bloom v. clark slapp motion
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
1/23
Ke
ith A
.
Fin
k,
Ba
r
N
o.
146
841
Ola
fJ.
M
ull
er, B
ar No
.
2
473
72
2
FI
NK
STE
IN
BE
RG
Att
orn
eys
at
Law
11
500
Oly
mp
ic
B
oul
eva
rd,
Su
ite
316
L
os
A
ng
eles
C
alif
orn
ia 9
00
64
4
Te
leph
on
e:
3
10 2
68
078
0
Facsim ile :
310
2680790
5
6
At
tor
ney
s
f
or
De
fen
dan
t
J
AM
ES
CL
AR
K
SU
PE
RI
OR
CO
UR
T OF
T
HE
ST
AT
E
OF
C
AL
IFO
RN
IA
9
CO
UN
TY OF V
EN
TU
RA
1
0
R
OB
ER
T
B
LO
OM
,
CA
SE
NO
.
5
6-2
014
-00
45
988
6-C
U-
DF-
VT
A
II
DE
FEN
DA
N
TJA
ME
S C
LAR
K
S N
OT
ICE
Pla
inti
ff,
O
F
S
PE
CIA
L
MO
TIO
N
A
N]
SPE
CI
AL
12
M
OT
IO
N
TO
ST
RI
KE
PLA
IN
TIF
FS
v.
CO
MP
LA
IN
T P
UR
SU
AN
T
TO
C.C
.P.
13
4
25
.16;
ME
MO
RA
N
DU
M
OF
P
OIN
TS
A
ND
A
UT
HO
RIT
IE
S
14
JA
ME
S
C
LA
RK
an
d
D
OE
S
1-5 i
nc l
usiv
e
[
De
fend
an
ts E
vi
den
ce in sup
po
rt
of
S
pe
cial
15
D
efe
nda
nts.
Mo
tion
to
Str
ike
su
bmi
tted
con
cur
rent
ly
h
ere
wit
h]
16
H
ea
ring D
ate
:
F
eb
rua
ry
10
,
201
5
7
H
ea
ring
T
im
e:
8:
30
a.m
.
H
ear
ing
D
ept
: 20
18
Re
serv
atio
n
N
o.: 20
224
64
19
Tr
ial
D
ate:
N
on
e
Set
T
rial T
ime
:
N
one
Set
20
Tr
ial
Dep
t:
N
on
e
Se
t
21
TO
A
LL
P
AR
TIE
S AN
D
T
HE
IR C
OU
NS
EL OF R
EC
OR
D:
22
PL
EAS
E
TA
KE
NO
TIC
E THA
T on
Fe
bru
ary 10,
20
15,
at 8
:30
a.m
.
in
D
ep
artm
en
t 20 o
f
t
he
23
V
entu
ra
C
oun
ty
S
upe
rio
r
C
ou
rt
l
oca
ted a
t 8
00
S
. Vi
cto
ria
S
tree
t, Ven
tur
a,
C
A
9
300
9, DE
FE
ND
AN
T
24
J
AM
ES
C
LA
RK
Cla
rk
an
d/or De
fen
dan
t
w
ill an
d h
ereb
y
do
es m
ove t
o s
trik
e
P
LA
IN
TIF
F
25
RO
BE
RT
B
LO
OM
S
B
loo
m
an
d/o
r
Pla
inti
ff
Co
mp
lain
t
pur
sua
nt
to
C.
C.P
.
42
5.1
6.
26
T
his Spe
cia
l
M
oti
on
to
S
tri
ke i
s
bas
ed
up
on
this
N
ot
ice
ofM
ot
ion
,
on th
eM
em
or
and
um
o
fPo
in t
s
DEFENDANTS
SPECIAL
MOTION
TO
STRIKE
PLAINTIFFS
COMPLAINT
PURSUANT
TO
C C P
4 5J6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
2/23
and
Aut
hor
itie
s
a
ttac
hed
here
to on th
e
ac
com
pa
nyin
g
E
vide
nc
e i
n
su
pp
ort
th
ereo
f; o
n the
plea
din
gs an
d
2
rec
ord
s on
f
ile
her
ein
an
d
o
n
s
uch
f
urth
er
or
al o
r
d
ocu
me
ntar
y
ev
iden
ce
or
a
rgu
me
nt as
m
ay
be
pre
sen
ted
a
t the
h
ear
ing
4
PLEASE
TAKE FURTHER
NOTICE
that
should
the Court
grant
Defendant
Clarks
underlying
5
S
pec
ial
Mo
tion
to S
trik
e
De
fen
dan
t
C
lark
fu
rthe
r re
ser
ves
the
r
igh
t
t
o
f
ile
a
se
par
ate
M
oti
on
a
gain
st
6 Plai
ntif
f
Blo
om for
th
e rec
ove
ry
of
a
tto
rney
s fee
s an
sts
ur
sua
nt
to
C C
P
4
25.1
6c
).
D
A
TED
: Jan
uary
9,
201
5
B
y
F
IN
ST
EI BE
RG
K
eith
A.
Fin
k
Ol
afJ
Mu
ller
Att
orn
eys
for
D
ef
end
ant
10
J
AM
ES CL
AR
K
1
2
13
14
15
16
1
7
18
19
20
21
2
2
2
3
25
2
6
2
D
EF
EN
D
NT
S
SP
EC
I L M
O
TIO
N
TO
ST
RIK
E
P
L
INT
IFF
S CO
MP
L
IN
T
P
UR
SU
N
T
T
O CC
P 425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
3/23
TA
BL
E
O
F C
ON
TE
NT
S
ME
MO
RA
ND
U
M
OF
PO
INT
S
AN
D AU
TH
OR
ITI
ES
INT
RO
DU
CT
IO
N
2
S
TA
TEM
E
NT OF PE
RT
INE
NT
FA
CT
S
3
LE
GA
L
A
R
GU
ME
NT
31 LE
GA
L
ST
AN
DA
RD
F
OR S
PE
CI
AL M
O
TIO
N
TO S
TR
IKE
3 2 FIR
ST PR
ON
G TH
E AN
TI
-SL
AP
P
S
TAT
UT
E
I
ND
ISP
UT
AB
LY
A
PP
LIE
S T
O
P
LA
INT
IF
FS
C
LA
IM
S
AG
AI
NS
T
D
EF
EN
DA
NT
C
LA
RK
H
ER
E
5
3
3 S
EC
ON
D
PR
ON
G TH
IS C
OU
RT
SH
OU
LD
GR
AN
T
DE
FEN
DA
N
T
C
LA
RK
S S
PEC
IA
L
M
O
TIO
N T
O
S
TR
IKE
BE
CA
US
E P
LA
IN
TIF
F
I
ND
ISP
UT
AB
LY H
AS S
UE
D
CL
AR
K
FO
R
P
RI
VIL
EG
ED
,
CO
NS
TIT
UT
IO
NA
LL
Y-P
RO
TE
CT
ED
,
NO
N-
AC
TIO
NA
BL
E
CO
ND
UC
T
3
3
1
P
lai
ntif
f
Im
per
mis
sibl
y
Tar
get
s
De
fen
dan
t C
lar
ks
P
riv
ileg
ed and
N
on
-Ac
tion
abl
e C
om
pla
int
s Reg
ard
ing
Pla
inti
fPs
Job Pe
rfor
ma
nce
as a P
ub
lic E
mp
loye
e
u
nde
r
C
ivi
l
Cod
e
4
7 b
7
3.
