Ancona v. Eller

Summary

The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment granting Fauna J. Eller’s special motion to dismiss under Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP statute, General Statutes § 52-196a. The court held that the plaintiffs’ argument concerning Eller’s status as a town official was unpreserved and that their public-forum argument was not relevant to the trial court’s ruling, which was based on the right to petition the government.

Holdings

1. The court declined to review the plaintiffs' claim that Eller was not entitled to anti-SLAPP protection because she was a government official, because the claim was not raised in opposition to the special motion to dismiss or during the trial-court hearing and was first raised in a postappeal motion for reconsideration.
2. The plaintiffs' argument that Eller's statements were not made in a public forum did not warrant reversal because the trial court's ruling rested on the right to petition the government, and § 52-196a does not expressly require a public forum for conduct implicating that right.
3. Review of a special motion to dismiss under § 52-196a is de novo, based on the pleadings, affidavits, and other submitted materials, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiffs could obtain appellate review of their claim that Eller, as a government official, was not entitled to invoke the protections of General Statutes § 52-196a when that argument was first raised in a postappeal motion for reconsideration.
2. Whether the plaintiffs' public-forum argument required reversal of the anti-SLAPP dismissal when the trial court based its ruling on Eller's exercise of the right to petition the government rather than the right of free speech.

Disposition

affirmed