The contours of the controversy requirement are at least partly defined by the notion that public-figure status attaches to those who "invite attention and comment" because they have thrust themselves to the forefront of a public controversy "to influence the resolution of the issue involved." Six different former business associates, including Lou Saba and Jack Sands, recount their view of their business dealings with Wamstad and how they came to feel that Wamstad took advantage of them. Wamstad's first four categories of evidence, in essence, assert that the Media Defendants were on notice that Rumore's statements were false because Wamstad disagreed with Rumore (he allegedly passed a polygraph test) and a divorce judge disagreed with Rumore's assertion that she acted in self-defense when she shot Wamstad in 1985. Code Ann. Wamstad's reliance on Wilson v. UT Health Center is also misplaced. The failure to investigate has been held insufficient to establish actual malice. New Restaurant from Del Frisco's founder Dale Wamstad To Debut Next Our review of the record shows that after Williams was deposed, he testified by affidavit, stating that he went over at least two drafts of the Article with Stuertz, who answered all of his questions, and that the Article went through the standard, detailed process for editing and revision. And it's not a steakhouse. See Gertz, 418 U.S. at 346, 94 S.Ct. Chamberlain expressed the view that Wamstad wanted to create some publicity for his new steakhouse and was doing it at the expense of Chamberlain's reputation. 1989). Mgmt. Labour's 1.5m cash injection from Just Stop Oil supporter and eco Wamstad's reliance on Wilson v. UT Health Center is also misplaced. The Article was precisely about that contradiction and thus a continuation of the public discussion of Wamstad's endeavors and disputes. The two were inevitably linked, particularly because reports by others contrasted significantly with the family-man persona Wamstad persistently projected in his advertising. Roy Wamstad describes specific incidents in which he asserts his father physically and emotionally abused him. The feud reportedly began in 1981 when Wamstad claimed Fertel's son had slipped her recipes to him. Six different former business associates, including Lou Saba and Jack Sands, recount their view of their business dealings with Wamstad and how they came to feel that Wamstad took advantage of them.3 The Article also describes Wamstad's litigation with his long-time rival Ruth Fertel, of Ruth's Chris Steakhouse. Wamstad reportedly bristled at that characterization of the truth, claiming, Twenty-three million dollars is truth.. Each Defendant filed a traditional motion for summary judgment under rule 166a(c) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Prac. We conclude that evidence is merely cumulative of Wamstad's testimony asserting Rumore's allegations are false. That Court noted the mere fact that a libel defendant knows that the libel plaintiff denies an allegation is not evidence that the defendant doubted the allegation. "Limited-purpose" public figures are only public figures for a limited range of issues surrounding a particular public controversy. Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas. Williams testified on deposition that he spoke with Lyons, and they talked about what the Observer's lawyer and Williams had previously discussed. He stated that he had no knowledge that the Article or any statements in it were false at the time the Article was published, and at no time did he entertain any doubts as to the truth of the statements made in the Article. Id. 2997; Waldbaum, 627 F.2d at 1297 n. 27 (controversy need not concern political matters). That is, the judge's disagreement with Rumore's assertion of self-defense does not raise a fact question whether Rumore herself believed her Statement that she acted in self-defense was false. We certainly agree that the public debate in this case does not involve matters of great moment in current public life. from 10 a.m.-2 p.m. 972-664-9975 (Texas restaurant) RELATED STORIES Make a one-time donation today for as little as $1. Updated 1:52 PM Jun 9, 2020 CDT. After Wamstad recovered from his wounds, he came back to the restaurant, which his wife had been running in his absence, and threw everybody out, including Roy. Id. 973 F.2d 1263, 1270-71 (5th Cir. Moreover, the judge's assessment is not probative of whether Rumore believed in the truth of the other Statements she made or whether she entertained doubts as to their truth. In an advertisement in the Dallas Morning News, Wamstad reportedly blasted Chamberlain for picking on Dee Lincoln, Wamstad's former partner and current manager of a Del Frisco's restaurant.9 Chamberlain expressed the view that Wamstad wanted to create some publicity for his new steakhouse and was doing it at the expense of Chamberlain's reputation. Finally, Wamstad argues he raises a fact question on actual malice based on deposition testimony of Williams and Lyons. Id. Imagining that something may be true is not the same as belief. Wamstad named as defendants parties associated with the media as well as individuals. Wamstad himself perpetuated the public nature of the debate over his contentious relationships through his personal self-promotion in his advertising and his other interactions with the press-with all their attendant ramifications for the opinion-forming, consuming public. 