San Diego, CA – November 25, 2024 – The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, has reversed a trial court decision denying an anti-SLAPP motion brought by Brenda and Brian Lilly, Sr., in a defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) lawsuit filed by former UC San Diego rowing coach Geoffrey Bond.

The case arose after the Lillys alleged in a federal wrongful death lawsuit that Bond’s conduct as a coach contributed to their son’s tragic death by suicide. Bond subsequently sued the Lillys, claiming that their media statements about him were defamatory and caused emotional distress.

On appeal, the Court concluded that 14 of the 15 statements attributed to the Lillys were protected under California’s fair and true report privilege, which shields accurate communications about judicial proceedings from defamation claims. The Court found that the statements reflected the substance of allegations in the Lillys’ federal complaint and were made in connection with their lawsuit. The Court further determined that Bond had not shown a likelihood of prevailing on his claims for the remaining statement.

The Court’s ruling directs the trial court to enter an order granting the Lillys’ anti-SLAPP motion, dismissing Bond’s defamation and IIED claims. As prevailing defendants under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, the Lillys are entitled to recover their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, including those incurred on appeal.

This decision underscores California’s strong protections for individuals engaging in free speech about matters of public interest and judicial proceedings. The matter has been remanded to the trial court for further proceedings to determine the fees and costs.