3.2
Plaintiff
Imp
erm
iss
ibly
Tar
get
s
D
ef
end
ant
Cl
ark
s
P
riv
ileg
ed
and N
on
-Ac
tion
abl
e
T
hre
ats o
f
L
itig
ati
on
an
d
De
ma
nds Rel
atin
g to the
Sa
me
1
3 4 S
EC
ON
D
PRO
N
G
A
LT
ER
NA
TE
LY
, TH
IS CO
UR
T SH
OU
LD
G
RA
NT
D
EF
EN
DA
NT
S
S
PEC
IA
L
M
OT
IO
N
BE
CA
US
E
P
LA
IN
TIF
F
I
ND
ISP
UT
AB
LY CA
NN
OT ES
TA
BL
ISH
TH
AT DEF
EN
DA
NT MA
DE
AN
Y
OF
T
HE
A
LLE
GE
DL
Y
D
EF
AM
AT
OR
Y ST
AT
EM
EN
TS WI
TH
AC
TU
AL
MA
LI
CE
3 4 1
PlaintiffMust
Show Actual Malice by
Defendant
Cla
rk Be
cau
se
P
lai
ntif
f
Is
a
G
ene
ral
and
/or
L
im
ited
P
ur
pos
e
P
ubl
ic
Fig
ure B
y V
irtu
e o
f
H
is S
tatu
s
as
He
ad
C
oac
h
o
f
the
W
es
tlak
e
H
igh
S
ch
ool
s M
en
s Bas
ket
bal
l
T
ea
m
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
4/23
3.
4.2
Plai
ntif
f
M
ust
S
ho
w
A
ctua
l
M
ali
ce
b
y D
efen
dan
t B
eca
use
Pl
ain
tiff Is
a Ge
ner
al o
r Lim
ite
d
Pu
rpo
se Pu
bli
c
F
igu
re
a
P
ub
lic
Of
fici
al
2
3.4
.3
P
lain
tiff
Blo
om
M
us
t Sh
ow
Ac
tua
l
M
alic
e
by
Defendant Clark
Because
Clarks Statements
Are
Q
ua
lifie
dly Priv
ile
ged U
nd
er
C
ivil
Co
de
4
7c
3.4
.4
Leg
al
S
tand
ard f
or Ac
tua
l
M
al
ice
5
3.4
.5 P
lain
tiffB
lo
om Ca
nno
t
Po
ssib
ly
S
ho
w
Cl
ear
an
d
Co
nv
inci
ng Ev
ide
nce
of
A
ctu
al
M
alic
e
by
D
efe
nda
nt
Cla
rk
Be
cau
se C
lar
k H
ad Mo
re T
ha
n
Suf
fici
ent F
actu
al
Gro
und
s
fo
r His All
ege
dly Def
am
ator
y C
om
mu
nic
atio
ns
5
5
TH
IS
C
OU
RT
SH
OU
LD
G
RA
N
T
DE
FE
ND
AN
T CL
AR
K
S
S
PE
CIA
L M
OT
IO
N
TO
ST
RIK
E
B
EC
AU
SE P
LA
INT
IFF
BL
OO
M CA
NN
OT E
ST
AB
LIS
H
T
T
C
LA
RK
S
AL
LEG
ED
LY DE
FA
MA
TO
RY
ST
AT
EM
EN
TS A
RE F
AL
SE
7
5
CO
NC
LU
SIO
N
7
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
5/23
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
6/23
B
rod
y
v.
M
on
talb
ano
197
8
8
7
C
al.
Ap
p.3d
7
2
5
7
8
C
am
pan
elli
v.
Reg
ent
s
of
U
niv
.
of
Cal
.
199
6
44
C
al.
App
.4t
h
5
72
17
Chr
isti
an
Res
ear
ch
Inst
itut
e v
.
A
lno
r 20
07
14
8
Cal.App.4th
71
5
Gha
fur
v
.
B
ern
stei
n 20
05
1
31
Cal
.Ap
p.4
th
123
0
8-1
2
Har
ris
v.
C
ur
tis Pub
lish
ing
C
o.
19
42
4
9 C
al.
A
pp
.
2
d
34
0
He
cim
ov
ich v.
E
nc
inal
Sc
ho
ol P
are
nt
T
eac
her
Org
an
izat
ion
2
012
203
Cal
.Ap
p.4
th
4
50.
..
6-
7,
14
K
ahn
v.
B
owe
r
1
991
2
32 C
al
.Ap
p.3
d
1
599
K
ash
ian v.
H
arr
ima
n
2
002
9
8
Ca
l.A
pp.
4th
89
2
8,
10
Le
e v.
F
ick 2
00
5
1
35
C
al.
App
.4t
h
89
7-
10
Ma
im
v
.
Sin
ger
2
01
3
2
17
C
ai.A
pp.
4th
12
83
1
0
Ma
ran
atha
Co
rre
ctio
ns,
L
LC
v. D
epa
rtm
ent
of
Cor
rec
tion
s
an
d Reh
abi
lita
tion
200
8
15
8
C
al.A
pp
.4th
1
075
M
arti
n v
Ke
arn
ey
197
5 5
1
C
al.A
pp
.3d
3
09
8
,
1
4
M
.
G
.
v.
Tim
e
W
arn
er,
In
c. 2
001
8
9 Ca
l.A
pp.
4th
62
3
Ro
hd
e
v.
W
olf
200
7
15
4
C
al.A
pp
.4th 28
1
0
R
uiz
v
.
Ha
rbo
r
Vie
w
C
om
mu
nit
y As
sn .
2
00
5
134
C
al.
App
.4t
h
1
456
7
S
he
kht
er
v.
Fin
an
cial
I
nde
mn
ity
Co
. 20
01
89
C
ai.
App
.4t
h
14
1
1
0
S
yim
ar
Air
C
on
diti
oni
ng
v.
P
ueb
lo
C
on
trac
ting
S
erv
ices
, Inc
. 2
00
4
122
C
al.A
pp
.4t
h
10
49
7
Te
rry
v.
Da
vis
C
om
mu
nity
Ch
urch
200
5
13
1 C
al.
Ap
p.4t
h
153
4
6
W
al
ker
v
.
K
iou
sis 2
001
93
Ca
l.A
pp.4
th
1
432
8
W
ei
nbe
rg
v.
Fei
sel
200
3
11
0
C
al.
Ap
p.4t
h 1
12
2
5
-iv
-
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
7/23
U
NI
TE
D
ST
AT
ES
SU
PR
EM
E
CO
UR
T
C
AS
ES
Bau
mg
art
ner
v.
Un
ite
d
Sta
tes
1
944
322
U.S
. 665
C
urti
s P
ub
lish
ing
C
o.
v
.
But
ts
19
67
38
8
U.S.
130
11-12
G
arr
ison v.
L
ouis
ian
a
196
4
3
79
U.S
.
6
4
5
G
ert
z
v.
Rob
ert
We
lch
19
74
4
18
U.S
.
3
23
Ha
rte-
Han
ks
Com
m
uni
cati
ons
,
In
c.
v
.
Co
nna
ugh
ton
19
89
49
1
U.S
. 657
5
L
orai
n jo
urn
al
C
o.
E
t Al.
v.
M
ilk
ovic
h
198
5
474
U.S
.
95
3
N
ew
Y
ork
Tim
es Co
.
v.
S
ulliv
an
376 U
S
2
54
11
-12
Ro
sen
bla
tt
v.
Ba
er
1
96
6
383
U
S 75
3,
F
EDE
RA
L
C
IRC
UI
T
CO
UR
T
CA
SE
S
C
hu
y
v
.
Ph
ilad
elp
hia
E
ag
les
Fo
otb
all
Clu
b 5
95
F
.2d
1
265
3
d
C
ir.
1
979
Ga
rci
a
v
.
Bd
.
OfEd
Of
Soc
orro
Co
nso
l
Sch
.
Dis
t.
10t
h
C
ir
198
5
7
77 F2d
14
03
F
ED
ER
AL
DIS
TR
ICT
C
OU
RT
CA
SE
S
ar
ry
v.
Ti
me
, In
c.
N.D
. C
al.
198
4 5
84
F.S
up
p.
111
0
1
1-1
2
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
8/23
M
E
MO
RA
ND
UM
O
F
PO
INT
S
A
ND A
UT
HO
RIT
IE
S
2
1.
IN
TRO
D
UC
TIO
N
O
ne
of
th
e
p
rer
oga
tive
s
of A
me
ric
an citi
zen
shi
p
i
s the
righ
t
to
c
ritic
ize pu
bli
c
m
en
and
4
measures
and
that
means not
only
informed
and
responsible criticism but the
freedom
to
speak
f
oo li
shl
y
a
nd
w
itho
ut
m
ode
rat
ion.
Bau
mg
art
ne r
U
nite
d Sta
tes
i94
4 3
22
U.S
. 665
, 67
3-6
74 .
