Justices Decline to Hear Texas Law Prof's Defamation Case Against Houston Lawyer
The Texas Supreme Court has declined to consider the appeal of South Texas College of Law Houston professor James Paulsen, who has engaged in a five-year legal battle over allegedly being defamed by Houston lawyer Ellen Yarrell.
March 20, 2018 at 06:16 PM
3 minute read
The Texas Supreme Court has declined to consider the appeal of South Texas College of Law Houston professor James Paulsen, who has engaged in a five-year legal battle over allegedly being defamed by a Houston lawyer.
Paulsen sued lawyer Ellen Yarrell after she complained to South Texas Dean Donald Guter that Paulsen acted improperly when he wrote unsolicited letters criticizing her legal decisions to a trial judge in a high-profile Houston child custody case she was handling.
Paulsen had been asked by the media to comment on a case regarding the custody of twins who were conceived through in vitro fertilization in which Yarrell represented a party. So he attended a 2012 hearing in the case.
After the hearing ended, Paulsen wrote a letter to the trial court on his school's letterhead criticizing the legal decisions made by Yarrell. He also alleged that Yarrell's client had committed “egregious misconduct” in the case and also criticized the trial judge's ruling as “a miscarriage of justice.”
Yarrell then wrote a letter to Guter alleging that Paulsen had violated Texas legal ethics by inserting himself in her case and requested that the school consider sanctions against him. Paulsen responded by suing Yarrell for defamation, claiming the letter she wrote to Guter was defamation per se.
But a trial court later eventually dismissed Paulsen's lawsuit, a decision that was affirmed last year by Houston's First Court of Appeals, which concluded in a 28-page decision that Paulsen had not been defamed by Yarrell's letter to the dean.
“Having considered the entirety of the letter to Dean Guter, we conclude that a reasonable person would perceive the letter to be Yarrell's opinion coupled with some statements of fact, which have shown to be true, and therefore not actionable in defamation,” wrote Justice Michael Massengale.
Paulsen then appealed the ruling to the Texas Supreme Court, which recently declined to hear his petition for review.
Paulsen said he was acting ethically as an amicus curiae in Yarrell's case when he wrote the letters to the trial court.
“I was an amici. I explicitly said I was an amici,” Paulsen said of his letters to the trial court.
Paulsen said he planned to file a motion for a rehearing before the Supreme Court to reconsider his appeal, “which I fully expect will be denied.”
Yarrell said she was pleased that the Supreme Court declined to hear Paulsen's defamation appeal.
“I sent a letter to Dean Guter and said this was inappropriate. That's all I did,” Yarrell said.
“I've been practicing law in Harris County since 1985 and I've never had a case where a third person interloper just wrote letters to the trial court about a case that was pending,” Yarrell said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSupreme Court Appears Sympathetic to Law Requiring Porn Sites to Verify Users' Age
Read the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readHouston Trial Lawyer Mary-Olga Lovett Leaves King & Spalding to Open Boutique
3 minute readAllstate Is Using Cell Phone Data to Raise Prices, Attorney General Claims
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Drake Sues UMG for Defamation Over Promotion of False Claims of Pedophilia
- 2Quinn Emanuel Files Countersuit Against DOJ in Row Over Premerger Reporting
- 3High Court Rejects 'Heightened' Standard for Employers Defending FLSA Cases
- 4Case With 'Serious Consequences for Corporate Law' Heads to Texas Supreme Court
- 5Oil Co. Alleges Plot to Drive Away Competition in NYC's Liquid Fuel Market
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250