The Texas Court of Appeals recently ruled in a case involving Jennifer Kott-Looney and Susan Michelle Aiello, affirming a lower court's decision not to dismiss Aiello's defamation claims against Kott-Looney. This ruling, issued on July 16, 2026, in docket number 01-23-00941-CV, is significant as it addresses the application of the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) in defamation cases.
The court's decision impacts individuals involved in disputes where allegations of defamation and emotional distress arise, especially in cases where the TCPA is invoked as a defense. The ruling clarifies how the law applies to personal disputes and the criteria for what constitutes a matter of public concern.
Background
The case centers around Jennifer Kott-Looney and Susan Aiello, who became embroiled in a legal battle following Kott-Looney's allegations against Aiello regarding her relationship with Kott-Looney’s husband, David B. Looney. Aiello claimed that Kott-Looney engaged in a pattern of harassment, including posting Aiello's phone number on social media and making false statements about her personal life.
Aiello's legal action stemmed from a series of incidents starting in 2018 when David filed for divorce from Kott-Looney. Following the divorce proceedings, Kott-Looney allegedly began to stalk Aiello, leading to significant emotional distress for Aiello. She filed a lawsuit against Kott-Looney, claiming defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, seeking damages for the harm caused by Kott-Looney's actions.
The Ruling
The Texas Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's decision to deny Kott-Looney's motion to dismiss Aiello's claims. The court ruled that Aiello's claims did not involve a matter of public concern as defined under the TCPA. The court stated, "We conclude that Aiello’s claims against Kott-Looney do not involve a matter of public concern, and as such, Kott-Looney is unable to establish by preponderance of the evidence that Aiello’s suit against her is based on or in response to her rights of free speech or association."
Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Guiney formed the panel that issued the ruling. The court emphasized that Kott-Looney's statements and behavior were personal attacks related to a private dispute, which did not qualify as matters of public concern under the TCPA.
Impact
This ruling is important for individuals facing similar situations where defamation claims arise from personal disputes. The court's decision clarifies that not all disputes involving public statements fall under the protections of the TCPA. The ruling reinforces the idea that personal grievances, even when they involve third parties, do not automatically transform into matters of public concern.
Going forward, this ruling may influence how similar cases are handled in Texas courts, particularly regarding the applicability of the TCPA in defamation cases. It highlights the importance of distinguishing between private disputes and matters that genuinely affect the public interest.
What’s Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Kott-Looney plans to appeal this ruling or if there are any related cases pending. However, the outcome of this case could potentially lead to further legal discussions about the boundaries of the TCPA and its application in defamation lawsuits.