In a move relevant for corporations and law firms across the globe, courts have directed trial courts to grant TCPA (Texas Citizen’s Participation Act) motions to dismiss on the basis of no-contest clause claims. The directive stems from the Texan Legislature’s establishment of a statute aimed at safeguarding parties’ rights to free speech and to petition the courts, as outlined in the TCPA. [See more]
The statute, referenced in Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§ 27.001-.011, was formulated to allow citizens to continue their rightful activities without threats of crippling lawsuits, otherwise known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP suits). In recent developments, the courts have ordered trial courts to honor TCPA motions related to the dismissal of cases founded on no-contest clause claims.
To recap, a no-contest clause, also known as an in terrorem clause, is a provision in a legal instrument designed to frighten anyone from challenging the instrument. In wills and trusts, for instance, this clause essentially spells out that any beneficiary who challenges the validity of the document could lose their inheritance.
In litigation, however, applying a no-contest clause could lead to potential conflicts. When a beneficiary or related party contests the will or trust in court, a well-crafted no-contest clause can deter such actions. Still, it appears that with the new directive, trial courts may now have to reconsider their approach to TCPA motions to dismiss cases, specifically those rooted in no-contest clause claims.
The evolution of this legal position marks an important development for law professionals, particularly those in corporate and commercial fields, and underlines once again the interplay between fairness, justice, and the application of the law.