Robert Arthur Burns, II, et ux. v. Louisiana Television Broadcasting, LLC d/b/a WBRZ TV Channel 2

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

ROBERT ARTHUR BURNS, II, ET NO. 2019 CW 0331
UX

VERSUS

LOUISIANA TELEVISION
BROADCASTING, LLC D/ B/ A WBRZ

TV CHANNEL 2, ET AL SEPTEMBER 23, 2019

In Re: Louisiana Television Broadcasting, LLC d/ b/ a WBRZ- TV
Channel 2 and Christopher Nakamoto, applying for

supervisory writs, 21st Judicial District Court,
Parish of Livingston, No. 156480.

BEFORE: WELCH, CHUTZ, AND PENZATO, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The February 19, 2019, ruling of the trial

court denying defendants Louisiana Television Broadcasting, LLC
d/ b/ a WBRZ TV Channel 2 and its reporter, Christopher Nakamoto' s

motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Robert Arthur Burns, II
claim for defamation is reversed and the motion for summary
judgment is granted dismissing plaintiffs' claims against

defendants. In order to prevail on a defamation claim, a

plaintiff must prove that the defendant, with actual malice or

other fault, published a false statement with
defamatory words

which caused plaintiff damages. Costello v. Hardy, 2003- 1146
La. 1/ 21/ 2004), 864 So. 2d 129, 139. If even one of the
required elements of the tort is lacking, the cause of action

fails. Id. In this matter, defendants have pointed out the

absence of factual support for one or more elements essential to
plaintiffs' claims, i. e., false statements and actual malice or

other fault in publishing the conclusions of
a state agency and
Goyeneche' s statement of opinion concerning same. Plaintiffs,
then, did not produce factual support sufficient to establish

the existence of a genuine issue of material fact.

JEW

WRC
AHP

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

LY
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT