On the facts of California Commercial Investment Group v. Herrington, “even
though the charges were dropped, [Defendant’s] statements made to police are protected as an exercise of the right to petition and of free speech.” The Fifth Court went on to find that no prima facie case was made on the plaintiff’s malicious-prosecution and defamation claims, and reversed the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s TCPA motion to dismiss. No. 05-19-00805-CV (July 8, 2020) (mem. op.).

In this malicious prosecution case, the Court of Appeals reversed the jury’s award of actual and punitive damages because the evidence introduced at trial was legally insufficient to support the jury’s verdict.  Among other things, the Court found that the defendant did not “initiate the prosecution” by bringing a formal charge to initiate the prosecution.  Instead, the defendant simply provided a “Voluntary Statement” that the law enforcement officer used to formally charge the plaintiff.  Thus, the Court found that the plaintiff could not establish the legal requirement that the defendant “initiated or procured” the underlying criminal prosecution.

Lermon v. Minyard Food Stores, Inc.