1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 2 - 0 8 - 1 8 8 - CV
PAUL F RI EDM AN AN D APPE L L AN TS S US AN F R I E DMAN V . TH E GLA D N EY C EN TER A N D A PPELL EES T HE P AR T Y DOI NG B US I NE S S AS ED N A G LAD N EY C EN TER

----- ----- --

FR O M THE 9 6 TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I . I nt r oduc t i on I n f our i ss ues , A ppe l l ant s Paul and Susa n Fr i edm an ( “Pa ul , ” “Sus an, ” and
c o l l e c ti v e l y , “F ri e d m a n s ” ) c h a l l e n g e th e tri a l c o u rt’s o rd e r g ra n ti n g s u m m a ry j udg m ent f or A ppel l ees, Th e G l adney C ent er and Th e Part y D oi ng B usi ness as2 ... A cc or di ng t o t he Fr i edm ans , how eve r , t heyex pr es se d t o Gl adn ey, on

m or e t han oneoc ca si on, t hatt hey di d notw anta chi l d w hos e p ar ent s had any 2 E d n a G la d n e yC e n t e r(c o lle c t iv e ly“ G la d n e y ” ). S p e c if ic a lly , t h e F r ie d m a n s c la im t hata gen ui ne i ss ue of m at er i al f ac t exi st s as t o bot h t hei rne gl i gen ce an d f r aud
c l a i ms . We a f f i r m. II . F a c tu a la n d P ro c e d u ra lH i s to ry I n 1979, Pau l an d Susa n a ppl i ed t o Gl adn ey, a pr i vat e a dopt i on a gen cy, f ora n in fa n t t o adop tand r ai se as t hei row n. D ur i ng a pr e- pl acem entof f i ce i nt ervi ew , t he Fr i edm ansdi sc us se d t he c h i l d t heyw oul d l i ke t o ha ve. The
c o n v e rs a ti o n i s re fl e c te d i n th e n o te s ta k e n b ya G l a d n e yc a s e w o rk e r:

M r . an d M r s. Fr i edm an ar e a cc e p ti n g o fa bab y of ei t hersex. They h a v e asked t hatw e notconsi der th e m f ort w i ns ora bab y t hati s nots i m i l art o t he n a ti o n a li t y o f the i r ow n . T h e yare ac c e p ti n g o f a pl ann ed out si de del i very , a bab y w i t h a m i nor c o rr e c ti b l e [ sic] pro b l e m an d are n o t co n c e rne d w i th t he ageo f th e b i ol ogi ca l m ot her . Theyar e n ot a c c e p ti n g o f a b a b yw i th a m a j o r p ro b l e m . T h e ya re notac ce pt i ng ofep i l eps y orj uve ni l e d i abe t esi n t he m edi ca l ba ck gr ound ofan i nf antbutar e a cc ept i ng of s e n i l e d i a b e te s , a l l e rg i e s a n d a s t h m a . T h e ya re ac ce pt i ng ofm ar ij uan a e xpe r i m ent at i on and sh ow ed a gr ea tde al o f h e s i t anc y t ow ar d a ny o t herdr ug exp er i m ent at i on, pa rt i cul ar l y i fi ti s aft erco nce pt i on of a c h i l d . T

h e ya rea c c ep ti

ngo f a n un kn o wnfa th er. Th ey have asked thatwe n o tconsider them f

or an i nf ant whos e bi

o logi ca l m other

i s schi zophreni

c o r wh ereth ereis af

a m ilym em b er

wh o iss ch izop h ren ic . [E m p h a s i s a d d e d .] 2“em ot i onal , psychi at r i c or psychol ogi cal pr obl em s” i n t hei rb ackgr oun ds.

[E m p h a s i s a d d e d .]

3 ... D ys gr aph i a i s a d ef i ci enc y i n t he abi l i t y t o w r i t e, r ega r dl es s oft he a b i l i ty to rea d , n o t du e to i n tel l e c tu a l i m p a i rm e n t.

