## Facts

- HBO broadcast a one-hour documentary, “Women on Trial,” about four southeast Texas custody disputes in which fathers received custody after mothers alleged child abuse.
- Two of the featured cases were presided over by Charles Dean Huckabee, the sitting judge of a Harris County district court with a family-law preference.
- Huckabee’s defamation claim focused on the program’s treatment of a custody decision involving four-year-old Wayne Hebert, in which Huckabee issued a temporary order transferring custody to the father and denying the mother visitation after a hearing.
- The program included allegations and interview material suggesting the child had been abused and that the father was responsible; investigative authorities concluded abuse occurred but could not identify the abuser.
- A later court-appointed psychologist opined the injury likely was caused by the child’s older brother rather than the father; the documentary did not include this opinion.
- Huckabee alleged the documentary’s specific statements and overall presentation falsely portrayed him as knowingly disregarding children’s best interests and as corrupt or biased, relying in part on omissions, editorial framing, and internal production materials.
- HBO supported summary judgment with affidavits from the researcher, director, and HBO personnel stating they believed the broadcast was accurate and had no awareness of falsity or serious doubts, and describing pre-broadcast research and legal review.

## Issues

1. Whether a sitting judge suing for defamation over a documentary about his custody rulings must prove “actual malice” under the public-official standard.
2. Whether HBO’s summary-judgment evidence conclusively negated actual malice, shifting the burden to Huckabee to produce evidence raising a genuine fact issue.
3. Whether omissions, editorial choices, internal disparaging characterizations, and extensive pre-broadcast legal review can, without proof of subjective doubt, create a fact issue on reckless disregard.
4. Whether Texas imposes a heightened “clear and convincing” evidentiary requirement at the summary-judgment stage for public-official defamation claims.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Texas affirmed summary judgment for Time Warner (HBO).
- The court held Huckabee was a public official and therefore had to prove actual malice.
- HBO conclusively negated actual malice through affidavits and record evidence showing belief in the truth of the broadcast and lack of serious doubts.
- Huckabee produced no evidence raising a genuine issue of material fact that HBO published with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth.
- The court rejected adopting a special Texas summary-judgment rule requiring “clear and convincing” proof of actual malice at the summary-judgment stage, applying ordinary Texas summary-judgment standards instead.

## Legal Principles

- A public official asserting defamation must prove actual malice: knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for whether the statement was false.
- Actual malice is a subjective standard requiring proof the defendant entertained serious doubts or had a high degree of awareness of probable falsity; negligence, poor judgment, or failure to investigate is insufficient.
- In Texas, a defendant may obtain summary judgment by conclusively negating an essential element (including actual malice); the plaintiff must then produce evidence raising a genuine fact issue.
- Omission of potentially favorable information and editorial framing, without evidence of subjective doubt about truth, do not establish actual malice.
- Pre-publication legal review aimed at reducing libel risk is not, by itself, evidence of actual malice.

## Conclusion

The Texas Supreme Court held that a judge, as a public official, could not maintain a defamation claim against HBO absent evidence the filmmakers subjectively doubted the truth of the documentary, and affirmed summary judgment because the record contained no fact issue on actual malice.


Huckabee v. Time Warner Ent. Co., L.P., 19 S.W.3d 413 (Tex. 2000)