published by media	PJS-based statements published by media via AP pick-up	Self-published statements not published by media	Unqualified; no publication by media found

Kaufman v. Islamic Society of Arlington, 291 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009) (multi-factor test for Internet authors as media defendants)
Hotze v. Miller, 361 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2012) (internet author as media defendant with broader online presence)
Quebe v. Pope, 201 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006) (unattributed information in media publication not protected by §51.014(a)(6))
CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. 2011) (strict construction of interlocutory appeal statutes)
Tex. A&M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. 2007) (limits of §51.014(a)(6) jurisdiction)
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (U.S. 1964) (foundational First Amendment defamation standard for media)
Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448 (U.S. 1976) (discussion of media’s role and flexibility in defining liability)