6
P
ubl
ic sch
oo
ls are th
e
N
ati
on
s
m
ost im
po
rtan
t
in
stitu
tio
n
in t
he
pre
par
atio
n o
f
in
div
idu
als
7
f
or
pa
rtic
ipa
tion as
c
itiz
en s
,
an
d
in
th
e p
rese
rva
tion of
the
va lu
es on
w
hic
h ou r
so
ciet
y
r
ests
.
Lo
rain
8
Jou
rna
l
Co. Et
A1
.
M
ilk
ovi
ch
19
85 474 U
.S
. 95
3, 9
58
dis. o
pn. of
Br
enn
an,
J
9
[T]h
e gov
ern
anc
e
o
f
a pu
blic
sc
hoo
l
sys
tem
is of
th
e ut
mo
st
im
po
rta
nce to a
co
mm
un
ity,
an
d
10
school
board
po lic ies
are
often ca refully
scrutinized
by
residents.
...
[T
he
re is
a]
str
ong p
ubl
ic
int
eres
t
i
n
1
1
en
sur
ing
o
pen d
isc
uss
ion
of
[p
ubl
ic sc
hoo
l
o
ffic
ials
] jo
b
pe
rfor
ma
nce
.... R
ose
nbl
att
B
aer
196
6
38
3
1
2
U
.S
. 75
,
8
5;
Ga
rci
a
v
Bd
.
O
fEd
.
O
f
Soc
orr
o
C
on
sol.
Sc
h. D
ist
.
10
th
Cir
.
19
85
777 F2d 1
40
3,
14
08.
13 In
19
92,
the C
alif
orn
ia Le
gis
latu
re ena
cted C.
C.P
.
4
25.1
6 i
n di
rec
t
r
esp
ons
e
to th
e
dis
tur
bin
g
1
4
in
cre
ase
in
m
erit
less
law
su i
ts des
ign
ed to
chil
l
th
e
val
id exe
rc i
se
o
f
t
he
con
stit
utio
nal
rig
hts
of
15 fre
edo
m
of
spe
ech
....
C.C
.P .
4
25.1
6 a
.
[
Th
e] p
oin
t
of
t
he an ti
-SL
AP
P s
tatu
te
is
t
hat
you
ha
ve
a
16
rig
ht
n
ot to b
e
d
rag
ged
thr
oug
h
t
he
cou
rts
bec
au
seyo
u
e
xe r
cis
ed y
ou
r
c
on
stitu
tio
nal
r
igh
ts.
V
ar
ian
1
7
M
ed
.
S
ys
tem
s,
Inc
.
v
De
lfin
o
200
5
35
Ca
l.4t
h
180
,
1
93.
1
8 2.
ST
AT
EM
EN
T
OF
PER
TI
NE
NT FA
C
TS
19
Pla
inti
ff
Blo
om is
a
ba
ske
tba
ll
co
ach fo
r W
est
lak
e Hig
h Sch
oo
l
W
H
S
,
a
p
ubl
ic
hi
gh
sch
ool
2
0
in
Th
ous
and
Oa
ks ,
Ca
lifo
rni
a w
hic
h hap
pen
s
to
ma
ke
Pla
int
iff
him
sel
f
a p
ubl
ic
of
fici
al .
P
lain
tif
fs
21
Ver
ifie
d
C
om
pla
int
at
5.
D
efe
nda
nt Jam
es C
lark
is
the p
are
nt
o
f tw
o s
tude
nts at
W
HS
S
ully
a
nd
22
Sy
dne
y,
the
for
mer o
f
w
hom
wa
s
fo
rme
rly co
ach
ed by
Plai
ntif
f
Bl
oom
. Id.
a
t 6
.
O
n
o
r
aro
und
N
ov
emb
er
23
6,
201
4,
Pl
ain
tiffB
loo
m
fi
led
th
is
la
ws
uit aga
ins
t
D
efe
nda
nt
J
am
es
Cla
rk for
tw
o
2
c
ause
s
of
ac
tio
n:
1
24 Lib
el
a
nd 2
Lib
el
Pe
r
Se.
See
gen
era
lly Pla
int i
ffs
Co
mpl
ain
t.
2
5
I
n br
ief,
Pla
inti
ff
Bl
oom ha
s
su
ed
C
lark
for com
pla
inin
g
to
off
icia
ls
o
f
W
estl
ake
H
igh
Sch
ool
,
the
2
6
Co
ne jo
Va
lley U
ni
fied S
cho
ol
Di
stri
ct,
a
nd
We
stla
ke
Spo
rts
C
am
p a
n
on-
pro
fit su
mm
er
ca
mp
ow
ned
an
d
o
per
ate
d
la
rgel
y
by
Pla
inti
ffB
lo
om
a
bou
t Pl
ain
tiffBlo
om
s
o
n- th
e- j
ob a
ctiv
itie
s
an
d abo
ut
P
lain
tiff
D
EF
EN
D
NT
S
SPE
CI
L
M
O
TIO
N
TO
S
TR
IKE
P
L
IN
TIF
FS
C
OM
P
L
INT
P
UR
SU
N
T
T
O
C
C
P
425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
9/23
Blo
om
s p
erso
na
l
m
ist
reat
me
nt
of
C
lark
s tw
o
kid
s.
Id
. Ac
co
rdin
g to
P
lai
ntif
f
B
loo
m,
C
lar
k
h
as
2
com
pl
ain
ed ab
out
Pla
in t
iffs
c
oac
hin
g d
ecis
ion
s
C
lar
k
has
r
epe
ate
dly
a
ccu
sed
Bl
oom
o
f
abu
sing
h
is
kid
s
an
d
ot
her
WH
S
st
ude
nts
h
e has
rep
eat
edl
y
de
ma
nde
d th
at
B
loo
m
r
es i
gn an
d
he
has en
gag
ed
in
the
4
underlying
libel
to
school
administrators
and
co aching
staff
so as
to put
false
pressure
on
those
in
5
aut
hor
ity
to ta
ke
[
awa
y]
B
loo
ms
co
ach
ing
job
. Id.
a
t
9
/9/
92
3.
6 Pla
inti
ff
B
loo
m
fu
rthe
r has
su
ed Cl
ark
he
re
fo
r
Cl
ark
s th
rea
ts to
ta
ke
leg
al
a
ctio
n ag
ain
st
B
lo
om
and
o
the
rs b
oth
d
irec
tly
v
ia
law
su
it a
nd i
ndi
rect
ly v
ia c
om
plai
nts
to g
ove
rnm
en
t
ag
en
cies
li
ke
t
he I.R
.S.
8
a
nd
D.
O.L
. I
d.
a
t 9/9
/16
18
2
3;
se
e
als
o
E
xhi
bits
A
E
t
o
P
lai
ntif
fs C
om
pla
int
[C
lark
thr
eat
ene
d
t
he
9
ent
ire C
on
ejo
S
cho
ol boa
rd
wi
th
clai
ms
the
y
wer
e
a
ll
com
pl
icit an
d
the
refo
re g
uil
ty of
ch
ild
abu
se.
10
Clark
concluded
his
most recent rant
with
a
threat
to
12
other
educators
and
members
of
the
c
om
mu
nity
..
th
at
th
ey.
.. w
ou
ld
be
su
ed
as
w
el
l
if h
is dem
an
ds
wer
en
t
m
et
].
Un
der
sco
rin
g
this
poi
nt
1
2
Pl
ain
tiff
B
loo
m fi
led
th
is a
ctio
n o
n
N
ove
mb
er 6, 20
14,
t
he v
ery
sam
e day
o
n wh
ich
C
lark
d
em
and
ed tha
t
1
3
B
loo
m re s
ign or
el
se b
e
s
ued
b
y
Cla
rk a
nd
othe
r WH
S
p
are
nts fo
r
th
e a
fore
me
ntio
ne
d
com
pl
ain
ts.
