Within a few years, he went "bust" in the chicken business. And the evidence shows that Wamstad used his access to the media to comment on his rivals and his business disputes. Wamstad had not reacted to the advertisement before. Texas Monthly and at least one trade magazine covered the suit with Fertel, as did ABC World News Tonight. Doubleday & Co., Inc. v. Rogers, 674 S.W.2d 751, 756 (Tex.1984) (reckless conduct not measured by whether reasonably prudent person would have investigated before publishing; must show defendant entertained serious doubts as to truth of publication, citing St. Amant, 390 U.S. at 731, 733, 88 S.Ct. The contours of the controversy requirement are at least partly defined by the notion that public-figure status attaches to those who "invite attention and comment" because they have thrust themselves to the forefront of a public controversy "to influence the resolution of the issue involved." Our review of the record shows that after Williams was deposed, he testified by affidavit, stating that he went over at least two drafts of the Article with Stuertz, who answered all of his questions, and that the Article went through the standard, detailed process for editing and revision. We conclude that the affidavits contain ample evidence of a plausible basis for the Observer's employees to believe in the truth of the Statements as reported in the Article. Wamstad is upping his bet that The Shire, with a "town village" design, will fill a need for a mixed-use project in Richardson. 1989). Wilson was not a public-figure case, that court applied federal procedural standards, and in a cryptic discussion it used the general term "malice," giving no indication it was applying the constitutional "actual malice" standard that we must apply here. The two were inevitably linked, particularly because reports by others contrasted significantly with the family-man persona Wamstad persistently projected in his advertising. For example, in 1995, the Dallas Morning News described Wamstad as "a colorful and controversial member of the Dallas restaurant scene since arriving from New Orleans in 1989." Wamstad's reliance on Wilson v. UT Health Center is also misplaced. Thus, the issue of credibility does not preclude summary judgment on the issue of actual malice. For example, at the time of the dispute with Piper, the Dallas press reported that Wamstad ran an advertisement stating, I've done some stupid things in my life, but selling my steakhouse to my attorney has to top the list and another one in which he accused Piper of running a clone restaurant. 51.014(6) (Vernon Supp. Tex. After Wamstad recovered from his wounds, he came back to the restaurant, which his wife had been running in his absence, and threw everybody out, including Roy. Select this result to view Dale Francis Wamstad's phone number, address, and more. at 558-59. (quoting Dilworth v. Dudley, 75 F.3d 307, 309 (7th Cir.1996)). I probably deserve it. I spend Sundays with my family. After he sold his interest in Del Frisco's, Wamstad continued to use his family values to promote his new restaurant, III Forks, which he opened in 1998.5, The press reported on a number of Wamstad's business disputes, particularly those with a personal edge to them. The Four Sisters were trying to stare down Dale. Nixon v. Mr. Wamstad's ex-wife, Lena Rumore, describes alleged incidents of Wamstad's physical abuse of her, her shooting of Wamstad in 1985, and the ensuing trial in which she was acquitted based on self-defense. 175 years later on November 8th, 2011 Tuesday night at 8:30 pm in a Texas Hold-em poker game, Dale Francis Wamstad went all in with The Four Sisters. Co. L.P., 19 S.W.3d 413, 420 (Tex. Through his promotion of his family-man image in his advertising over the years, Wamstad voluntarily sought public attention, at the very least for the purpose of influencing the consuming public. The Texas Supreme Court has recently addressed the issue of what type of evidence is probative of actual malice in a case involving media defendants. The record includes the following radio advertisement for III Forks, featuring his children from his current marriage, with Wamstad making reference to his wife Colleen: The press reported on a number of Wamstad's business disputes, particularly those with a personal edge to them. The record refers to Wamstad's involvement in at least ten restaurants since 1977 and contains court documents concerning legal disputes over at least four different restaurants, involving four different former associates. (citing Trotter, 818 F.2d at 433; Waldbaum v. Fairchild Publications, Inc., 627 F.2d 1287, 1296-98 (D.C.Cir.1980)). See Howell v. Hecht, 821 S.W.2d 627, 630 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1991, writ denied) (concluding similar language negated actual malice). A lower court agreed with Wamstad, but Rumore won on appeal. Former Fish chef Chris Svalesen countersued his ex-Fish Partner Steven Upright last month in the latest installment of their ongoing ownership battle in the successful downtown seafood restaurant. Updated 1:52 PM Jun 9, 2020 CDT. He recently purchased an adjacent 10 acres, where he's already planning a 144,000 square foot second phase. While that may well raise a fact question whether Rumore did indeed act in self-defense, it is not probative of Rumore's subjective attitude toward the truth of the Statements she made. In an extensive affidavit, Stuertz stated the following, among other things: In researching for the Article, he interviewed at least nineteen people, reviewed numerous court documents (listing fifty-seven documents), court transcripts, and numerous newspaper articles concerning Wamstad (listing forty-eight newspaper articles). The Rooster Town Cafe will serve breakfast and lunch seven days a week.