HOUSTON – A local homeowners association obtained a favorable ruling against one of its board members on claims of defamation.
Justice Terry Jennings issued an 18-page ruling on July 31 in the 1st Court of Appeals in a lawsuit initiated by Sabrenda Littles against Riverwalk Council of Co-owners Inc. and JDH Association Management Co. The ruling affirmed a summary judgment decision by the 165th District Court in Harris County.
Littles appealed to the court after the District Court granted summary judgment in her case in favor of the homeowners association, sustaining that "the trial court erred in granting appellees’ matter-of-law and no-evidence summary judgment motions," the ruling states.
The case started in 2015 when Littles alleged that the association published defamatory materials against her. She alleges the defamatory statements included comments that she was "crazy," "bipolar," "tried to rig the homeowners board member election," and other statements, the ruling states.
Littles also sustained that the association "“exposed [her] to public hatred, contempt and ridicule,” “impeached [her] honesty, integrity, virtue and reputation,” and “imputed a mental disease to [her],” as well as she also stated that the defamatory statements were "false, made with actual malice, and affected her membership, reputation, and effectiveness on the Board of Directors for Riverwalk," the ruling states.
In the motions for summary judgment, Riverwalk HOA argued that the comments were not made by one of its board members and neither by one of JDH's employees, and that Littles "could produce no evidence of damages, which was required as the statements at issue do not constitute defamation per se, " the ruling states.
A total of two motions for summary judgments were filed, claiming matter-of-law and no-evidence provided by Littles.
The district court decided to combine all motions into one single judgment.
As stated in the ruling, Littles claimed in the appeal that "'the trial court was not authorized to treat two final judgments as one.'”
Jennings, in his ruling, stated that the "trial court did not err in signing a single final judgment that superseded and replaced its previous orders," confirming the understanding of the combining the summary judgment motions into one ruling.
Court of Appeals for the 1st District of Texas case number 01-16-00790-CV