14 Ex
hib
it
to
Pla
inti
ffs
C
om
pla
int
[
If
yo
u do
nt
le
ave
o
n Thu
rsd
ay
[No
ve
mbe
r
6
,
2
014
]
we
wil
l,
a
s
15 p
are
nts
w
ho ob
ser
ved
rep
eat
ed
abu
se ,
re
tain
t
he are
as
b
est
p
ers
ona
l in
ju r
y
atto
rne
y
to
ma
ke
y
ou
and
16
the Dis
tric
t
r
ea l
ize
tha
t
re
pea
ted
ly ab
usin
g
kid
s, eve
n fo
r m
on
ey
won
t
be
tol
erat
ed
].
1
7
Alth
ou
gh Pla
inti
ff Bl
oom
bro
adl
y c
laim
s
t
hat
Cla
rk h
as b
een d
efa
min
g
him
f
or y
ear
s
B
loo
m
18 ap
pare
ntl
y
b
ase
s this law
sui
t e
ntir
ety on six
6
d
isc
rete
em
ail me
ssa
ges
sen
t
b
y
Cla
rk
b
etw
een
J
uly
and
1
9
No
ve
mbe
r
2
014
to
th
e Co
ne j
o Val
ley
U
nif
ied
Sc
hoo
l D
ist
rict
W
es
tlak
e
Hi
gh Sc
hoo
l,
and
We
stla
ke
20 S
por
ts
Ca
mp
wh
ich
a
re a
ttac
hed
to
his
Co
mp
lain
t
as
E
xhi
bits A
E T
he
se e
mai
ls
ar
e
the
onl
y
21
ins
tan
ces
of
Cla
rks all
ege
d
de
fam
atio
n ple
d w
ith
s
uff
icie
nt
s
pec
ific
ity
i
n Blo
om
s Co
mp
lain
t
a
nd
the
y
22
p
res
um
ably
ar
e
t
he on l
y inst
anc
es that fall
wi
thin
the
one
ye
ar
st
atu
te
of
l
im i
ta ti
on s un
de
r
C
.C.
P.
23 3
40
c .
Id.
24
2
5
26
Pla
inti
ff
B
loo
m
ine
xp
lica
bly at
tach
es the
fir
st
tw
o
2
se
par
ate
em
ail
s
join
tly
as Ex
hib
it
A
to
his C
om
pla
int
r
ath
er th
an
t
reat eac
h
e
ma
il m
ess
age
as
a sep
arat
e ex
hib
it lik
e he
doe
s wit
h
the o
the
r
f
our e
ma
il m
ess
age
s .
4
DE
FEN
D
AN
TS
SPE
CI
AL
M
OT
IO
N
T
O
ST
RIK
E P
LA
IN
TIF
FS
C
OM
PL
AI
NT PU
RSU
AN
T
T
O
C
.C.
P.
42
5
6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
10/23
3
.
L
EG
AL AR
GU
M
EN
T
2
3
.1 LEG
A
L
S
TA
ND
AR
D
FO
R
S
PEC
IA
L
MO
TIO
N
TO S
TR
IK
E
3
[
A] cau
se
o
f ac
tio
n
a
ga
inst
a
per
son aris
ing
from an
y ac
t
o
f
th
at
pe
rson
in
fu
rthe
ran
ce
of tha
t
4
persons
right
of petition
or
free speech...
shall
be
subject
to
a
special
motion.... C.C.P.
425.16b 1.
5
In
1
99
7,
the L
egis
lat
ure
am
end
ed C
.C.P
.
42
5.16
a
, exp
res
sly
in
str
ucti
ng
C
ali
fo r
nia
Co
urt
s
to
6
bro
ad
ly...
c
ons
tru
e[] this s
tatu
te. S
tats
. 19
97,
c
h.
27
1,
1;
a
me
ndin
g 42
5.1
6 a
.
In
199
9, th
e
Ca
lifo
rnia
7
S
up
rem
e
C
ou
rt
fu
rth
er
dire
cte
d
all
C
ali
fo rn
ia
Co
urt
s
w
he
nev
er
p
oss
ible
...
[to ]
inte
rpr
et
t
he
Fir
st
A
me
ndm
en
t
an
d
se
cti
on
42
5.1
6
i
n
a
ma
nn
er
fav
ora
ble
t
o
t
he
ex
erc
ise
of f
ree
dom
o
f spe
ech
no t
to
i
ts
9
c
urta
ilm
ent
.
Br
igg
s
v
Ed
en
C
oun
cil
for
Hop
e
an
d
O
ppo
rtu
nity 1
99
9
9
C
al.
4th
110
6,
1119
quo
ting
10
Bradbury v Superior Cou rt
1996
49
Cal.App.4th
1170, 1176 .
To
an
alyz
e a
Sp
eci
al
Mo
tion to
Stri
ke
t
he C
ou
rt
firs
t
mu
st
de
cide wh
eth
er the
def
end
ant
has
12
mad
e
a suf
fic
ient
t
hre
sho
ld
sho
wi
ng
th
at th
e ch
alle
nge
d
ca
use
s
of
act
ion
i
s su
bje
ct
to
a
sp
ecia
l
Mo
tio
n
3
un
der C
.C
.P.
425
.16
e
.
W
ein
ber
g v
F
eise
l 2
003
110
Ca
l.A
pp.
4th
1
122
,
1130.
If
def
end
ant m
ak
es
thi
s
1
4
thr
esh
old
sho
win
g, the bu
rde
n
s
hift
s to
th
e pl
aint
iff
t
o
sho
w
a
pr
oba
bi l
ity
of pre
vai
ling on
his
clai
ms.
Id
.
15
If
th
e
p
lai
ntif
f
ca
nno
t
me
et
th i
s bur
den
,
t
he
spe
cia
l
mo
tion
m
us
t be gra
nted
.
Id.
16
3
.2
FIR
ST PR
ON
G
T
HE
AN
TI
-SL
AP
P
S
TA
TUT
E
IND
IS
PU
TA
BLY
AP
PL
IES
TO
PLA
IN
TIF
FS C
LA
IMS AG
A
INS
T
DE
FEN
D
AN
T
C
LA
RK HE
RE
.
17
A
cau
se
o
f
ac
tion is s
ubj
ect
t
o
a
s
pec
ia l
m
ot
ion to
strik
e
if
it
ar
ises
fro
m
a
cts i
n
furt
her
anc
e
o
f
18
a
pe
rso
ns
r
igh
t
o
f
pe
titi
on
o
r
fr
ee
spe
ech
...
in
co
nne
ctio
n
wi
th
a pub
lic
is
sue
.
Ma
ran
ath
a
C
or
rect
ion
s,
19
LLC
v
De
par
tme
nt
of
C
orr
ecti
ons
and R
eha
bi li
tati
on
20
08 158 C
al.
Ap
p.4t
h
10
75,
108
4
qu
ot i
ng
C.C
.P
.
20
42
5.1
6 e
.
C.
C.P
.
4
25
.16
e
de
fine
s
suc
h ac
ts
as
inc
lud
ing
b
ut n
ot
be
ing li
mit
ed to t
he
foll
ow
ing
:
21
1
any
written
or oral
statement
or
writing
made
before
a
leg islative,
22
ex
ecu
tive
,
or
j
udi
cial p
roce
edi
ng,
o
r
a
ny
oth
er
off
icia
l pro
cee
din
g a
uth
ori
zed
by
law
;
2
3
2
an
y
w
rit
ten
or ora
l
st
atem
en
t
or wri
ting m
ad
e
in c
onn
ect
ion wi
th
an
is
sue
24
un
der con
sid
erat
ion
or
re
vie
w
b
y
a
l
egi
slat
ive,
e
xe
cu ti
ve ,
or j
ud i
cial
b
ody
,
or
25
any
oth
er
of
fici
al pro
cee
din
g
au
tho
rize
d
b
y
la
w;
3
a
ny
w
ritt
en o
r
or
al sta
tem
ent
or
wr
itin
g
m
ad
e
in
a
pl
ace o
pen
to the
2
6
pu
blic or a
p
ub l
ic
f
oru
m in c
onn
ect
ion wit
h
an
iss
ue
o
f pu
bli
c
int
eres
t;
o
r
5
DEFEND NTS
SPE I L
MOTION
TO
STRIKE
PL INTIFFS
OMPL INT
PURSU NT
TO
P 425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
11/23
4
an
y
oth
er con
duc
t in
fu
rthe
ran
ce
of the
exe
rc is
e
of
the c
ons
titu
tion
al
ri
ght o
f
pe
titi
on or t
he
co
nst
itut
iona
l
rig
ht of
fre
e
s
pee
ch
in co
nn
ecti
on w
ith
2
a
p
ub l
ic iss
ue o
r an
issu
e of
pu
bl i
c inte
res
t.
