Opinion ID: 2435258
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Outcome Determinative

Text: The second prong of the Republic Insurance test requires that the privileged information sought must be such that, if believed by the factfinder, in all probability it would have been outcome determinative of the cause of action asserted.... The confidential communication must go to the very heart of the affirmative relief sought. Id. The court of appeals reviewed the questions asked and the documents sought at the June 11, 1992 deposition and determined that while some of the questions in response to which Denton asserted his privilege were outcome determinative, others were not. 862 S.W.2d at 790. The court of appeals reviewed the questions asked and the documents sought at the June 11, 1992 deposition and determined that while some of the questions in response to which Denton asserted his privilege were outcome determinative, others were not. 862 S.W.2d at 790. The court then held that since all questions were not outcome determinative, the second prong of the Republic Insurance test was not satisfied. This conclusion is incorrect. First, we note that at the discovery hearing, the trial court narrowed the scope of the questions it ordered Denton to answer to only those questions that pertained to the claims made by Denton against the Association. It was thereafter that Denton, again, asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. These questions tracked the language used in Denton's petition. For example:  What information do you allege that Billy Don Ivey gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What misinformation or false statements do you allege that [Jerry] Moore, a defendant in this action, disseminated about you to members of the board of directors of the [Association]?  What false and misleading information did Jerry Moore give the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What false and misleading information do you contend that defendant Charlie Adams gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What false and misleading information do you contend that defendant Frank Holland gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What false and misleading information do you contend that defendant Mary Pat Becnel gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What false and misleading information do you contend that defendant Jack Pate gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What false and misleading information do you contend that defendant Bob Gorsky gave the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What other employees of the Texas Department of Public Safety Officers Association do you contend gave false and misleading information to the Travis County District Attorney's office?  What miscellaneous gossip ... do you contend [was used] to violate your right to privacy?  What public humiliation and emotional distress do you contend that you suffered as a result of the defendants?  What business relations and contracts did you contend were the subject of interference...?  Have you seen a physician with respect to the emotional distress alleged by you...?  Are you aware of any such misinformation [disseminated to the Association]?  Describe ... the lost business opportunities as a lobbyist that you have suffered as a result of defendants. Several of these questions go directly to the heart of Denton's claims. They asked Denton to specify either what tortious acts the defendants committed, or how he was injured. We hold that the second prong was satisfied. Republic Insurance, 856 S.W.2d at 163.