Miller v. Watkins

• Decision Date: 11 March 2021
• Docket Number: No. 02-20-00165-CV,02-20-00165-CV
• Parties: CARLYE JONES MILLER, Appellant v. MICHELLE WATKINS, Appellee
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

CARLYE JONES MILLER, Appellant v. MICHELLE WATKINS, Appellee

No. 02-20-00165-CV

Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

March 11, 2021

On Appeal from the 393rd District Court Denton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 19-11600-393

Before Kerr, Bassel, and Wallach, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Bassel MEMORANDUM OPINION

I. Introduction

In this accelerated appeal, Appellant Carlye Jones Miller raises two issues challenging the trial court's denial of a motion invoking the provisions of the Texas Citizens Participation Act (the TCPA or the Act) by which she sought to dismiss Appellee Michelle Watkins's suit against her. Watkins's suit alleged causes of action against Miller for defamation and tortious interference with actual and prospective contract. The suit alleged that Miller had made defamatory statements to various governmental and private individuals when she challenged whether Watkins should be permitted to teach classes at a school where Miller's daughter was a pupil.

Miller moved to dismiss Watkins's suit claiming that the statements that she made were an exercise of rights protected by the TCPA. Watkins responded to the motion by filing several items of evidence that she argued established a prima facie case for each essential element of the claims that she had brought against Miller. The trial court found that Watkins had met her burden to establish a prima facie showing that her claims were meritorious and should not be dismissed.

We conclude that the trial court's ruling was correct. This opinion focuses on our conclusion that Watkins presented prima facie proof establishing the elements of her defamation claim. Because this conclusion is dispositive, we do not address whether Miller properly invoked the TCPA. Also, we do not address whether Watkins presented prima facie proof of her tortious-interference claim because thatappellate contention was waived by Miller due to being inadequately briefed. We also overrule Miller's contention that Watkins lacked standing to bring her suit because she failed to comply with the Texas Defamation Mitigation Act and that the trial court should have considered Watkins's request for injunctive relief to be a discrete legal action that is subject to dismissal under the TCPA.

II. Background

A. Factual background

To set the scene for the parties' dispute, Miller and Watkins each have daughters who attend the same elementary school, are in the same grade, and are friends. Miller and Watkins were both active in the parent-teacher organization (PTO) of the school that their daughters attended. Watkins was one of the parents who taught a PTO-sponsored art class called Meet the Masters and was also qualified as a substitute teacher for the school. It is apparent from the record that Miller and Watkins have a history of conflict.

The controversy that led to Watkins's suit against Miller was sparked by an electronic message that Watkins sent her ex-husband, with whom she shared custody of her daughter. The message objected to their daughter's spending time in Miller's home. The message claimed, among other things, that there had been "a number of incidents at the school involving that family that [were] concerning," that a police report had been filed against Miller for harassment, and that they (presumably members of the Miller family) had disparaged Watkins's ex-husband.

The message was passed to Miller. The receipt of the message produced several actions by Miller. She stated her views about Watkins on Facebook, texted and telephoned other parents who were also in contact with Watkins, and contacted the principal of the school that Watkins's and Miller's daughters attended. What Miller said is documented in the record, which includes copies of her texts and Facebook posts and copies of her emails and other communications with the school. These documents became part of the record because other parents who texted with Miller or were friends with her on Facebook attached copies of the texts and posts to declarations that Watkins filed in support of her response to Miller's TCPA motion to dismiss. A business-records affidavit from the school district's custodian of records attached the communications that Miller had with the principal of the elementary school and also with other school district officials. The attachments to the business-records affidavit total 229 pages and span communications over a four-month period.¹ Further, the other parents outlined in their declarations what Miller had allegedly said about Watkins during telephone conversations.

Below, we will outline the statements that Miller allegedly made about Watkins. To give context to some of the statements, we note that Watkins concedes that certain statements that Miller made about her past are true. Watkins acknowledgedthat she had been arrested for public intoxication ten years prior to the suit. Miller also obtained and provided to the school a ten-year-old record of a CPS "Family Team Plan," which was apparently at least partially prompted by the public-intoxication arrest and required supervised visitation for a period of time when Watkins visited with her children.