Li
ke
t
he SL
AP
P
sta
tut
e
i
tsel
f, the q
ues
tion
w
he
the
r
s
om
ethi
ng is an
is
sue of
pub
lic
inte
res
t
4
must
be
construed
broadly.
Hecimovich
v
Encinal
School
Parent
Teacher
Organ ization
2012
203
C
al.A
pp
.4th
45
0,
466
[in
tern
al
ci
tati
ons o
mitt
ed]
.
6
[
W]
we
con
clu
de
th
at
saf
ety
in
yo
uth
s
por
ts,
not
to
m
en
tio
n p
rob
lem
c
oac
hes
/pr
oble
m
pare
nts
7
in
yo
uth spo
rts,
is a
noth
er is
sue o
f
pub
lic in
tere
st
with
in the SLA
PP law
.
H
ec
imo
vic
h,
su
pra
, 20
3
8
C
al.
App
.4t
h at
468
c i
ting
M.
G. v
Ti
me
W
ar
ner, In
c.
2
001
89
Cal
.Ap
p.4
th
62
3
[m
oles
tati
on i
n y
out
h
9
sp
orts
];
Te
rry
v
Da
vis Co
mm
uni
ty Chu
rch
20
05
131
Ca
l.Ap
p.4
th 153
4,
1
547
[p
rote
ctio
n
of
chi
ldre
n
10
from
predators];
McGarry
v
University
of
San
Diego
2007
154
Cal.
App
.4t
h
97
[firing
of
colleg
e
f
oot
ball
c
oac
h]
oth
er
c
itat
ion
s
om
itte
d ; s
ee
a
lso H
ar
ris
v
Cu
rtis Pu
bli
shin
g
Co
.
194
2
4
9 Ca
l. Ap
p.
2d
34
0, 3
50
1
2
[
[T]
he
o
ver
wh
elm
ing
m
ajo
rity o
f
t
he
ci
tize
ns
of t
his c
oun
try
are
int
ere
sted
in
su
ch
m
at
ters
a
nd in
13
q
ues
tion
s
w
hich
aff
ect
th
e
e
duc
atio
n
an
d
pr
ope
r
tra
ini
ng of
ou r
yo
uth
].
1
4
H
ere,
Pla
int
iff Blo
om
in
dis
put
ably
ha
s su
ed
Ja
me
s C
lark
fo
r
exe
rcis
ing
h
is
c
on s
titu
tion
ally
-
15
p
rote
cte
d
rig
hts of
p
etit
ion
ing go
ver
nm
ent
of
fici
als
wi
th his g
rie
van
ces an
d
for
ex
erc
isin
g
hi
s fre
e
spe
ech
16
rig
hts
in co
nn
ecti
on wi
th a
pub
lic
is
sue
. Se
e
ge
ner
ally P
lai
ntif
fs
C
om
pla
int;
Ex
hib
its A
-E
th
ere
to.
1
7 Sp
ecif
ical
ly,
p
ub l
ic hig
h
s
cho
ol
b
ask
etb
all
c
oac
h Rob
ert
Blo
om
h
as
s
ued p
are
nt
Jam
es
C
lark
for
1
8
com
pla
inin
g
to
m
em
bers
of
W
es
tlak
e
H
ig
h S
cho
ol , W
es
tlak
e Sp
orts Cam
p
an
d
the
Con
ejo
V
alle
y
U
ni
fied
Sc
ho
ol
Dis
tric
t
re
gar
din
g Blo
om
s
jo
b pe
rfor
ma
nce
and
o
n-t
he-
job a
ctiv
itie
s
an
d
for
dem
an
din
g
20
th
at
the
se
ind
ivi
dua
ls
d
o
som
eth
ing
ab
ou
t
th
e s
am
e. Id.
As suc
h all
of Cl
ark
s all
ege
dly
w
ron
gfu
l
act
s
21
un
derl
yin
g
Pla
inti
ffs la
ws
uit h
ere
co
nst
itut
e
w
ritt
en
o
r
o
ral
sta
tem
ent
s
m
ade be
for
e...
[an
]
o
ffic
ial
22
pr
oce
edin
g
au
thor
ize
d
by
l
aw,
sta
tem
ent
s
m
ad
e
i
n co
nne
ctio
n wit
h
a
n
issu
e
u
nd
er
c
on
side
ra t
ion
or
2
3
rev
iew
by..
.
a
ny
oth
er
o
ffi
cial p
roc
eed
ing
a
uth
ori
zed
b
y
la
w,
st
atem
en
ts m
ade
in
a
pub
lic
fo
rum
i
n
2
4
co
nn
ecti
on
wit
h
an
i
ssu
e of pu
blic
in
tere
st,
and o
the
r
con
duc
t
in
fur
ther
anc
e of
th
e exe
rcis
e
of
th
e
2
5
co
nsti
tuti
ona
l
rig
ht
ofp
etit
ion
o
r
t
he co
nst
itut
ion
al
righ
t
o
f fre
e sp
eec
h i
n
co
nn
ecti
on
wit
h a
pu
blic
is
sue
26 o
r
a
n
issu
e
of pu
blic
int
ere
st.
C.
C.P
.
4
25
.16
e .
6
D
EF
EN
D
NT
S
S
PE
CI
L MO
TI
ON
TO
S
TR
IKE
PL
IN
TI
FF
S
CO
MP
L
INT
PU
RS
U
NT
T
O C
CP
425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
12/23
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
13/23
T
he
[C
ivi
l
C
ode
4
7]
pr i
vile
ge is d
esig
ned
to
pro
vid
e
th
e ut
mos
t
free
dom of
co
mm
un
icat
ion
2
b
etw
een
citi
zen
s
an
d
p
ub l
ic
a
uth
orit
ies
w
ho
se
resp
ons
ibi
lity
is
to
i
nve
stig
ate w
ro
ngd
oin
g. L
ee
v
F
ick
20
05
5 C
al.
App
.4t
h 89
,
96
c
iting
Br
ady
,
s
upr
a, 87
C
al.A
pp
.3d at
733
. Th
us,
[a]
co
mm
un
icat
ion
4
to
an official
ag ency
which
is
designed
to
prompt
action
is
deemed part
of
an official
proceeding for
5
p
urp
ose
s
o
f se
cti
on 4
7,
s
ubd
ivi
sion
b
....
G
ha
fur
v Be
rns
tein
200
5 131 C
al.
Ap
p.4t
h
123
0,
1
235
q
uo t
ing
W
alk
er
v
K
ious
is
2
00
1
9
3 C
al.A
pp
.4th 143
2,
14
39
ci
ting
Hag
ber
g 2
Ca
lifo
rni
a
Fe
der
alB
ank
7
20
04
32
Ca
l.4
th 35
0,
3
62-
364
[
num
ero
us
c
ase
s app
ly th
is pr
ivile
ge
t
o
c
omp
lai
nts
to
g
ove
rnm
en
tal
8
a
gen
cies
req
ues
tin
g
t
hat th
e a
gen
cy in
ves
tiga
te
or
re
me
dy wro
ngd
oin
g]
.
Th
e
priv
ile
ge
a
pp l
ies
9
reg
ardl
ess
o
f w
ha
t
a
ctio
n,
if a
ny
,
the
o
ffi
cial
age
ncy
t
ake
s
on
a
com
pla
int
.
T
he co
mp
lain
t its
elf
is
pa
rt
10
of
the
official
proceedings.
Lee,
supra ,
35
Cal.App.4th
at
97
c iting
Brody,
supra,
87
Cal.App.3d at
732.
Th
e pri
vile
ge
a
pp
lies e
ven
if t
he
com
mu
nic
atio
ns
t
hem
sel
ves
a
re
fra
udu
len
t,
pe
rjur
iou
s,
12
u
neth
ica
l,
or
eve
n
i
lleg
al
K
ash
ian
v
Ha
rrim
an
200
2
98
C
al.A
pp
.4th
892
, 92
0.