4 ... T h e fo l l o w i n g i s a n e x c e rp t fro m th e F ri e d m a n s ’ l e tte r: Ou rs o n M a r k wa s b o r n o n S e p t e mb e r2 7 , 1 9 7 9
. He i s now t hi rt ee n a nd a hal f yea r s ol d. Fr om t he ageof t hr ee, w hen he f i r stst art ed pr e- school , he has had i ncr easi ng di f f i cul t i es. H i s pr i m ar y pr obl em , w hi ch has b e e n v e r y w e ll d ia g n o s e d b y e x p e rt s in t h e P h ila d e lp h ia ar ea , i s a m aj or att ent i on def i ci t di so r der . Thoug h not hype r ac t i ve atal l , M ar k i s o n a l ar ge dos ageof m e d ic a t io n (r it a lin a n d c lo n id in e ) d a ily in o r d e rt o h e lp hi m succeed i n school and w i t h ot herar eas ofhi s l i f e. 3 O n S e p tem b e r 2 7 , 1 9 7 9 , a m o th e r i n the G l a d n e yp rog ram g a v e b i rt h to
a b o y . S h o rt lyt h e r e a f t e r , t h e F r ie d m a n s a d o p t e d t h e c h i l d a n d n a m e d h im M ar k. A c c o rdi ng t o t he Fr i edm ans , G l adn ey t ol d t hem t hatt her e w asno evi dence of psychol ogi cal orem ot i onal pr o b le m s i n M ar k’ s bi rt h par ent s. H ow eve r , f r om an ea r l y age , M ar k w as def i ant t ow ar ds t he Fr i ed m a n s a nd
e x h i b i te d ra g e , a n g e r, a n d a n u n w i l l i n g n e s s to c o o p e ra te . V a r i o u s d o c to rs di a g n o s e d M a r kwi t h ma j o rd e p r e s s i o n , i mp u l s e c o n t r o l d i s o r d e r , AD H D , dysgr aphi a, 3an d a d i ffi c u l ty w i th p roc e ss i n g v i su a l se n so ry i n p u t. I n 1 99 3, as a r esul tofM ar k’ s sever e psychol ogi cal and behav i or al i ssues, t he Fr i edm anss ent a l e tt ert o Gl adn ey r equ es t i ng a ny a ddi t i ona l i nf or m at i on t hey m i ght have on M ar k. 4 I n res p o n se , G l a d n e y p rov i d e d the F ri e d m a n s w i thD ur i ng hi s very e ar l y yea r s of edu ca t i on, w e w entf r om s c h o o l t o s c h o o l u n t il t h e p r o b le m w a s f in a lly di agno sed. . . . H e is exper i enci ng gr eatdi f f i cul t i es. W e a re s e e k in g a n yk in d o f h e lp w e c a n fin d . . . . If y o u h a v e an yi n fo rm a ti o n at a l l tha t ha s b e e n a d d e d to M a rk ’s r e c o r d s b yh i s b i rth p a re n ts , w e w o u l d v e ry m uch app r eci at e you shar i ng i tw i t h us. 4 M ar k’ s hos pi t al not es . Then , i n A ugus t 200 6, aft er r ec ei vi ng per m i ss i on f r om M a rk ’s b i rth m o th e r, G l a d n e yp ro v i d e d th e F ri e d m a n s w i th th e b i rth m o th e r’s
c ou ns e l i ng r e c or dst ha th a d be e n i n Gl a dn e y’ s p os s e s s i on s i nc e 1979
. Th e F r i e dm a nss ue d Gl a dn e y f or f r a ud a nd ne gl i ge nc e i n Fe br ua r y 2007,
c la im in g t h a tifM a r k ’s b irt h m o t h e r ’s re c o r d s h a d b e e n d is c lo s e d t o t h e m in 19 79 , t hey never w o u l d have ado pt ed M ar k. I n r esponse t o t he Fr i edm ans’ cl ai m s, G l adn ey f i l ed a m o t i on f ors um m ary j udgm enton b ot h t r adi t i ona l an d
n o e v i d e n c e g ro u n d s . I n i ts tra d i ti o n a l m o ti o n , G l a d n e ym o v e d fo r s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t o n th e g ro u n d o f l i m i ta ti o n s . In i ts n o e v i d e n c e m o ti o n fo r s u m m a ry j udg m ent , G l adney ar gued t hat t he Fr i edm ans had no evi dence of duty, br each
o f d u ty, o r c a u sa ti o n . T h e tr i a l c o u rt g ran ted G l a d n e y ’s m o ti o n i n i ts e n ti rety and di sm i ss ed t he Fr i edm ans ’ cl ai m s w i t h pr ej udi ce . Thi s app ea l f ol l ow ed. I I I . Sum m ary Ju dgm ent H e re, t h e tr i a l co u rt ’s o rde r gra n ti n g su m m a ry j u d g m e n t do e s n o t sp e c i fy th e b a s i s fo r i ts r u l i n g . T h e re fo re , b e c a u s e G l a d n e ym o v e d fo r s u m m a ry5

