In its ExxonMobil Corporation and WHM Custom Services Inc. v. Rincones decision issued last week, the Texas Supreme Court held that there is no independent cause of action in Texas for compelled self-defamation. http://www.txcourts.gov/supreme/orders-opinions/2017/may/may-26-2017/.
The crux of this sometimes-recognized tort is that a former employee's publication to a third party can satisfy the publication element of a defamation claim because the former employee is effectively compelled to publish the defamatory statement to prospective employers when the employee is asked why she left her former employment. The claim often arose in cases where an employee alleged that the employer gave a false reason for the employee's discharge, and the employee was "compelled" to publish the false statement to prospective new employers during the hiring process. Prior to the Supreme Court's decision, several appeals courts in Texas had recognized the theory.
In its decision, the Court cited several reasons for its refusal to recognize the claim. First, such a refusal is a natural extension of the well-established rule that if the publication about which the plaintiff complains was consented to, authorized, invited, or procured by the plaintiff, she cannot recover for injuries sustained by reason of the publication. Second, the recognition of such a claim would not only discourage plaintiffs from mitigating damages to their own reputations, but would also enable an employee to unilaterally create an actionable tort against the employer, and third, the compelled, self-defamation doctrine would unacceptably impinge on the at-will employment doctrine.
In short, employment plaintiffs now have one less claim to assert against employers in Texas.