T
he
pri
vile
ge
ap
plie
s
1
3
to
co
mm
un
icat
ion
s
m
ad
e in
an
d
o
uts
ide of
co
urt, in
clu
ding c
om
mun
ica
tion
s
in w
hic
h
m
al
ice
or in
ten
t
14
to
h
arm
is
a
lleg
ed .
S
ilbe
rg
v
A
nde
rson
19
90 5
0 C
al.3
d
2
05, 21
5-2
16
. [T
]he
w
ork
ing
d
efin
itio
n
o
f
15 jud
icia
l
p
roc
eed
ings e
ven
inc
lude
s pro
cee
din
gs
w
hic
h hav
e t
he
p
ote
ntia
l fo
r
b
eco
min
g
a
cou
rt
con
cer
n
1
6
e
mp
has
is
a
dde
d.
B
lo
ck
v
S
ac
ram
ent
o
Cli
nica
l L
ab
s,
I
nc.
19
82
1
31 C
al A
pp
3d 386
,
3
93
.
17
It
i
s wel
l se
ttled
tha
t co
mp
lain
ts
to
sch
ool
au
tho
riti
es abo
ut
a
t
eac
her or
pr in
cip
al
in
the
1
8
p
erfo
rm
anc
e
of
h
is or
h
er
o
ffic
ial du
tie
s are
pri
vile
ged
f
or
pu
rpo
ses
o
f
Ci
vil
Co
de
47
b.
L
ee,
sup
ra ,
19
135
Ca
l.A
pp.4
th
at
9
6
c
itin
g
Br
ady
,
sup
ra ,
87
Ca
l.A
pp.
3d
at 7
31-
735
; M
ar
tin
v
K
earn
ey
197
5
5
1
2
0
Ca
l A
pp
3d 30
9 ;
s
ee
also
Gha
fur
,
sup
ra ,
141
C
al.A
pp
.4th
at 1
235
.
21
The
fa
cts in
Lee
,
su
pra
,
a
re as
toun
din
gly sim
ilar
to
the
fact
s
b
efo
re
the
C
our
t
h
ere.
Th
ey
e
ven
2
2
or
igin
ate
d
in
the sam
e
c
our
t
t
he Ve
ntu
ra
C
ou
nty Su
per
ior Co
urt
albe
it
u
nd
erJu
dg
e
Hu
tch
ins
V
CSC
23 Ca
se
No
.
S
C03
856
0 . In
L
ee, [
p]ar
ent
s o
f
h
igh sc
hoo
l b
ase
ba ll p
lay
ers
u
rge
[d] sch
oo
l
of
fic i
als
t
o
fire
2
4
th
e
co
ac
h[, wh
o
in turn
] sue
[d] the
pa
ren
ts
fo r l
ibe
l....
135
C
al.
App
.4t
h
at
91
.
S
pe
cifi
call
y,
the
coa
ch
2
5
a
lleg
ed
tha
t th
e
pa
ren
ts
p
ub
lish
ed a
let
ter
ma
kin
g
f
alse
stat
eme
nts abo
ut h
im
,
j
ust like
P
lai
nt if
f
Blo
om
26
ha
s
a
lleg
ed
he
re.
Id.
at 92
-93
;
se
e
fo
r com
p.
Pla
int
iffs
C
om
pla
int
at
q7
/15
-20
.
Th
e
com
pl
ain t
al
lege
d tha
t
th
e
let
ters w
ere
an
atte
mp
t t
o
ha
ve
[p
la i
ntif
f]
rem
ov
ed
a
s bas
eba
ll
c
oac
h,
an
d w
er
e
pu
bli
she
d
t
o th
e
8
DEF
EN
D
NT
S
S
PEC
I
L
M
OT
ION T
O
S
TR
IK
E
PL
I
NT
IFF
S
C
OM
PL
I
NT PU
RS
U
NT TO
CC
P
425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
14/23
C
on
ejo V
all
ey U
nif
ied S
ch
ool Di
stric
t...
, ju
st lik
e P
lain
tiff
Blo
om
h
as
a
lle
ged he
re.
Id.
at
9
2;
se
e f
or
c
om
p. P
lain
tiff
s
C
om
plai
nt
at 7
9 2
3 2
6,
29
,
33-
36
.
T
he
pla
inti
ff
c
oac
h
alle
ged
tha
t the d
efe
nda
nts
a
cted
w
ith
m
ali
ce and cau
sed
h
im
to
lo
se..
,
f
utu
re
em
pl
oym
en
t
o
ppo
rtu
niti
es, j
ust like
P
lain
tiff
B
loo
m
he
re.
4
Id.
at
p. 93;
see
for
comp.
Plaintiffs
Complaint
at
9/9/23,
29,
34,
36.
The Court
of
Appea l
held
that
the
p
are
nts
Spe
cia
l
M
ot
ion to
St
rike
und
er C.
C.P
.
42
5.1
6
sh
oul
d hav
e bee
n g
ran
ted in its
en
tire
ty
bec
aus
e
6 the
par
ents
c
omp
lai
nts
re
gard
ing
th
e
p
lai
ntif
f
coa
ch
to s
cho
ol auth
ori
ties w
ere
a
bso
lut
ely
p
rivi
leg
ed
7 un
der C
ivil
Cod
e
47.
Le
e a
t
p
.
96
[
Th
e in
esca
pab
le co
nclu
sio
n
is th
at t
he [pa
ren
ts]
lette
r
wa
s
w
ritte
n
8
to
pro
mp
t
of
fici
al ac
tio
n, an
d
is
p
riv i
lege
d u
nde
r
C
ivi
l Co
de s
ect
ion
4
7,
sub
div
isio
n
b
In s
ofa r
a
s
9
som
e o
f
pl
ain
tiff coa
ch
s c
lai
ms aga
ins
t
t
he
pa
ren
ts
ta
rge
ted
the
p
are
nts
d
isc
uss
ion r
ega
rd in
g t
he
co
ach
10
between
one
another, the Court
ofAppeal held
that
such speech
also
was
privileged and
non
ac
tion
ab l
e
11 fo
r
pu
rpo
ses
o
f
Civ
il
Co
de
4
7 b
and C
.C.P
.
4
25
.16
. I
d. a
t
p.
98
[
suc
h com
m
ents
to
sch
oo
l
o
ffic
ials
12
an
d
in
ter
este
d
p
are
nts
are
p
riv
ileg
ed .
[P
lain
tiff coa
ch}
ca
nno
t avo
id th
e
pr
ivil
ege
b
y cha
rac
teriz
ing
t
he
13 dis
cus
sion
am
ong
par
ent
s a
s
gos
sip
].
14
In Gha
fur
,
s
up r
a,
the
C
ou
rt
of
A
pp
eal
sim
ila
rly uph
eld
the gr
ant i
ng o
f a S
pe
cial
M
oti
on to
St
rike
1
5
def
ama
tio
n
c
laim
s b
rou
gh
t by a
fo
rm
er
ch
arte
r sch
ool
sup
erin
ten
den
t
ag
ains
t the
A
nti-
Def
am
atio
n
16
L
eag
ue
an
d
me
mb
ers
th
ere
of
for
th
eir co
mp
lai
nts to
th
e
St
ate
S
up
erin
ten
den
t
of P
ub
lic
In
str
ucti
on
17
u
rgin
g
an
in
ves
tiga
tio
n to
th
e
[p l
ain
tiff
s] li
nks
to an
Isla
mic
ter
rori
st org
ani
zati
on.
...
131
Ca
l.Ap
p.4
th
1
8 at
123
0.
T
he
C
our
t
n
ote
d
th
at ev
en
the
pla
inti
ff
c
onc
ede
d
that th
e d
efe
nda
nts
alle
ged
ly
de
fam
ato
ry
19
l
ette
r
co
mp
lain
ing
d
irec
tly t
o t
he
Sta
te Su
per
inte
nde
nt
wa
s p
rivi
leg
ed
und
er Ci
vil
Co
de
4
7b
2
0
b
eca
use
it wa
s
a co
mm
uni
cat
ion
to a
n
off
icia
l ag
enc
y w
hic
h
is de
sig
ned
to
pro
mp
t
a
cti
on.