j udgm enton b ot h t r adi t i ona l and no evi den ce gr oundsan d t he t r i al co urtdi d not
s p e c i f y t h e g ro u n d s o n w h i c h i t w a s g ra n te d , w e w i l l u p h o l d th e s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t i f a n yo n e o f th e g ro u n d s a d v a n c e d i n th e m o ti o n i s m e ri to ri o u s . Joe
v. Two T

h i rtyNi n eJo i n t Ven ture , 1 4 5 S .W .3 d 1 5 0 , 1 5 7 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ). W hen a part y m ove s f or su m m ary j udgm ent unde rbot h r ul es166a( c) an d 166 a( i ) , w e w i l l f i r st r evi ew t he t r i al co urt ’ s j udgm entunde rt he st and ar ds of
ru l e 1 6 6 a (i ). Ford Motor Co. v. Ridgway , 1 3 5 S .W .3 d 5 9 8 , 6 0 0 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ). I f t he a p p e l l a n tf a i l e d t o p r o d u c e mo r e t h a n a s c i n t i l l a o fe v i d e n c e u n d e rt hat bur den , t hen t her e i s no ne ed t o a nal yz e w het herap pel l ee ’ s su m m ary j udgm ent p ro o f s a ti s fi e d th e l e s s s tri n g e n t ru l e 1 6 6 a (c ) b u rd e n . Id . A . N o Evi dence S um m ary Judg m entStandar d ofRev i ew A f t eran ad equ at e t i m e f ordi sc ove r y, t he part y w i t houtt he bur den of pr oofm ay, w i t houtpr es ent i ng e vi den ce , m ove f or su m m ary j udgm enton t he gr ound t hatt her e i s no e vi d e n c e t o s upportan es se nt i al el em entoft he
non m ovant’ s cl ai m ordef ense. Tex. R. C i v. P. 16 6a( i ). The m ot i on m ust
s p e c i fi c a l l ys ta te th e e l e m e n ts fo r w h i c h th e re i s n o e v i d e n c e . Id. ; John so n v. Bre wer & Pritch a rd

, P.C., 7 3 S
. W . 3 d 1 9 3 , 2 0 7 (T e x . 2 0 0 2 ). T h e tri a l c o u rt
m us tgr antt he m ot i on un l es s t he nonm ova nt p ro d u ce s su m m ary j udgm ent
e v i d e n c e th a t ra i s e s a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a te ri a l fa c t. S eeTex. R. Ci v. P.5 ... T h e elem e n ts o f a n e g l i g e n c e ca u se o f a c ti o n a re th e ex i ste n c e o f a

l ega l dut y, a bre a c h oft hatdut y, an d da m age s pr oxi m at el y c aus ed by t he b re a c h . S ee IHS Trea tm ent Ctr. of D es oto, Tex. , I