Miller asserted that her impetus for communicating with the school's principal about Watkins was "because [Watkins] actually substitutes for the school and helps with the art program [and because Miller] felt like this finally needed to be addressed." During her communications with the school, Miller made a host of statements about Watkins. These included the following:

• Though Miller did not think that Watkins would harm Miller's daughter, Miller's daughter felt unsafe around Watkins.

• Miller stated, "If she was just a crazy parent slandering my name, I wouldn't be talking to you guys right now[;] but she is employed at the school and she is around my children and I really don't feel safe like we have been for all of these years."

• Miller claimed that "all you have to do is talk to enough people to know that there is something psychologically wrong with [Watkins,]" but Miller would not provide names because she did not want others dragged into the controversy.

• Watkins had "CPS charges including child endangerment and public intoxication," and Miller obtained copies of records "to ensure Ms. Watkins [was] no longer allowed on campus."

• "Watkins ha[d] been to a mental hospital and was institutionalized . . . ."

• Miller obtained public records "to show that Watkins should not be at school."

• Watkins is "adult bullying at its finest."

• Miller planned to contact CPS to communicate about the email that Watkins had written to her ex-husband.

• The police told Watkins to stop "following" Miller.

• According to Miller, "[t]he psychological abuse on [Watkins's] kids by [Watkins] is sickening."

• Miller had proof that Watkins had been stalking her on social media, allegedly confirmed by Miller's conversation with Watkins's son.

• Miller knew of no instances of Watkins's misconduct that had occurred at the school; but Watkins volunteered at the school, and Watkins's efforts to slander Miller had to stop.

• Miller stated that she had "talked to [the] local police department" and that they were going to set up a meeting for her with an investigator, "but they said [Miller] should go ahead and talk to the school to see if [the school was] going to do something."

• Miller reported that she had

[j]ust finished with the investigator. He will be contacting [Watkins] to stop harassing me and saying things that aren't true and searching my social media. . . . The investigator is also going to contact the ISD police to let them know what's going on because even though she hasn't done anything at the school that we know of (other than negatively affect the kids['] friendship)[,] they need to be aware that she's been told to stop.

• Miller's daughter was excluded from activities because of the actions of "an evil mother. That is BULLYING."

• Watkins's child "is afraid of her mother." Watkins punishes her daughter for associating with Miller's daughter, and "[t]his is sick behavior."

• "This situation has gotten out of hand and goes beyond the harassment that we've been dealing with for the last few years. A parent involved at the school is FORCING her child to exclude her best friend[—]all for her own evil agenda."

• Watkins had "public intoxication[,] among other things[,] on her record[,]" and Miller forbade Watkins to be anywhere near her daughter.

• Miller asked the school to "keep [Watkins] away from [Miller's daughter] anytime [Watkins was] at the school volunteering."

• Miller stated that she had "to involve CPS now because [Watkins] should not be around my child ever. There is no reason that children should be hiding scared at the school that they attend because of a horrible volunteer mother."

• "How hard is it to get the one person hurting EVERYONE[] out of the school? At least [for] the remainder of this year."

• "Watkins is BULLYING my family AND her own daughter."

• "What you guys did, by excluding my child instead of removing the bully is very disturbing."

• Miller "found out that [she was] not able to get [Watkins's] [c]hild endangerment records or the records of her being in a mental hospital[,] but her ex-husband [was] in the process of doing that because she's causing so many problems for them as well."

• "[Watkins] has to stay away from the school until my child is gone."

• Miller stated that she had "contacted our police department AGAIN, and they're in the process of getting an email together stating that [] Watkins is slandering my name by saying that I have charges against me. Not only is she hurting my child, she's hurting her own child and making it HELL for me when it comes to volunteering at my kids['] school. This is all ILLEGAL what she is doing[,] and you guys aren't taking it seriously."

• Miller provided notes from the local police department, which described the interaction that both Miller and Watkins had with police. The

...