Id.
at 12
35
21
q
uoti
ng
W
alk
erv.
K
iou
sis 2
001
93 Ca
l.A
pp.
4th
14
32,
1
439
.
2
2
Her
e,
th i
s
Co
urt
sho
uld
gra
nt De
fen
dan
t
J
im
Cla
rk
s
Spe
cial M
otio
n in
f
ull
be
cau
se
Pla
int
iff
23
Bl
oom
ind
isp
uta
bly has
t
arg
eted
D
efe
nda
nts
co
nst
itut
iona
lly pr
ote
cted
a
nd
abs
olu
tely
priv
ile
ged
2
4
c
omp
lai
nts to
sc
hoo
l
sc
hoo
l d
ist
rict
,
and
su
mm
er cam
p off
icia
ls
rega
rd i
ng
P
lai
ntif
f
Blo
om
wit
hin
the
25
m
ean
ing
o
f
C
ivi
l
C
od
e
4
7 b
.
A
s
Pla
int
iff Bl
oom
h
im
self al
lege
s in h
is C
om
pl
aint
,
De
fend
an
t
C
lark
26
lib
el
and app
are
nt m
oti
ve w
as,
and is
to
def
am
e Bl
oom and
to
put
fals
e p
res
sur
e
on
t
his
in
au
tho
rity
to
tak
e
[a
wa
y]
B
loom
s
co
ach
ing
job
.
P
lai
ntif
fs
C
om
pl
aint a
t
9
/23
. As
ack
now
led
ge
d
b
y Pl
ain
tiff
Blo
om in
9
D
EFE
ND
AN
T
S
S
PE
CIA
L
MO
TI
ON
TO
S
TR
IKE PL
AI
NT
IFF
S CO
MP
LA
INT PU
RS
UA
NT
TO
C C
P
4
5J6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
15/23
h
is C
om
pla
int a
nd as se
t
fort
h at
con
side
rab
le
le
ngt
h in
th
e
em
ail
m
es
sage
s
the
ms
elv
es De
fen
dan
t
Cla
rk
2 pu
bli
she
d the
alle
ged d
efa
ma
tory
fa
lseh
oo
ds to
the m
em
ber
s
o
f
the
Co
ne j
o
V
all
ey
U
nif
ied
Sc
hoo
l
3
D
istr
ict W
es
tlak
e
H
igh
S
cho
ol, a
nd
W
es
tlak
e S
por
ts
Cam
p
to p
rom
pt off
icia
l ac
tion
from t
hem
i
n
4
response.
Ghafur,
Cal.App.4th
at
1235; Lee,
supra
135
Cal.App.4th
at
96.
5
3.3
.2 P
lai
ntif
f
l
inpe
rm
issi
bly
T
arg
ets D
ef
end
ant Cla
rks
P
rivi
leg
ed
an
d
No
n
6
Ac
tio
nab
le T
hre
ats
of
Liti
gat
ion and
De
ma
nds Re
lati
ng
to th
e
Sam
e.
Or
dina
rily
a d
em
and le
tter sen
t
in
a
ntic
ipa
tion
o
f
liti
ga t
ion
i
s a
leg
itim
ate
spee
ch
or
pe
titio
nin
g
ac
tivi
ty
th
at
is
pr
ote
cted
u
nde
r
se
cti
on
4
25 .
16 .
M
aim
Si
nge
r
2
01
3
2
17
Ca
l.A
pp.
4th
1
283
,
129
3
8
c it i
ng
B
rig
gs,
sup
ra , 19
C
al.4
th
at
111
5 ;
se
e al
so
S
hek
hte
r
v
Fin
anc
ial
In
dem
nit
y
C
o.
200
1
8
9
9
C
al
.Ap
p.4
th
14
1, 152
; Ka
shi
an
su
pra
, 98 C
al.
App
.4t
h
at
908
90
9;
Roh
de
v
W
olf 20
07
154
C
al.A
pp
.4th
10
28
;
A
ctio
n
A
pa
rtm
ent As
soc
iati
on Inc
.
v
C
ity o
fSa
nta
Mo
nica
20
07
41
C
al.4
th 1
232
,
1
25
1.
Th
e s
am
e
is
tru
e o
f
any
p
re
litig
atio
n
spe
ech
o
r
con
duc
t
so
l
ong
as
it
re
late
s to
litig
at io
n
tha
t
is
c
ont
emp
lat
ed
in
12
g
oo
d
f
aith
an
d
un
de
r ser
ious
co
nsi
dera
tio
n.
A
cti
on Ap
artm
en
t A
ssoc
.,
su
pra
, 4
1 C
al.
4th at
12
51
.
H
ere
th
is
Co
urt
sho
uld g
ran
t D
efen
da
nt
J
im
C
lar
ks
S
pec
ial
Mo
tion
in fu
ll
be
cau
se
P
lai
ntif
f
14
B
loo
m
i
ndi
spu
tab
ly
has
ta
rget
ed D
efe
nda
nts
liti
gati
on
priv
ile
ged
and no
n-a
ct io
na
ble
sp
eec
h
and
5
con
duc
t.
A
s se
t
for
th
i
n
Pl
aint
iff
s
C
om
pla
int
and
ev
ery
sing
le on
e
of
the
s
ix
6
em
ail
m
essages
attached
16
ther
eto
De
fen
dan
t
Cla
rk
se
nt
the
se e
mai
ls in si
gni
fica
nt pa
rt to
th
rea
ten l
ega
l
a
ctio
n
aga
inst
Blo
om
,
the
1
7
sc
hoo
l
d
istr
ict
the sch
oo
l
a
nd/o
r
We
stla
ke
Sp
ort
s Ca
mp
if
they
d
id
no
t sto
p th
e alle
ged
w
ron
gfu
l
ac t
s.
18
E
xhi
bits
A
to
P
lain
tiff
s
C
om
pla
int.
Pl
ain
tiff Bl
oom e
ven
file
d t
his ac
tion
on N
ov
emb
er
6, 2
014
,
th
e
1
9
ve
ry
sam
e
da
y
o
n w
hic
h
C
lar
k
d
ema
nd
ed
th
at
Bl
oom re
sig
n
o
r el
se b
e
su
ed
by
C
lar
k
an
d
o
the
r
W
HS
2
0
p
are
nts
for
th
e
a
fore
me
nti
one
d
c
om
pla
ints
.
xhi
bit
to
Pl
ain
tiff
s
C
om
pla
int [
If yo
u
d
on
t
lea
ve on
21
Thursday
[November
6,
2014] we
will,
as
parents
who observed
repeated
abuse,
retain
the
areas
best
22
p
erso
nal
i
njur
y
atto
rne
y
t
o mak
e
you a
nd
t
he
D
istr
ict re
al iz
e
th
at re
pea
ted
ly
a
bus
ing
kid
s,
e
ve
n
for
23
mo
ney
w
on
t
b
e tol
era
ted
].
24
25
2
6
10
DE
FEN
D
N
TS
S
PE
I
L MO
TIO
N
TO ST
RI
KE
P
L
INT
IF
FS
OM
PL
IN
T
PUR
SU
N
T TO
C
C
425
6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
16/23
3.4
S
EC
ON
D PRO
N
G
AL
TE
RN
AT
EL
Y,
T
HI
S
CO
UR
T SHO
U
LD
G
RA
NT
D
EFE
ND
AN
T
S SPE
CI
AL
M
O
TIO
N
B
EC
AU
SE
P
LA
IN
TIF
F
IN
DIS
PU
TA
BL
Y
C
AN
NO
T ES
TA
BL
ISH
TH
AT
DE
FEN
D
AN
T M
A
DE
AN
Y O
F
TH
E
2
A
LL
EG
ED
LY DE
FA
MA
TO
RY
ST
AT
EM
EN
TS
W
IT
H
A
CT
UA
L
MA
LI
CE
.
