AP&S Wins Appeal in Anti-Slapp Case

On January 27, 2010, AP&S attorneys Bill Burke, Ted Whitesell and Colleen Nevin obtained a dismissal of a case brought against their clients, a condominium association and one of its security guards.  The plaintiff's defamation claims were based on what he alleged to be intentionally false statements made to the police by the security guard in connection with his arrest for disorderly conduct under the Massachusetts "Peeping Tom" statute. AP&S brought a special motion to dismiss the claims under the Massachusetts Anti-SLAPP ("Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation") statute, M.G.L. c. 231, s. 59H, arguing that statements to the police of suspected criminal activity and the filing of a criminal complaint were constitutionally protected petitioning activity under the statute.   The District Court, Worcester Division, denied the special motion to dismiss.

AP&S brought an immediate interlocutory appeal of the District Court's decision, successfully arguing to the Appeals Court that the District Court had applied the improper standard for a special motion to dismiss and that the anti-SLAPP statute protected reports to the police even where there was a factual dispute as to whether the underlying events had in fact occurred as reported.  AP&S was further successful in arguing that the anti-SLAPP statute applied to agents such as a security guard, who are employed to assist in the petitioning activity, regardless of whether were acting on their own behalf.  As a result, the Appeals Court reversed the decision of the District Court, remanded the case for entry of judgment of dismissal of the complaint against our clients, and found that our clients were entitled to attorneys' fees under the anti-SLAPP statute for both the underlying litigation and the appeal.