In 2018, the TSC issued five opinions on the Texas Anti-Slapp and I’ll address them in reverse order of issuance over the next week.
In S&S Emergency Training Solutions, Inc. v. Elliot, 2018 WL 6711322 (Tex. Dec. 21, 2018), the TSC sided with the trial court which had denied an Anti-Slapp motion brought by the defendant against plaintiff’s claim for breach of a non-disclosure contract. Reversing the trial court, the Dallas COA determined the plaintiff failed to establish enough facts concerning damages. Relying on past precedent, the TSC reversed the Dallas COA and reaffirmed that an exact calculation of lost profits is not required to meet the clear and specific standard of prima facie evidence for each element of a claim (here the focus was on damages). Rather, the amount of evidence necessary must only “support a rational inference that [defendant’s] actions caused [plaintiff] to lose some specific, demonstrable profits.”
As noted in the last post, ten days later the Dallas COA would rely on S&S to revive a dismissed tortious interference claim in Linda Dickens v. Jason C. Webster, P.C, 05-17-00423-CV, 2018 WL 6839568 (Tex. App.—Dallas Dec. 31, 2018, no pet. h.).