1980) (intensive advertising and continuing access to media made libel plaintiff a limited public figure). Independent evidence is required: While it is conceivable that a defendant's trial testimony, under the rigors of cross-examination, could provide the requisite proof, it is more likely that plaintiff will have to secure that evidence elsewhere. Doubleday & Co., Inc. v. Rogers, 674 S.W.2d 751, 756 (Tex.1984) (reckless conduct not measured by whether reasonably prudent person would have investigated before publishing; must show defendant entertained serious doubts as to truth of publication, citing St. Amant, 390 U.S. at 731, 733, 88 S.Ct. When Ms. Rumore discovered the sale and compared the $45,000.00 she received for her half interest in the community, which included the Del Frisco's Steakhouse businesses, with the $22.7 million dollar sale price, allegedly received by Mr. Wamstad from Lone Star, she filed suit alleging fraud. 175 years later on November 8th, 2011 Tuesday night at 8:30 pm in a Texas Hold-em poker game, Dale Francis Wamstad went all in with The Four Sisters. She's a great lady Chamberlain was reportedly perplexed: his advertisement had not mentioned Lincoln by name, and he had used the same advertising concept for nearly five years, which was a list that compared Chamberlain's four-star listing with the three-and-a-half stars enjoyed by Del Frisco's and others, with the recent inclusion of III Forks on the lower-rated list. at 573-74 (quoting New York Times, 376 U.S. at 279-80, 84 S.Ct. Having negated an essential element of Wamstad's cause of action, Defendant-Appellants are entitled to summary judgment. Wamstad's role was both central and germane to the controversy about his contentious relationships. See Casso, 776 S.W.2d at 555. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. Id. Accordingly, we reverse and render judgment for all Appellants. As noted, falsity alone does not raise a fact question on actual malice. Even after Rumore was acquitted based on self-defense, the New Orleans press continued to cover the couple's subsequent suits against each other, including Wamstad's suit in 1997 against Rumore for damages from shooting him and Rumore's subsequent countersuit for $5 million. (Courtesy Adobe Stock) Rooster Town Cafe should open by Labor Day at 3613 Shire Blvd., Ste . Id. The Shire has new ownership. We disagree that no "public" controversy existed. The article also stated that son Roy Wamstad recounted at least eleven separate instances in which he asserted Wamstad physically abused him and his mother. The article recounted stories of Wamstad's physical and emotional abuse of family members and his numerous disputes with business partners. In an extensive affidavit, Stuertz stated the following, among other things: In researching for the Article, he interviewed at least nineteen people, reviewed numerous court documents (listing fifty-seven documents), court transcripts, and numerous newspaper articles concerning Wamstad (listing forty-eight newspaper articles). Wamstad's ex-wife, Lena Rumore, describes alleged incidents of Wamstad's physical abuse of her, her shooting of Wamstad in 1985, and the ensuing trial in which she was acquitted based on self-defense. Wamstad himself perpetuated the public nature of the debate over his contentious relationships through his personal self-promotion in his advertising and his other interactions with the press-with all their attendant ramifications for the opinion-forming, consuming public. The managing editor had stated to her that virtually all of the information, even that conveyed in interviews with Rumore and Roy Wamstad, was corroborated by other sources or documents. As noted by D Magazine, it was unlike other high-end steakhouses in Dallas, . Alan S. Loewinsohn, Loewinshn Flegle, L.L.P., Dallas, for appellee. 683 S.W.2d 369, 374-75 (Tex.1984). The evidence includes an Associated Press article, from November 1994, that chronicled the long-standing personal rivalry between Fertel and Wamstad and also reported Fertel's allegation that Wamstad was behind the supposedly independent Top-Ten rating. And when he wished to, he participated in the debate by using his media access to propound his point of view. 1987)). The lawsuit was eventually settled. Several inquiries are relevant in examining the libel plaintiff's role in the controversy: "(1) whether the plaintiff sought publicity surrounding the controversy, (2) whether the plaintiff had access to the media, and (3) whether the plaintiff voluntarily engaged in activities that necessarily involved the risk of increased exposure and injury to reputation." About TEXAS: Beef Fish Fowl Prac. The continuing press coverage over the years showed that the public was indeed interested in Wamstad's personal behavior in both the family and business context.