3 Ind
epe
nde
nt
o
f the
ab
so l
ute
priv
ile
ge
a
ffo
rded
by
Civ
il Cod
e
4
7 b
,
D
efen
dan
t
C
lark
s
t
arg
eted
4
communications
also
are
qualifiedly privileged
under three
3
other
lega l
doctrines,
each
of which
5
in
dep
end
ent
ly
re
qui
re Pla
int
iff
B
loom
to
sh
ow
c
lear
a
nd co
nvi
nc i
ng
e
vide
nc
e
of
actu
al
m
al
ice
b
y
6 Def
end
ant C
lar
k.
Ev
en
i
f th i
s Co
urt de
cli
nes
to
e
nfo
rce
Civ
il
C
od
e
4
7 b
s
abs
olu
te
pr
ivile
ge
her
e,
this
7
Co
urt m
ust
s
till
gra
nt
C
lar
ks M
otio
n
b
eca
use
P
lain
tiff
B
loo
m ca
nno
t
s
ho
w cle
ar
an
d
con
vin
cing
e
vide
nce ofact
ual
ma
lice by
Def
end
ant
C
lar
k suf
fici
ent
to
s
atis
fy th
e
s
eco
nd
p
ron
g of
the
C.C
.P.
4
25.
16
9
te
st. A
Sp
ecia
l Mo
tio
n
to
St
rike m
ay
b
e g
ran
ted so
lely
ba
sed on a
pla
int i
ffs
inab
ilit
y
to
sho
w
ma
lice
10
by
defendant
sufficient
to
overcome the
defendants
Specia l
Motion.
Hecimovich,
supra,
203
Cal.App.4th
a
t
47
2 [in
ter
nal
ci
tatio
ns
om
itte
d].
1
2
3
.4.1
Pl
ain
tiffMu
st
Sh
ow
A
ctu
al
Ma
lice
by
D
efen
da
nt
Cl
ark
B
eca
use
P
lai
ntif
f
Is
a
Ge
ner
al and
/or Li
mit
ed
P
urp
os
e Pu
blic
Fig
ure By
Vi
rtue
ofH
is
Sta
tus
as
13
H
ea
d Co
ach
of theW
es
tla
ke
H
ig
h
Sc
ho
ols
Me
ns Ba
ske
tbal
l
T
eam
.
14
I
f
a
defa
ma
tio
n
pl
ain
tiff
i
s a pub
lic
figu
re
o
r l
imi
ted
pur
pos
e
p
ubl
ic
fig
ure
,
the
U
.S.
Co
nst
itut
ion
1
5 re
qui
res
pr
oof
of ac
tua
l m
alic
e
on
d
efen
dan
ts pa
rt bef
ore a
ny
l
iab
ility
c
an be i
mp
ose
d N
ew
Y
or
k
Tim
es
16
Co.
v
Sullivan
376
U.S.
254,
279-80
1964 .
17
A
pub
lic
figu
re is o
ne w
ho
ha
s
s
uch
p
erva
siv
e
fam
e
o
r
n
oto
riety
tha
t he
b
eco
me
s
a
p
ubli
c
fi
gur
e
18
fo
r al
l
pur
pos
es
an
d
in
a
ll co
nte
xts,
w
he
reas
a
l
imi
ted
p
urp
ose
pu
blic figu
re is
on
e
who
vol
unta
rily
1
9
in
ject
s
hi
mse
lf o
r
is dr
awn in
to
a
p
art
icu
lar
pub
lic
c
ontr
ove
rsy
and
t
here
by
bec
om
es
a
p
ubli
c
f
igu
re
for
a
20
l
imi
ted
rang
e of
is
sue
s. G
er
tzv
.
Ro
be
rt
W
elc
h 19
74
41
8
U
.S. 3
23 ,
35
1.
21 So
me
tim
es
p
osit
ion al
one
can
m
ake
on
e
a
pu
bli
c
fig
ure
. Ba
rry
v
Tim
e,
Inc
.
N
.D
.
C
al.
19
84
2
2
584
F.S
up
p.
1
110
,
1
11
8
citi
ng
Cu
rtis
Pub
lish
ing
Co.
v
B
utts 19
67 38
8
U
.s.
1
30
;
Ch
uy
Ph
ilad
elp
hia
23 E
agl
es
Fo
otb
all
C
lub E.
D. Pa
.
19
77 431 F
.Su
pp.
2
54
, 267
,
aff
d,
595
F
.2d
12
65 3d
C
ir.
197
9
e
n
b
anc
.
24 T
he
p
osit
ion
its
elf
ma
y
be
so
pro
mi
nen
t
th
at
an
y
o
ccu
pan
t
un
avo
ida
bly ent
ers
the
l
ime
ligh
t
an
d
th
us
2
5
be
com
es
ge
nera
lly
kno
wn i
n
th
e
c
om
mu
nity
a
ge
ner
al p
ubl
ic
f
igur
e. Sim
ila
rly,
th
e
resp
on s
ib i
litie
s
of
a
2
6 po
sitio
n
ma
y
i
nclu
de d
ecis
ion m
ak
ing tha
t
affe
cts
s
ign i
fica
ntl
y
on
e or
mo
re pub
lic
c
on t
rov
ers i
es
in
w
hic
h
ca
se th
e
o
ccu
pan
t
be
com
es
a
lim
ite
d
p
ubli
c figu
re fo
r
tho
se c
ont
rov
ersi
es.
Id. Su
ch
a
per
son
ma
y
D
EFE
ND
N
T
S
SPE
CI
L
MO
TI
ON
T
O
ST
RIK
E
P
L
IN
TIF
FS
CO
MP
L
INT
PU
RS
U
NT
TO
C
C P
425 6
-
8/10/2019 Bloom v. Clark Slapp Motion
17/23
i
nvit
e[]
at
tent
ion an
d com
me
nt by his de
cisi
on
to ac
cep
t
a p
os
ition
wh
ich
by its
ve
ry
n
atur
e
puts
the
2
ho
lder o
f
th
at
po
sitio
n
in
t
he
cen
ter
of
a
p
ubl
ic
co
ntro
ve
rsy.
Id
. q
uot
ing
Ge
rtz,
sup
ra ,
418
U
.S
. at
351
.
3 The
U
.S.
S
upr
eme
Co
urt
a
nd
sub
ord
ina
te cou
rts
ha
ve
c
ons
iste
ntl
y
h
eld
th
at
pro
fess
ion
ally
4
employed
coaches
constitute
at
minimum
limited purpose
public
figu res. Curtis
Publishing
Co
v
Butts
5
19
67
388
U
.S.
130
[co
lleg
e foo
tba
ll c
oac
h] ;
Bar
ry
v
Time
I
nc.
N.D
. C
al
. 198
4 5
84
F
.Su
pp.
1110
6
[co
lleg
e
ba
ske
tba
ll
coa
ch]
.
As e
xp
lain
ed
i
n
Ba
rry,
s
upr
a,
a
l
ong li
ne
o
f c
ase
s,
b
eg i
nn in
g
w
ith
the
7 S
upr
em
e
C
ou
rts
o
pin
ion
i
n
B
ut
ts
[
has
fou
nd tha
t] on
es
v
olu
nta
ry
d
ec i
sion to
pu
rsu
e
a c
are
er
in
spo
rts
8 wh
ethe
r
as
an
at
hle
te
or
a c
oac
h, in
vite
s
att
enti
on
an
d
co
mm
en
t
re
gar
ding
h
is
jo
b
per
form
an
ce
and
9
thu
s
c
ons
titu
tes
an
ass
ump
tio
n o
f
th
e ris
k
of
neg
ati
ve
p
ubl
icity
.
58
4
F
.Su
pp
.
a
t
1119
10
In
Curtis,
sup ra,
388
U.S.
at
135-136,
the
U.S.
Supreme
Court
held
that
the
plaintiff
was
a
public
fi
gur
e
bec
aus
e
h
e
was
the
at
hlet
ic dire
cto
r
of
th
e
U
niv
ers
ity
of
G
eor
gia
an
d
had ove
rall
r
esp
ons
ibil
ity
12
fo
r
th
e
ad
mi
nist
rati
on of
[th
e en
tire un
ive
rsity
s]
at
hle
tic p
rog
ram
.
In
Ba
rry
,
su
pra
,
5
84
F