Boston Partner Jay S. Gregory and Associate Shaun D. Loughlin secured a favorable decision in the Massachusetts Appeals Court, which upheld a trial court’s dismissal of a defamation lawsuit against their client under Massachusetts’ anti-SLAPP statute.
GRSM’s client served as the project manager for the construction of a public high school in a Massachusetts city, with the plaintiff as the HVAC subcontractor. Approximately two years into the project, the HVAC company’s owner posted inflammatory accusations on Facebook, alleging that GRSM’s client and others had mismanaged the project, covered up defects, and wasted taxpayer dollars. The post went viral, prompting GRSM’s client to send a letter to the city’s mayor, rebutting the accusations, explaining corrective actions, and attributing many defects to the plaintiff, whom they described as “marginally qualified” for the job.
The plaintiff then filed a defamation lawsuit, which Gregory and Loughlin successfully dismissed by arguing that the letter was protected under the anti-SLAPP statute as a form of petitioning. They emphasized that the letter, directed to the mayor, aimed to address issues in a publicly funded project, especially in light of the public interest generated by the viral Facebook post.
On appeal, Gregory and Loughlin authored the appellate brief, with Loughlin delivering oral arguments. They argued that the plaintiff had misinterpreted Massachusetts law in claiming that a person cannot petition the government while maintaining a contractual relationship with it. They clarified that Massachusetts law only prohibits “the government from petitioning itself,” which was not the case here, as GRSM’s client was acting on behalf of the project team, not as an agent of the government.
To further support their arguments, Gregory and Loughlin drew upon hundreds of pages of project documents in the appellate record. These documents showed that the plaintiff had repeatedly been notified of inadequate performance throughout the project. The records also evidenced that the plaintiff’s bid qualification scores were lower than those of other bidders and that the city relied on numerous local references to help the plaintiff qualify as a bidder, underscoring that its local status contributed significantly to its selection as the HVAC subcontractor.
In its decision, the Appeals Court adopted nearly all of GRSM’s arguments, affirming that the client was exercising their right to petition and concluding that each of the allegedly defamatory statements was well-supported by fact and law. This appellate decision serves as one of the first decisions rendered since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overhauled the application of the anti-SLAPP statute earlier this year. As a result, the Appeals Court dismissed the case and awarded GRSM’s client all costs and fees incurred in defending the appeal.
This outcome highlights the ability of GRSM’s attorneys to leverage complex legal defenses and secure decisive victories for their clients, resulting in a successful dismissal, appellate affirmation, and monetary recovery for a longstanding client of the Construction Practice Group.