Preview
GR
AUSE DCV 272126
ALMA AHER NTHE ISTRICT OURT OF
LAINIIFF
ORT END OUNTY EXAS
EHIA MAR
EFENDANT TH UDICIAL ISTRICT
LAINTIFF OTIONFOR ARTIAL UMMARY UDGMENT
HE ONORABLE UDGE OF OURT
OMES , Plaintiff, Salma Taher requesting that the Court grant summary judgment
that the statements made by Defendant Y ehia Omar were defamatory per se, and in support would
show the following:
ROUNDS FOR _UMMARY_UDGMENT
Plaintiff Salma Taher moves for summary judgment that Defendant Y ehia Omar’s
(hereinafter “Omar”) statements that she committed adultery are defamatory per se.
UTHORITIES
It is a question of law whethera statement is defamatory per se. In re Lipsky, 460 S.W. 3d
596 (Tex. 2015).
Accusing someone of serious sexual misconduct is defamatory per se as a matter of law.
In re Lipsky at 596.
Accusing a woman of adultery has long been held to be defamation per se under Texas
“Accusing someone of a crime, of having a loathsome disease, or of serious sexual
misconduct are examples of defamation per se. In re Lipsky at 596. See also
Miller v Talley Dunn Gallery, 2016 LEXIS 2280, No. 5 CV (Tex.
Dallas 2016)
136337348.1
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page |
ARGUMENT
Defendant Omar has admitted that he accused Plaintiff of adultery. Attached as Exhibit 1
is his deposition taken on January 9, 2023. His admissions are at pages 34-38, 42-45, 49-50, 54-
55, 57, 59-60, 62, 64-65, 77-78, 81, 84, 87, 89, 91-93, 97, 101, and 121-123 . Thus, he has
committed defamation per se.
The damages caused by Omar’s admitted defamatory statement is a question of facts that
remains for the jury to decide. This Motion does not seek summary judgment on damages.
DEFENDANT’S DEFENSES ARE NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS MOTION
Defendant’s defenses are not at issue here. In this case the Defendant has asserted a
privilege to make the accusation that he does not dispute he made. Privilege is, of course, an
affirmative defense, which means that the defendant admits the conduct he is accused of, but states
that he is not liable because of other reasons. Here, the granting of this Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment does not deprive Defendant of the opportunity to present his affirmative defenses.
DAMAGES
ARE NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS MOTION
A tuling that the Defendant’s accusation of adultery is defamatory per se does not dispense
with the requirement that Plaintiff prove damages. When a statement is defamatory per se, it
entitles the plaintiff to recover only nominal damages unless special reputational injuries are
proven. Hancock v. Variyam, 400 S.W. 3d 59, 65 (Tex. 2013):
“Tn defamation per se cases nominal damages are awarded when ‘there is no proof
that serious harm has resulted from the defendant’s attack on the plaintiffs
character and reputation’ and the action is brought for purposes of vindicating the
plaintiff's character...”
The Supreme Court goes on to hold that nominal damages are defined as a “trifling sum,
such as $1...” Variyam at 65-66. Plaintiff must still prove her damages if she is to be awarded
more than a trifling sum. In re Lipsky at fn 11.
136337348.1
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page |2
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that the Court grant partial summary judgment that
Defendant’s statements accusing her of adultery are defamatory per se and for such other relief as
she may be entitled to receive.
Respectfully submitted,
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH, LLP
/s/ Michael D. Sydow
Michael D. Sydow
State Bar No. 19592000
michael.sydow@ lewisbrisbois.com
24 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1400
Houston, Texas 77046
(713) 659-6767 [Telephone]
(713) 759-6830 [Telecopier]
Attomey
for Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument was
duly forwarded, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, to all counsel listed below on this
the 14" day of February, 2024:
Via E-File Service
Joe House
Ben House
House, Perron & House
633 E. Fernhurst Dr. Suite 1401
Katy, Texas 77450
Attomeys
for Defendant
/s/ Michael D. Sydow
Michael D. Sydow
136337348.1
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page |3
EXHIBIT 1
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 2033
TAHER vs OMAR -
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 40-43
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 44-47
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 48-51
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 52-55
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 56-59
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 5023
TAHER vs OMAR -
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 7023
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09.2 023
TAHER vs OMAR -71
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 72-75
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 76-79
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 5033
TAHER vs OMAR -
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 7073
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2073
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 3023
TAHER vs OMAR
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 2033
TAHER vs OMAR -
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 100-103
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 104-107
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 108-111
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 112-115
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 116-119
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 120-123
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 124-127
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 128-131
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 132-135
Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023
TAHER vs OMAR 136-138
Carmen Halter
ZESQ UIRE
DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS.
