Texas Supreme Court: Texas Court Has Jurisdiction in Gloria Trevi Defamation Suit against TV Azteca

Photo of Brian Humphrey

In a decision handed down last Friday, the Texas Supreme Court held that Texas courts have jurisdiction over Mexican television network TV Azteca, along with two other defendants, in a suit by defamation suit filed in Hidalgo County by Mexican pop star Gloria Trevi. This is an important case in the development of the law of personal jurisdiction in media cases in Texas and, perhaps, the country.

In TV Azteca, S.A.B. de C.V. v. Trevino Ruiz, Gloria de Los Angeles Trevino Ruiz, better known by her stage name, Gloria Trevi, along with her husband and child, all of whom currently live in McAllen, Texas, filed a libel suit in Texas state court in Hidalgo County against TV Azteca, TV Azteca news anchor and producer Patricia Chapoy, and Publimax, the owner of two Monterrey TV stations, over a series of stories aired in the late 2000s on the Spanish-language entertainment news show Ventaneando. The stories concerned Trevi's 2000 arrest in Brazil for kidnapping and sexual assault, charges of which she was ultimately acquitted in 2004 after spending more than four months in prison. Trevi asserted that the stories included several false and defamatory statements about the charges and her time in prison.

TV Azteca and the other defendants filed a "special appearance," a procedure in Texas courts by which a nonresident defendant can challenge the court's jurisdiction over them. The defendants argued that Texas courts lacked personal jurisdiction because none of them reside or are located in Texas, because the suit was over broadcasts that were aired only on Mexican television (though their signals reach South Texas), and because the stories concerned Mexican citizens and events that did not occur in Texas.

There are two components to a court's jurisdiction: subject matter jurisdiction, which concerns what type of case the court can hear, and personal jurisdiction, which concerns what defendants are subject to the court's authority. TV Azteca's and the other defendants complaint regarded personal jurisdiction.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Due Process Clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments allow American courts to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident defendants-that is, individuals who do not live in the state or businesses that are not incorporated in or principally located in the state-only in suits that arise from contacts created by the defendant's "purposeful availment of the benefits of conducting activities in the forum state," and then only where jurisdiction comports with "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice." These broad concepts, first articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1945 case International Shoe Co. v. Washington, have spawned a long line of state and federal cases concerning the limits of personal jurisdiction.

Personal jurisdiction becomes particularly complicated in media cases, where the effects of broadcasts, newspapers, and, now, internet posts reach across state and national borders. The U.S. Supreme Court has found in the past that courts have jurisdiction over nonresident media defendants when the defendant intentionally made use of the forum state's market:

In Keeton v. Hustler Magazine, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a nonresident magazine that had defamed a nonresident plaintiff had minimum contracts where the magazine had "'continuously and deliberately exploited'" the forum state's market by distributing thousands of copies of its magazine in the forum state.

In Calder v. Jones, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the a nonresident reporter and editor had minimum contacts where they defamed a resident plaintiff in a tabloid article that concerned the plaintiff's activities in the forum state, was drawn from sources in the forum state, and caused the plaintiff to suffer "'the brunt of the harm'" in the forum state. Also, as in Keeton, the editor and publisher knew that the thousands of copies of the tabloid were distributed in the forum state.

In TV Azteca, the Texas Supreme Court held that it was not enough that the defendants defamed a Texas resident, nor was it enough that the broadcasts happened to reach Texas. However, because the defendants actively promoted their broadcasts in Texas to Texas viewers, and because the brunt of the harm was felt in Texas, Texas courts had jurisdiction over them.

If you or someone you know has been the victim of libel or slander, contact the attorneys of Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels, Agosto & Friend by calling 713-222-7211 or toll free at 1-800-870-9584.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information

Awards & Recognition

  • 2016-2017 Equal Access to Justice Champion

    The Equal Access to Justice Champions Program was started by the Houston Bar Association in 2006, to help ensure placement of Houston Volunteer Lawyers cases with pro bono volunteers. Originally, firms were tiered according to size, and firms within each tier committed to accept a certain number of pro bono cases from HVL each year for five years.

  • The National Trial Lawyers | Top 100 Trial Lawyers

    The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100 is an invitation-only organization composed of the premier trial lawyers from each state or region who meet stringent qualifications as civil plaintiff and/or criminal defense trial lawyers. Selection is based on a thorough multi-phase objective and uniformly applied process which includes peer nominations combined with third-party research.

  • Million Dollar Advocates Forum

    Established in 1993, the Million Dollar Advocates Forum (which includes the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum) is one of the most prestigious groups of trial lawyers in the United States. Membership is limited to attorneys who have won million and multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements. There are over 4000 members throughout the country. Fewer than 1% of U.S. lawyers are members.

  • Recognized by Best Lawyers America | Abraham, Watkins, Nichols, Sorrels, Agosto & Aziz | 2017

    Recognition by Best Lawyers is based entirely on peer review. Their methodology is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical area and legal practice area.

  • Lead Counsel Rated

    In order to earn the Lead Counsel Rating, an attorney must not only demonstrate significant legal experience, but must also receive multiple peer recommendations advocating his or her ability. This is a key component in the screening process.

  • Texas Super Lawyers | Texas Monthly

    Each year, Super Lawyers recognizes the top lawyers in Texas via a patented multiphase selection process involving peer nomination, independent research and peer evaluation. The Texas lawyers who receive the highest point totals during this selection process are further recognized in Texas Super Lawyers Top Lists.

Get Your Free Case Review 713.587.9668

Let Us Help You Today! Request a Free Consultation

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.


Privacy Policy

  • $50+ Million Personal Injury Fire and Explosion

    The firm successfully represented nearly 100 victims who suffered personal injuries and damages to property from a large fire and explosion resulting in a settlement of more than $50 million. The firm served as lead lawyers on the steering committee in this litigation.

  • $80 Million Personal Injury Large Plant Explosion

    The firm successfully represented 270 plaintiffs', taking a lead role in the plaintiffs' steering committee, who suffered injuries in a large plant explosion resulting in a settlement of nearly $80 million.

  • $50+ Million Personal Injury Plant Fire and Explosion

    The firm successfully represented 45 personal injury victims in a plant fire and explosion, serving on the plaintiffs' steering committee, concluding with a settlement of more than $50 million.

  • $22+ Million Personal Injury Work Site Accident

    The firm prevailed in a personal injury trial for a worksite injury client with the jury returning a verdict and resulting in a judgment of over $22 million for the firm's client.

  • $12 Million Auto Accident 18-Wheeler Collision

    The firm successfully achieved a $12 million settlement for the family of a man who died in an 18 wheeler collision.

  • $30 Million Personal Injury Burn Victims

    The firm prevailed on behalf of three burn victims with settlements totaling nearly $30 million.

Our Record Of Success.

When you are hurt and you choose a law firm to represent you in court or at the negotiation table, you need to carefully consider the firm's record.

More Success Stories