Truth is a defense to libel claims, which often leads Texas courts to grant summary judgment rulings in favor of media entities—but not always. A physician can proceed to trial on his libel claim against an Austin TV reporter and her station after the Texas Supreme Court denied rehearing and issued a corrected opinion on Jan. 31 in Neely v. Wilson.
The key issue in the case is the truth defense: There is no defamation liability if the gist of a broadcast is substantially true. And many issues in Neely turn on whether the high court created a rule 23 years ago that a media defendant’s reporting of third-party allegations is substantially true if it accurately reports the allegations—even if the allegations themselves are false.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
