Casso v. Brand

776 S.W.2d 551 · Texas Supreme Court · 1989

Facts

Othal E. Brand, a public official, sued Dr. Ramiro Casso for defamation over statements made in campaign ads and a magazine article during their mayoral race, alleging Casso falsely accused him of condoning police brutality and other misconduct. Casso sought summary judgment, which was granted by the trial court but reversed by the court of appeals, prompting this review. The case examines the showing a defendant must make to obtain summary judgment in a defamation action brought by a public official or public figure.

Issue

What showing must a defendant make to obtain summary judgment in a defamation action brought by a public official or public figure in Texas courts, particularly regarding the element of actual malice? This includes re-evaluating the interpretation of Texas's "readily controverted" standard for interested witness testimony in summary judgment motions.

Holding

The Texas Supreme Court partially affirmed and partially reversed the court of appeals, holding that Casso successfully negated actual malice as a matter of law for the radio ad statements but failed to do so for the magazine article statements. The court overruled prior Texas decisions that made summary judgment virtually impossible in defamation cases by strictly interpreting the "readily controverted" standard. The case was remanded for further proceedings regarding the magazine statements and for partial summary judgment on the radio ads.

Rule

In public official/figure defamation cases, Texas common law requires plaintiffs to prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence, consistent with the New York Times standard, even against non-media defendants. For summary judgment, an interested witness's testimony can negate actual malice if it is clear, positive, direct, credible, free from contradictions, and of a nature that "could have been readily controverted" by opposing evidence, meaning it can be effectively countered.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.