PJC Business 2024

D EFAMATION , B USINESS D ISPARAGEMENT & I NVASION OF P RIVACY PJC 110.15

PJC 110.15 Question and Instructions on Business Disparagement QUESTION ______ Did Don Davis disparage the business of Paul Payne ? A person disparages the business of another if he publishes a disparaging false statement about the business, and, when he publishes the statement, he [ knows the falsity of the statement or acts with reckless disregard of whether the statement is false/acts with ill will or intends to interfere with the economic interest of Paul Payne ], and his publication of the statement played a substan tial part in inducing others not to do business with Paul Payne and resulted in a specific pecuniary loss to Paul Payne . A statement is “published” if it is intentionally communicated to a person other than Paul Payne who is capable of understanding its meaning. Answer “Yes” or “No” for each statement listed below. In answering this question, you may consider only the following statements: [ statements defined by pleadings and proof ] Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. PJC 110.15 is used for business disparagement instead of defama tion. Business disparagement is a species of tort similar to defamation, because both involve the imposition of liability for injury sustained through publication to third par ties of a false statement affecting the plaintiff. In re Lipsky , 460 S.W.3d 579, 591 (Tex. 2015). But business disparagement and defamation protect different interests. “Defa mation serves to protect one’s interest in character and reputation, whereas disparage ment protects economic interests by providing a remedy for pecuniary losses from slurs affecting the marketability of goods and services.” Innovative Block of South Texas, Ltd. v. Valley Builders Supply, Inc. , 603 S.W.3d 409, 417 (Tex. 2020); In re Lipsky , 460 S.W.3d at 591. In Waste Management of Texas, Inc. v. Texas Disposal Sys tems Landfill, Inc. , 434 S.W.3d 142, 155 (Tex. 2014), the supreme court further explained the distinction between defamation and trade disparagement and the dam ages recoverable in the two causes of action. See also Burbage v. Burbage , 447 S.W.3d 249, 261 n.6 (Tex. 2014). The supreme court explained in Hurlbut that, unlike in common-law libel, the plain tiff in a business disparagement claim must plead and prove the falsity of the statement as part of his cause of action; the defendant in an action for business disparagement is

397