Allison Camille Lartigue a/k/a Allison C. Lartigue and The Freelance Paralegal, LLC v. Karleana L. Farias

Summary

The Texas First Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Allison Camille Lartigue and The Freelance Paralegal, LLC’s motion to dismiss a stalking claim under the Texas Citizens Participation Act. The court held that the stalking claim was based on alleged harassing and threatening conduct, rather than on Lartigue’s exercise of the rights to petition or free speech, or conduct described by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 27.010(b). The opinion is a memorandum opinion issued per curiam.

Holdings

1. The stalking claim was not based on or in response to Lartigue's exercise of the right to petition because the gravamen of the claim was Lartigue's alleged harassing and threatening conduct, not communications in or pertaining to the related unauthorized-practice-of-law proceeding.
2. The stalking claim was not based on or in response to Lartigue's exercise of the right of free speech because the alleged threats and harassing conduct were not protected communications made in connection with a matter of public concern.
3. The stalking claim was not based on or in response to the communication, gathering, receiving, posting, or processing of consumer opinions, commentary, evaluations of consumer complaints, or business reviews or ratings as described by section 27.010(b)(2).
4. Because Lartigue failed to establish that the TCPA applied at the first step, the court did not need to address whether Farias established a prima facie case or whether Lartigue established an affirmative defense.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Farias's stalking claim was based on or in response to Lartigue's exercise of the right to petition under the TCPA.
2. Whether Farias's stalking claim was based on or in response to Lartigue's exercise of the right of free speech under the TCPA.
3. Whether Farias's stalking claim was based on or in response to acts described by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 27.010(b).
4. Whether the court needed to address whether Farias established a prima facie case or whether Lartigue established an affirmative defense under the TCPA.

Disposition

affirmed