The Colorado Court of Appeals revived part of a 2021 defamation lawsuit Denver school board Vice President Auon’tai Anderson brought against people who made unsubstantiated allegations of sexual assault against him, according to a summary opinion published Thursday.
The judges upheld the lower court’s decision to dismiss most of the claims in the defamation lawsuit Anderson filed against Black Lives Matter 5280 and its leadership, an activist and a Denver Public Schools parent.
But the Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of part of Anderson’s claims against parent Mary-Katherine Brooks Fleming, specifically regarding a comment she posted on social media after testifying before state legislators, according to the summary.
“I’m grateful that the court is allowing me to hold (Brooks Fleming) accountable for the things she said on social media,” Anderson said, adding, “I hope that we are able to start moving forward in a place of closure.”
A Denver District Court judge dismissed most of the lawsuit last year, except for a defamation claim against a Parker activist who made allegations on her Facebook page. The Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s decision and denied Jeeva Senthilnathan’s motion to dismiss Anderson’s defamation claim against her.
Neither Brooks Fleming nor Senthilnathan immediately responded to requests for comment Thursday.
Anderson filed the lawsuit after BLM 5280 and others made allegations of sexual assault against him in 2021. An investigation by an independent firm hired by the Denver Public Schools Board of Education found those allegations to be unsubstantiated.
The investigation also found Anderson had flirted online with a 16-year-old student and made intimidating social media posts. The findings led the school board to censure Anderson.
During the investigation into the initial allegation made by BLM 5280, Brooks Fleming testified before a state Senate committee that a predator was targeting DPS students. She did not name Anderson in her testimony, but the school board later issued a statement saying she had been referring to him and that the independent investigation would be expanded to look at those allegations, too.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court that Brooks Fleming’s testimony before the state legislature was protected speech because it related to legislative proceedings.
But the court found that a statement Brooks Fleming made on social media about her testimony was not privileged and that the district court erred when it concluded Anderson could not prove the comment was false and made with actual malice, according to the summary of the opinion.
As a result, the court is sending that particular defamation claim against Brooks Fleming back to the district court, which also will determine whether Brooks Fleming is a partially-prevailing party and able to recover any attorney fees and costs related to the still-dismissed claim, according to the summary.
Get more Colorado news by signing up for our Mile High Roundup email newsletter.
