Opinion
No. 05-04-00831-CV
Opinion Issued July 21, 2005.
On Appeal from the 160th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 02-10739-H.
Affirmed.
Before Justices MORRIS, LANG, and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this case, Terry James and Charlotte Manor complain in a single issue that the summary judgment on their defamation claim was improper. We affirm the trial court's judgment. The background of the case and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties, and therefore we limit recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled.
When appellants do not expressly challenge every ground stated in the motion for summary judgment by specific points of error, or a broad issue, the summary judgment must be affirmed if there is an unchallenged ground upon which the trial court could have based the summary judgment. Malooly Bros., Inc. v. Napier, 461 S.W.2d 119, 121 (Tex. 1970). Unless appellants have specifically challenged every possible ground for summary judgment, the appellate court need not review the merits of the challenged ground and may affirm on an unchallenged ground. Reese v. Beaumont Bank, N.A., 790 S.W.2d 801, 804-05 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1990, no writ).
Here, appellee moved for both a traditional summary judgment on the basis of the statute of limitations and a no-evidence summary judgment. Although appellants generally assert the trial court erred in granting summary judgment, nowhere in the brief presented to this court do appellants argue the summary judgment was improper on the basis of the statute of limitations. Because appellants fail to challenge one of the possible grounds upon which the summary judgment could have been granted, the summary judgment must be affirmed. We overrule appellant's sole point of error.
We affirm the trial court's judgment.