Weaver vs. Chauhan

held that the defendants had not shown that the statements in the termination letter furthered or contributed to a public discussion of that issue, and that the trial court failed to undertake the required contextual analysis. The court further held that the school’s decision to terminate the teacher was itself not entitled to anti- SLAPP protection.

Although the subject matter of the letter here, a teacher’s alleged physical mistreatment of a special needs student, plainly implicates a matter of public interest, that alone does not confer anti-SLAPP protection on the termination letter itself. Under Bishop, even where the termination and its stated reasons implicate an issue of public interest, the school must separately demonstrate that the specific statements in the letter furthered or contributed to a public discussion of that issue. A private termination letter sent directly to the teacher being released, without broader public dissemination or connection to an ongoing public proceeding or forum, does not satisfy this requirement.

Case Management Conference continued to February 26, 2027 at 8:30 a.m. in Department C44.

Sycamore to give notice.

8 Weaver vs. Demurrer to Amended Complaint Chauhan Continued to 11/12/26.