236 So. 3d 1233
La.2017Background
- Dr. Shelton sought to nullify his wife's beneficiary change; Pavon alleged defamation in response; trial court granted Dr. Shelton's anti-SLAPP motion to strike; appellate court reversed and found no public issue; court grants writ to resolve circuit split on Article 971(F)(1)(a); majority holds statute requires public-issue connection; this case involves private dispute between spouses/parties; remand for fees to Pavon.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Article 971(F)(1)(a) require a public-issue connection | Shelton: broad reading applies; petition before court is act in furtherance | Pavon: ambiguous language; must be connected to public issue | No; statements before a judicial proceeding must be connected to a public issue |
| Is the burden-shifting framework triggered by a prima facie showing of protected conduct | Shelton: burden shifts if actions are protected and public-issue related | Pavon: statute ambiguous; results absurd if applied broadly | Yes; once protected conduct shown, plaintiff must show probability of success |
| Did Shelton’s petition to nullify a beneficiary change constitute protected conduct in connection with a public issue | Shelton: petition relates to a public issue because derived from litigation context | Pavon: private dispute; not in connection with public issue | Petition did not arise from public issue; protected conduct not shown |
| Should Pavon be awarded fees as prevailing party on remand | Shelton: Jeansonne controls; no fee on remand | Pavon: Pavon prevailed; proper under Article 971(B) | Affirmed that Pavon is prevailing party; fees to be determined on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Gibbs v. Elliott, 186 So.3d 667 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2013) (art. 971(F)(1)(a) & (b) discussed as protecting acts before judicial proceedings)
- Yount v. Handshoe, 171 So.3d 381 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2015) (ambiguity of F(1)(b) leads to emphasis on public issue requirement)
- Thinkstream, Inc. v. Rubin, 971 So.2d 1092 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2007) (statutory intent to broadly construe Article 971)
- Jeansonne v. Roy, 156 So.3d 134 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2014) (fees issue discussed; later clarified by Jeansonne decision)
- Shelton v. Pavon, 212 So.3d 603 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2017) (key appellate decision involving public-issue interpretation)
- Gibbs v. Elliott, 186 So.3d 667 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2013) (addressed public issue connection in First Circuit)
- Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (U.S. 1983) (speech on public concern standard cited for public-issue concept)
- Aloise v. Capital Management Consultants, Inc., 2017 WL 1378223 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2017) (discussed in interpretive debates; not official reporter)