Skip to main content
· 5/17/2013

Joseph E. Hancock v. Easwaran P. Variyam

Citations

  • 400 S.W.3d 59
  • 56 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 561
  • 2013 WL 2150468
  • 2013 Tex. LEXIS 394

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that determination of whether statement is defamatory per se is question of law
  • defining defamation “as the invasion of a person’s interest in her reputation and good name”
  • describing defamation per se statements as those that injure a person in his “office, profession, or occupation”
  • discussing rationale behind presuming harm in defamation per se cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Guzman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.