nc. v. Mas on , 143 S. W . 3d 7 9 4 , 7 9 8 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ). 6 1 6 6 a (i ) & c m t.; S w. E le c . Po wer Co . v. Gran t, 7 3 S .W .3 d 2 1 1 , 2 1 5 (T e x . 2 0 0 2 ). W h e n re v i e w i n g a n o e v i d e n c e s u m m a ryj u d g m e n t, w e e x a m i n e th e e n ti re
r e c o r d in t h e lig h t m o s tf a v o r a b le t o t h e n o n m o v a n t , in d u lg in g e v e r yre a s o n a b le i n fe re n c e a n d re s o l v i n g a n y d o u b ts a g a i n s t th e m o ti o n . Sudan v. Sudan, 199 S. W . 3d 291, 292 ( Tex. 2006 ) . I f t he nonm ova nt br i ngs f or w ar d m or e t han a sci nt i l l a of pr obati ve evi dence t hat r ai ses a genu i ne i ssue ofm at er i al f act , t hen
a n o e v i d e n c e s u m m a ryj u d g m e n t i s n o t p ro p e r. Moore v. K MartCor p. , 981 S
. W . 2d 26 6, 26 9 ( Tex . A pp. — S an A nt oni o 19 98 , pet . deni ed) . W e r evi ew a
no evi den ce su m m ary j udgm ent f or evi den ce t hat w oul d ena bl e r ea so nab l e a nd fa i r-m i n d e d j u ro rs to d i ffe r i n th e i r c o n c l u s i o n s . Ham i lton v. W

i l so n , 249 S. W . 3d 425 , 426 ( Tex. 200 8) ( ci t i ng Cit y of Kel ler v. W i l so n , 168 S. W . 3d 802, 8 2 2 (T e x . 2 0 0 5 )). 1. N egl i gence I n G l adney’ s no evi dence m ot i on f orsum m ar y j udg m ent , i tal l eged t hat th e F ri e d m a n s o ffered n o ev i d e n c e o f du ty, b rea c h o f du ty, o r c a u sa ti o n to
s u p p o rtt h e irn e g lig e n c e c la im . 5Spec i f i ca l l y, ac cor di ng t o Gl adn ey’ s no evi den ce m ot i on f ors um m ary j u d g m ent , t he Fr i edm ansf ai l ed t o i den t i f y a ny7

r egu l at i on, st at ut e, i nt er nal pol i cy, ors t and ar d ofca r e t hatw oul d ha ve r equ i r ed,
orcr ea t ed a d ut y f or , G l adn ey t o di s c l o seM ar k’ s bi rt h m ot her ’ s cou ns el i ng
r ec or ds t o t he Fr i edm ans at t he t i m e of t he ado pt i on. I n r es pons e , t he F ri e dm ansar gue d t hatG l adn ey’ s dut y a r os e w hen t heyde part ed f r om t he st and ar d of ca r e. The F r i edm anscl ai m ed t hata r ea so nab l e a dopt i on a gen cy, unde rt he sa m e o rs i m i l arci r cum st anc es , w oul d notha ve to l d t he Fr i edm ans th a t t h e yh a d all the i n fo rm a ti o n w h e n , i n fac t, the yd i d n o t. O n app ea l , G l adn ey r ee m pha si z es t hat t he Fr i edm ans f ai l ed t o of f eran y
e v i d e n c e sh o w i n g tha t G l a d n e yh a d an affi rm a ti v e d u ty to d i s c lo s e th e b i rt h
m ot her ’ s r ecor ds t o t he Fr i edm ans. Based on t he r ecor d bef or e us, w e agr ee. T h e F r ie d m a n s f a ile d t o p r o v id e a n ys u m m a r yju d g m e n te v id e n c e in t h e ir
r es pons e r ega r di ng t he st and ar d of c a re att he t i m e o fM ar k’ s ado pt i on a nd th e re fo re fa i l e d to p ro d u c e e v i d e n c e th a t G l a d n e yd e p a rte d fro m th a t s ta n d a rd ofca r e. Fu rt her m or e, th e F ri edm ansf ai l ed t o i den t i f y a ny l i ce ns i ng
r equ i r em ent , r egu l at i on, s t at ut e, ori nt er nal pol i cy i n e xi st enc e a tt he t i m e o ft he
a d o p ti o n t h a t w o u l d h a v e re q u i re d G l a d n e yto d i s c l o s e M a rk ’s b i rth m o th e r’s
cou ns el i ng r ec or ds t o t hem b a s e d upon t he Fr i edm ans ’ s pec i f i ca t i onsatt he t i m e o ft he ado pt i on, ori n t hei r1993 r equ es t . Ther ef or e , be ca us e t he6 ... B e cause w e det er m i ne t hatG l adney d i d not have a duty t o di scl ose

