In Re Steven Lipsky, Relator

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court held that the 'clear and specific evidence' a plaintiff must produce under Texas Citizens Participation Act section 27.005(c) to survive a motion to dismiss includes relevant circumstantial evidence and the rational inferences it supports, and that the Act imposes no elevated evidentiary standard and no greater burden than the plaintiff would bear at trial. The Court also held that mere notice pleading will not suffice under the Act — the plaintiff must provide enough detail to show the factual basis for each essential element — and that conclusory affidavits asserting general economic losses fail that requirement. Applying these standards, the Court concluded that Range's defamation claim against Steven Lipsky was actionable per se because his statements branded Range an incompetent, reckless polluter, so special-damages proof was unnecessary and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying his TCPA motion, while no clear and specific evidence showed that Shyla Lipsky or Alisa Rich published defamatory statements or conspired with Steven Lipsky. All relief sought in both mandamus petitions was denied.