800.211.DEPO (3376)
EsquireS olutions.com
Preview
GR AUSE DCV 272126 ALMA AHER NTHE ISTRICT OURT OF LAINIIFF ORT END OUNTY EXAS EHIA MAR EFENDANT TH UDICIAL ISTRICT LAINTIFF OTIONFOR ARTIAL UMMARY UDGMENT HE ONORABLE UDGE OF OURT OMES , Plaintiff, Salma Taher requesting that the Court grant summary judgment that the statements made by Defendant Y ehia Omar were defamatory per se, and in support would show the following: ROUNDS FOR _UMMARY_UDGMENT Plaintiff Salma Taher moves for summary judgment that Defendant Y ehia Omar’s (hereinafter “Omar”) statements that she committed adultery are defamatory per se. UTHORITIES It is a question of law whethera statement is defamatory per se. In re Lipsky, 460 S.W. 3d 596 (Tex. 2015). Accusing someone of serious sexual misconduct is defamatory per se as a matter of law. In re Lipsky at 596. Accusing a woman of adultery has long been held to be defamation per se under Texas “Accusing someone of a crime, of having a loathsome disease, or of serious sexual misconduct are examples of defamation per se. In re Lipsky at 596. See also Miller v Talley Dunn Gallery, 2016 LEXIS 2280, No. 5 CV (Tex. Dallas 2016) 136337348.1 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page | ARGUMENT Defendant Omar has admitted that he accused Plaintiff of adultery. Attached as Exhibit 1 is his deposition taken on January 9, 2023. His admissions are at pages 34-38, 42-45, 49-50, 54- 55, 57, 59-60, 62, 64-65, 77-78, 81, 84, 87, 89, 91-93, 97, 101, and 121-123 . Thus, he has committed defamation per se. The damages caused by Omar’s admitted defamatory statement is a question of facts that remains for the jury to decide. This Motion does not seek summary judgment on damages. DEFENDANT’S DEFENSES ARE NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS MOTION Defendant’s defenses are not at issue here. In this case the Defendant has asserted a privilege to make the accusation that he does not dispute he made. Privilege is, of course, an affirmative defense, which means that the defendant admits the conduct he is accused of, but states that he is not liable because of other reasons. Here, the granting of this Motion for Partial Summary Judgment does not deprive Defendant of the opportunity to present his affirmative defenses. DAMAGES ARE NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS MOTION A tuling that the Defendant’s accusation of adultery is defamatory per se does not dispense with the requirement that Plaintiff prove damages. When a statement is defamatory per se, it entitles the plaintiff to recover only nominal damages unless special reputational injuries are proven. Hancock v. Variyam, 400 S.W. 3d 59, 65 (Tex. 2013): “Tn defamation per se cases nominal damages are awarded when ‘there is no proof that serious harm has resulted from the defendant’s attack on the plaintiffs character and reputation’ and the action is brought for purposes of vindicating the plaintiff's character...” The Supreme Court goes on to hold that nominal damages are defined as a “trifling sum, such as $1...” Variyam at 65-66. Plaintiff must still prove her damages if she is to be awarded more than a trifling sum. In re Lipsky at fn 11. 136337348.1 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page |2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that the Court grant partial summary judgment that Defendant’s statements accusing her of adultery are defamatory per se and for such other relief as she may be entitled to receive. Respectfully submitted, LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH, LLP /s/ Michael D. Sydow Michael D. Sydow State Bar No. 19592000 michael.sydow@ lewisbrisbois.com 24 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1400 Houston, Texas 77046 (713) 659-6767 [Telephone] (713) 759-6830 [Telecopier] Attomey for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument was duly forwarded, pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, to all counsel listed below on this the 14" day of February, 2024: Via E-File Service Joe House Ben House House, Perron & House 633 E. Fernhurst Dr. Suite 1401 Katy, Texas 77450 Attomeys for Defendant /s/ Michael D. Sydow Michael D. Sydow 136337348.1 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT Page |3 EXHIBIT 1 YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 2033 TAHER vs OMAR - Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 40-43 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 44-47 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 48-51 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 52-55 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 56-59 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 5023 TAHER vs OMAR - Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 7023 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09.2 023 TAHER vs OMAR -71 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 72-75 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 76-79 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 5033 TAHER vs OMAR - Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 7073 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2073 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 3023 TAHER vs OMAR Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. January 09, 2033 TAHER vs OMAR - Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 100-103 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 104-107 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 108-111 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 112-115 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 116-119 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 120-123 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 124-127 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 128-131 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 132-135 Z ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com YEHIA OMAR Cont. J anuary 09, 2023 TAHER vs OMAR 136-138 Carmen Halter ZESQ UIRE DEPOSITION SOLUTIONS. 800.211.DEPO (3376) EsquireS olutions.com