t h e b i rth m ot her ’ s i nf or m at i on t o t he Fr i edm ans , w e n ee d notad dr es s t he F ri e d m a n s ’ se c o n d i s s u e p e rta i n i n g to c a u s a ti o n . S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 1.

7 ... Th e el em ent s f ora f r aud cause of a c ti on ar e t hat : ( 1) a m at er i al r epr esent at i on w as m ade; ( 2) i tw as f al se; ( 3) t he speakerknew i tw as f al se w hen m ade orm ade i t r eckl essl y w i t hou t any know l edge oft he t r ut h and as a pos i t i ve as se rt i on; ( 4) he m ade i t w i t h t he i nt ent i on t hati tbe ac t ed upon by t he ot herpart y; ( 5) t he part y act ed i n r el i ance upo n i t ; and ( 6) t her e w er e dam ages. S ee T. O
. Stanl

ey Bo otCo. v. Ban k of El Paso , 847 S
. W .2d 218, 222 ( Tex. 1 9 9 2 ). 8 F ri e d m a n s d i d n o t p ro v i d e a n ys u m m a ryj u d g m e n t e v i d e n c e a s to G l a d n e y ’s duty, w e over r ul e t he Fr i edm ans’ t hi r d i ssue. 6 2. Fraud G l adn ey f urt heral l ege d i n i t s no e vi den ce m ot i on f ors um m ary j udgm ent t hatt he Fr i edm ans f ai l ed t o pr ovi de evi dence of G l adney’ s i nt entt o decei ve as
r equ i r ed i n a c aus e o fac t i on f orf r aud . 7I n r esponse, t he Fr i edm ans pr odu ced evi dence t hat : 1) t he y had i nf or m ed G l adney, bef or e t he adop t i on, t hatt hey
w er e ver y adam antabout not havi ng a chi l d w i t h any evi dence of psychol ogi cal
orem ot i ona l pr obl em s; 2) w hen G l adn ey not i f i ed t hem t hat t her e w asa bab y
r ea dy f orpl ac em ent , t heys pec i f i ca l l y a sk ed aga i n i f t her e w asan y e vi den ceof ps ych ol ogi ca l or em ot i ona l pr obl em s and w er e t ol d bya G l adn ey r epr es ent at i ve t hatt he bab y di d notha ve any ; 3) w hen t he Fr i edm answ entt o pi ckM ar k u p f r om t he G l adn ey C ent er , t heyw er e han ded a f ol der w i t h hi s i nf or m at i on a nd8 ... G l a d n e y , o n the o th e r ha n d , d e sign a ted th ree e x p e rt s th a t po i n ted to

evi den ce i n t he r ec or d t hatt he bi rt h m ot her’ s ps ych ol ogi ca l t es t i ng a nd per so nal co uns el i ng no t esdo n oti ndi ca t e a ny f or m ofps ych opa t hol ogy.

