Neal Rauhauser v. James McGibney and ViaView, Inc.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 11, 2014
Docket02-14-00215-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Neal Rauhauser v. James McGibney and ViaView, Inc. (Neal Rauhauser v. James McGibney and ViaView, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Neal Rauhauser v. James McGibney and ViaView, Inc., (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00215-CV

Neal Rauhauser § From the 67th District Court

§ of Tarrant County (067-270669-14) v. § December 11, 2014

James McGibney and ViaView, Inc. § Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was error in the trial court’s judgment. We reverse the denial by operation

of law of Neal Rauhauser’s motion to dismiss under the Texas Citizens’

Participation Act (TCPA) as to all James McGibney’s claims against Rauhauser

and as to all ViaView, Inc.’s claims against Rauhauser that are based on alleged

communications made by Rauhauser in connection with an issue related to

McGibney. We remand this case to the trial court to enter an order dismissing all

claims against Rauhauser except ViaView’s business disparagement claim and

tortious interference with business relationships claim to the extent those claims

are not based on communications by Rauhauser made in connection with an

issue relating to McGibney, and for further proceedings to award court costs, reasonable attorney’s fees, and other expenses incurred by Rauhauser in

defending against Appellees’ suit as justice and equity may require; and to award

sanctions against McGibney, ViaView, or both in an amount that the trial court

determines sufficient to deter them from bringing similar actions under section

27.009(a)(1) and (2) of the TCPA.

It is further ordered that McGibney and ViaView shall pay all of the costs of

this proceeding, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Neal Rauhauser v. James McGibney and ViaView, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neal-rauhauser-v-james-mcgibney-and-viaview-inc-texapp-2014.