Ruddell v. Viscia

Filed 8/31/06 Ruddell v. Viscia CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

DANE RUDDELL,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

GEORGE VISCIA,

Defendant and Appellant.

C049043

(Super. Ct. No. 04AS00660)

Plaintiff Dane Ruddell sued defendant George Viscia for defamation, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and intentional infliction of emotional distress after a letter Viscia allegedly wrote was disseminated to community leaders, Ruddell's competitors, and his clients that alleged Ruddell had engaged in questionable business dealings with at least two school districts. Viscia filed a special motion to strike the lawsuit under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.^[1] The trial court denied the motion, concluding that Viscia failed to make a prima facie showing that the letter was connected to a public issue. We disagree and will reverse and remand the matter to the trial court for its determination of whether Ruddell is able to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his claims.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

We draw the following facts from the allegations in Ruddell's complaint: Ruddell is a compliance officer and administrator of private and public works contracts. In 1996, while employed by 3D/International, providing management services for school programs, projects, and construction, Ruddell was offered a position as the director of facilities at the Lafayette School District. He accepted the position and worked there until August 1998, when he began working again for 3D/International in Dallas, Texas.

In October 2001, Ruddell accepted a position as the assistant superintendent for facilities at the Antioch Unified School District. In 2002, the Antioch Unified School District awarded Haskell-3D/International a $12.7 million design-build contract. A design-build contract is one in which a single entity guarantees the price for designing and constructing a

project, as opposed to one entity (an architect) designing the project for a fee and another entity (a general contractor) building the project for a separate fee. 3D/International is a promoter of design-build projects.

In September 2002, Ruddell submitted his resignation as assistant superintendent to accept a position with USR Corporation. He withdrew the resignation when the Antioch Unified School District offered him the position of associate superintendent for facilities.

In June 2003, Ruddell resigned as associate superintendent to form his own company, WCS/Ca, which provides labor compliance for public works projects.

In July 2003, the Board of Education for the Antioch Unified School District approved an agreement between WCS/Ca and the school district â€

Description	Plaintiff sued defendant for defamation, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and intentional infliction of emotional distress after a letter appellant allegedly wrote was disseminated to community leaders, respondent's competitors, and his clients that alleged respondent had engaged in questionable business dealings with at least two school districts. Appellant filed a special motion to strike the lawsuit under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16.The trial court denied the motion, concluding that appellant failed to make a prima facie showing that the letter was connected to a public issue. Court disagree and reverse and remand the matter to the trial court for its determination of whether respondent is able to demonstrate a probability of prevailing on his claims.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.