9 ... T h e F ri e d m a n s’ arg u m e n t ce n tere d m a i n l yaro u n d M a rk’s b i rt h m ot her ’ s M M PI r es ul t s. Spec i f i ca l l y, Pau l cl ai m ed t hat“ i fw e h ad se en t he 9 t ol d t hatt he i nf or m at i on i n t he f ol derw as al l t he i nf or m at i on t hatG l adney h ad on M ar k; an d 4) G l adn ey had i n i t s pos se ss i on, s i ncebe fo re th e ad opt i on,
re c o rd s o n M a rk ’s b i rth m o th e r. O n a ppe al , G l adn ey r ea ss ert s t hatt he Fr i edm ansf ai l ed t o r ai sea gen ui ne i ssue of m at er i al f act as t o G l adney’ s i nt ent t o decei ve t he Fr i edm ans. Based on t he r ecor d bef or e us, w e agr ee. Th e Fr i edm ans ar gu e th a t G l adney’ s i nt entt o decei ve can be i nf er r ed f r om t he f act t hat G l adney t ol d t hem a di r ect untr ut h as t o w het hert her e w as evi dence of psychol ogi cal pr obl em s on t he partofM ar k’ s bi rt h m ot her . They f urt herar gue t hatG l adn ey kne w att he t i m e o f t he ado pt i on t hatt he Fr i edm ans
w oul d notha ve ado pt ed M ar k h ad t heykn ow n t he w hol e t r ut h. H ow eve r , t he Fr i edm ansf ai l ed t o r ai sea gen ui ne i ss ue ofm at er i al f ac t as t o w hati nf or m at i on i n t he r ecor ds w oul d have put G l adney o n noti ce t hatM ar k’ s bi rt h m ot herhad psychol ogi cal pr obl em s. 8I nst ead, t he Fr i edm a n s cl ai m ed onl y t hathad t hey kno w n w hatw asi n t he r ec or ds at t he t i m e ofM ar k’ s ado pt i on, t heyw oul d not h a v e a d o p t e d h i m. 9Thati s noten ough. The que st i on i s notw het hert heM M PI , r ega r dl es s of any ot her per so n se ei ng t he M M PI , w e d ef i ni t el y w oul d not

h a v e a d o p te d M a rk .”

10 ... Becau se w e det er m i ne t hat t he Fr i edm ans f ai l ed t o of f erany evi dence o f a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a te ri a l fa c t a s to th e i r n e g l i g e n c e a n d fra u d c l a i m s , w e n e e d n o t a d d re s s th e F ri e d m a n s ’ fi rs t i s s u e p e rta i n i n g to l i m i ta ti o n s . S eeTex. R . A p p . P . 4 7 .1 ; Ford Motor Co. , 135 S. W . 3d a t600.

10 Fr i edm ans w oul d h a v e a dop t ed M ar k had t hey seen t he r ecor ds buti nst ead
w het hert her e w as evi dence t hatG l adney kn ew M ar k’ s bi rt h m ot herhad ps ych ol ogi ca l pr obl em s and t her ef or e i nt en d e d to de ce i ve t he Fr i edm ansby
w i t hhol di ng t he i nf or m at i on. Becau se t he Fr i edm ans f ai led t o of f erany evi dence t hatG l adney kn ew M ar k’ s bi rt h m ot her ’ s counsel i ng r ecor ds show ed a hi st or y ofpsychol ogi cal p ro b l e m s , th e yfa i l e d to ra i s e a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a te ri a l fa c t a s to G l a d n e y ’s i nt entt o decei ve. A ccor di ngl y, w e over r ul e t he Fr i edm ans’ f ourt h i ssue. 10 I V . Concl us i on H avi ng o v e rru l ed orot her w i se di sposed ofal l f ouroft he Fr i edm ans’ i ss u e s, w e affi rm the tr i a l co u rt ’s o rde r gra n ti n g su m m a ry j u d g m e n t.

B OB M CC OY J U S T I C E
PA N EL: D A U PH I N O T, W A LKER, an d M C C O Y, JJ.11

DEL I VERE D: F e br ua r y 12, 2009