Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills

591 S.E.2d 423, 264 Ga. App. 597

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 29, 2004

DocketA03A2480, A03A2481

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 591 S.E.2d 423 (Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills, 591 S.E.2d 423, 264 Ga. App. 597 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal and cross-appeal from an order in a defamation action brought by the Atlanta Humane Society (AHS) and its director, Bill Garrett. AHS and Garrett sued Kathi Mills, alleging that she posted defamatory messages on an Internet message board. The messages were posted in response to a series of WSB-TV investigative programs criticizing the AHS. In Case No. A03A2480, AHS appeals the trial court’s determination that it is a governmental entity which cannot bring an action for defamation, and Garrett appeals the trial court’s determination that he is a limited-purpose public figure with respect to this controversy. In Case No. A03A2481, Mills cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion to dismiss the complaint as an improperly verified SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit under OCGA § 9-11-11.1.

This appeal is controlled by our recent decision in Harkins v. Atlanta Humane Society, 264 Ga. App. 356 (590 SE2d 737) (2003), another defamation action brought by AHS and Garrett against an individual for statements made in connection with the WSB-TV series. In Harkins, we concluded that the controversy at issue was “an issue of public concern” as defined by OCGA § 9-11-11.1, id. at 360 (2), and that “Harkins has a substantive right to exercise her constitutional right of free speech regarding a matter of public concern. The trial court therefore should have dismissed appellees’ defamation lawsuit that was initiated in response to Harkins’s protected statements.” Id. at 361. Mills also has this substantive right in connection with her comments on the same matter of public concern. We therefore reverse the trial court’s judgment in Case No. A03A2481 and direct the trial court, upon receipt of the remittitur, to dismiss the complaint.

*598 Decided November 21, 2003 Reconsideration denied December 8, 2003 Lipshutz, Greenblatt & King, Edward L. Greenblatt, James V. Zito, for appellants. Begner & Begner, Alan I. Begner, Robert M. Adelson, Katherine Wood, for appellee. Stacy S. Levy, amicus curiae.

Because Mills’s cross-appeal is dispositive of this case, AHS and Garrett’s appeal in Case No. A03A2480 is dismissed as moot.

Judgment reversed in Case No. A03A2481. Appeal dismissed as moot in Case No. A03A2480.

Ruffin, P. J., and Miller, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Smith, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal and cross-appeal from an order in a defamation action brought by the Atlanta Humane Society (AHS) and its director, Bill Garrett. AHS and Garrett sued Kathi Mills, alleging that she posted defamatory messages on an Internet message board. The messages were posted in response to a series of WSB-TV investigative programs criticizing the AHS. In Case No. A03A2480, AHS appeals the trial court’s determination that it is a governmental entity which cannot bring an action for defamation, and Garrett appeals the trial court’s determination that he is a limited-purpose public figure with respect to this controversy. In Case No. A03A2481, Mills cross-appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion to dismiss the complaint as an improperly verified SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) suit under OCGA § 9-11-11.1.

This appeal is controlled by our recent decision in Harkins v. Atlanta Humane Society, 264 Ga. App. 356 (590 SE2d 737) (2003), another defamation action brought by AHS and Garrett against an individual for statements made in connection with the WSB-TV series. In Harkins, we concluded that the controversy at issue was “an issue of public concern” as defined by OCGA § 9-11-11.1, id. at 360 (2), and that “Harkins has a substantive right to exercise her constitutional right of free speech regarding a matter of public concern. The trial court therefore should have dismissed appellees’ defamation lawsuit that was initiated in response to Harkins’s protected statements.” Id. at 361. Mills also has this substantive right in connection with her comments on the same matter of public concern. We therefore reverse the trial court’s judgment in Case No. A03A2481 and direct the trial court, upon receipt of the remittitur, to dismiss the complaint.

*598 Decided November 21, 2003 Reconsideration denied December 8, 2003 Lipshutz, Greenblatt & King, Edward L. Greenblatt, James V. Zito, for appellants. Begner & Begner, Alan I. Begner, Robert M. Adelson, Katherine Wood, for appellee. Stacy S. Levy, amicus curiae.

Because Mills’s cross-appeal is dispositive of this case, AHS and Garrett’s appeal in Case No. A03A2480 is dismissed as moot.

Judgment reversed in Case No. A03A2481. Appeal dismissed as moot in Case No. A03A2480.

Ruffin, P. J., and Miller, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

591 S.E.2d 423, 264 Ga. App. 597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlanta-humane-society-v-mills-gactapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack