Court Deems Ex-Employer's Lawsuit a "SLAPP" Against Ex-Employee
Posted by Candice Boyd
California employers recently suffered a setback in their ability to curb perceived defamatory statements made about their businesses. In Nygard, Inc. v. Uusi-Kerttula, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the granting of motions to strike an employer’s complaint pursuant to California’s “anti-SLAPP” statute. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16. The statute allows a defendant to seek early dismissal of a lawsuit that qualifies as a “strategic lawsuit against public participation.”
In Nygard, a former employee gave an interview to a magazine after ceasing his employment with plaintiffs Nygard, Inc. and Nygard International Partnership (collectively, “Nygard”). The interview concerned the employee’s work experiences with Nygard, about which the employee provided several negative comments.
Nygard sued the former employee, the magazine, and its publisher for, among other things, defamation. The employee, the magazine, and the publisher filed anti-SLAPP motions to strike the complaint, which the superior court granted. In affirming the dismissal of the complaint, the Court of Appeal agreed with the superior court that the employee’s comments were made to a public forum and concerned an issue of public interest. The court further decided that the plaintiff failed to show that it could probably prevail on the merits of its claims.
Most importantly, the Court of Appeal took broad views of the meanings of “public forum” and “public interest.” The court found that newspapers and magazines were public fora within the meaning of the anti-SLAPP statute. With respect to whether the matter concerned an issue of “public interest,” the court held that “an issue need not be ‘significant’ to be subject to the anti-SLAPP statute, it simply need be an issue in which the public is interested. Such interest included “tabloid” issues such as reports on celebrities. Given the court’s decision in Nygard, and the anti-SLAPP statute’s allowance for attorneys’ fees to a prevailing defendant, employers should closely evaluate the merits of any defamation claim it wishes to bring against a former employee before filing the complaint. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact us directly.